Commuter & Regional Rail

[David A]

Seeing a HST or even a standard affordable train between Edm and Cal would be great, although I think this is just another empty promise from the government.

Probably the most likely part of this is commuter rail. BC and Ontario already have this and they don't have high speed yet either.

However, it would be nice to also have some sort of service between Edmonton and Calgary again which I feel makes sense given the size of the cities.

 

[BrettB]

Metro Vancouver's commuter rail is barely worth mentioning. Toronto and Montreal have the most developed systems, with one route in Toronto going all the way to Niagara Falls. I would suggest that may be on the outer limits of what's reasonable for commuter rail.

 

[David A]

Well Vancouver's is still more than we have and it has existed for many years. In the future we could have a population close to Vancouver's now

However, we probably actually could easily do more, unlike Vancouver we are not bounded by ocean and rock, the terrain is relatively level and not as built up.

 

[Glenco]

I find it ludicrous that people are promoting a deluxe high speed rail system from downtown to the airport. At present the volume of passengers and workers can only support an half hourly bus service. The high speed option to our downtown just wouldn’t support the volume to justify a decent frequency with what I assume would be a premium fair. The LRT option is achievable in a much shorter timeline and would be supported by travellers, workers and shoppers at the outlet mall.
The first line out to Heathrow was the Piccadilly line it wasn’t the the high speed direct line to Paddington station.

 

[ChazYEG]

At present the volume of passengers and workers can only support an half hourly bus service

I'd argue that there's demand for more than that. the 747 has been reported as being fairly busy as of late, and there has been quite a lot of advocates for a more frequent service and/or larger busses. That is not considering that many people (me included) have foregone using it to go to the airport because It would involve substantial wait times at the terminal, a modal transfer and extended travel times (from most places you'd have to bus to an LRT station and then have to transfer twice, for example). I don't know about a deluxe train (unless it is part of a line between Edmonton and Calgary's downtowns), but I would argue that there would be appetite for an LRT going to the airport.

 

[David A]

I'd argue that there's demand for more than that. the 747 has been reported as being fairly busy as of late, and there has been quite a lot of advocates for a more frequent service and/or larger busses. That is not considering that many people (me included) have foregone using it to go to the airport because It would involve substantial wait times at the terminal, a modal transfer and extended travel times (from most places you'd have to bus to an LRT station and then have to transfer twice, for example). I don't know about a deluxe train (unless it is part of a line between Edmonton and Calgary's downtowns), but I would argue that there would be appetite for an LRT going to the airport.

I feel there already is a demand for more service to the airport and having more frequency would probably encourage even more people to take it. Waiting 15 min at the airport is not too long, but half hour is too much for many.

Most of the advocates for high speed or other rail are not talking about it being only to the airport, but as part of an regional or inter city high speed rail service. Perhaps LRT works as a stop gap, but do you really want to carry luggage on the LRT during rush hour? Yes, it can be done, but it is tricky.

 

[thommyjo]

I find it ludicrous that people are promoting a deluxe high speed rail system from downtown to the airport. At present the volume of passengers and workers can only support an half hourly bus service. The high speed option to our downtown just wouldn’t support the volume to justify a decent frequency with what I assume would be a premium fair. The LRT option is achievable in a much shorter timeline and would be supported by travellers, workers and shoppers at the outlet mall.
The first line out to Heathrow was the Piccadilly line it wasn’t the the high speed direct line to Paddington station.

Canada line detractors don’t like you stealing their talking points!!

This is like the bike lane arguements. You can’t base on current usage.

We have tens of thousands of people going to and from the airport daily, plus tens of thousands more in the areas of Leduc, and south Edmonton, who could use HSR to the airport. You also have tens of thousands more going to Calgary and Banff regularity.

Look at the traffic in highway 2 for potential. Not 747 bus ridership.

The only challenge with HSR from YEG to downtown vs LRT is less areas to get off. So those near the henday and south of downtown might not use HSR into downtown if they just need off at century park or Southgate areas.

 

[archited]

I think LRT connecting to the airport is a far smarter solution than HSR. Not only does it serve "southerners" better but immediately from the airport it connects to the whole LRT network and thereby most of the city, especially after VL West is completed (it would also put more pressure on northern expansion of LRT and open up opportunities for other modes like aerial tram networks. HSR better serves YEG to YYC and makes a more efficient use plan for both airports, opening up new portals of opportunity. If HSR had to connect downtown to downtown it would require years and years of planning and mega-billions of dollars, the end result being a major missed opportunity.

 

[Kosy123]

Honestly if Edmonton continues to grow substantially past the 2 million mark, we could both have Commuter Rail and LRT at the same time. Other cities (albeit with higher transit ridership, and stronger tourist sectors) do it like Copenhagen.

 

[David A]

Honestly if Edmonton continues to grow substantially past the 2 million mark, we could both have Commuter Rail and LRT at the same time. Other cities (albeit with higher transit ridership, and stronger tourist sectors) do it like Copenhagen.

Yes it could, but with LRT to our airport progressing so slowly (if at all now) and if commuter rail proceeds quicker, the later could actually happen first which may be better as it would also involve fewer stops than LRT.

 

[archited]

^ There would be a night-and-day difference in the cost of the two.

 

[Edmcowboy11]

I so much want to see HSR between Edmonton and Calgary, with stop in Red Deer,. Edm LRT to YEG, St.Albert, Sherwood Park. Commuter train to Fort Sask, Spruce Grove/Stony Plain.
Also I'd be happy with an airport transport station that would service HSR, LRT, south commuter trains and intercity busses.
Cal C-train to YYC, Commuter train to Airdrie, Cochrane, Okotoks, Banff, and similar transport station at YYC creating another hub.

 

[EdwardEdm]

If we could find some way to upgrade the Capital Line to some kind of tram-train system using equipment like the Stadler CityLink, then it can become a viable LRT/regional hybrid, especially if the line between Health Sciences and Century Park could be fully grade separated and upgraded to heavy rail. A similar grade-separation and higher speed route from Coliseum to Clareview and any further NE extensions could be interesting with similar operations (potentially allowing for viable service to Fort Saskatchewan).

But that's a lot of track replacement, plus a total replacement of rolling stock, at bare minimum.

I think something to keep in mind is that the tram-trains you are thinking of run on a mix a tram and mainline railway routes.
I gather your proposal is more so to keep the LRT/ Regional route seperate, but operate it with a higher speed vehicle. That's simple, just spec higher speed vehicles. Full grade seperation on the existing Capital Line would be an incredible, if not impossible challenge, but I don't think there's much difference between 80 km/h and 110-120 km/h track. If you wanted to increase speed on the SLRT the one change that would be needed is to track circuits to change the timing of grade crossings for higher speed trains.
The catenary could be a bigger problem. Right now it is designed for maximum 90 km/h. Voltage would likely need to be increased from 700V but that shouldn't be an issue and SD160's can handle up to 900V.

Replacement of rolling stock wouldn't necessarily be needed. The airport extension wouldn't need the same frequency as the core of the system so you could get away with a dedicated fleet and replace the rest of the fleet in time.
Indeed, the one place the tram-trains vehicle concept could prove useful is in the dual model electric and diesel vehicles.
Build the airport line from the end of the SLRT to the airport as a single track line with passing sidings and operate it as a diesel. As the LRT expands, build a second track and install catenary. It more than likely will be possible to use batteries for the sprint from the end of line to the airport.

 

[Glenco]

Canada line detractors don’t like you stealing their talking points!!

This is like the bike lane arguements. You can’t base on current usage.

We have tens of thousands of people going to and from the airport daily, plus tens of thousands more in the areas of Leduc, and south Edmonton, who could use HSR to the airport. You also have tens of thousands more going to Calgary and Banff regularity.

Look at the traffic in highway 2 for potential. Not 747 bus ridership.

The only challenge with HSR from YEG to downtown vs LRT is less areas to get off. So those near the henday and south of downtown might not use HSR into downtown if they just need off at century park or Southgate areas.

Definitely correct on one point. Nobody wanted to pay a premium fare even in TO with all the high flying business executives. Better off to take a cab directly to your destination for very little cost difference.

 

[thommyjo]

Definitely correct on one point. Nobody wanted to pay a premium fare even in TO with all the high flying business executives. Better off to take a cab directly to your destination for very little cost difference.

…what? Both the canada line and Pearson connector are very successful with their increased fares.

Canada line is less than $10. Pearson is less than $20. Both significantly beat an uber or paying to park nearby