[chrisvazquez7]

I fear false hopes are being raised.

The most feasible way to get rail transit between the Edmonton airport and the city core is by expanding LRT. Constructing an entirely new rail line and musing about new entry points into downtown will be massively more expensive and intrusive than simply extending the future Capital Line south from its Stage 2 endpoint. That being said, extending the Capital Line South to the airport cannot come at the expense of other areas of the city. Castle Downs has already been screwed over by having the Capital Line extended to Heritage Valley first before they receive the Metro Line. Imagine if the LRT is extended into Leduc County before Castle Downs gets any trains.

Secondly, it's true that other Canadian cities do have airport rail links to downtown. However, YYZ, YUL and YVR all have airports that are both major international hubs and which have much higher passenger counts than Edmonton's. Vancouver's in particular was able to kill multiple birds with one stone: the airport link is a spur off the line into Richmond which means the Canada Line doubles as a commuter route into one of the largest cities in the Lower Mainland. By contrast rail transit further south from 41 Avenue SW to the Edmonton airport would only serve the airport. And yes, Ottawa is getting LRT to its airport but again the Trillium Line was being extended anyway to serve the south portion of the city and an airport spur was fairly easy to add.

The metro area would benefit far more from getting the Metro Line into Castle Downs and then into St. Albert.

LRT to the airport is a good idea in the long-term, but makes little sense right now. Light rail is generally more expensive per km to build. A heavy rail line can share infrastructure with CPKC which would save money. Also, having a third line to the city’s south between the Capital and Valley Lines could relieve pressure on the other two.

To me, I wouldn't see this as an airport link like seen in other larger cities. I would like to see a commuter line that connects to the airport, but also to Nisku, Leduc, maybe even Wetaskiwin. It would also serve the workplaces along Gateway Boulevard.

 

[The_Cat]

Even with heavy rail, I think railway crossings at Ellerslie Road, 51 and 34 Avenue might need grade separations.

 

[Garneau2Go]

me, I wouldn't see this as an airport link like seen in other larger cities. I would like to see a commuter line that connects to the airport, but also to Nisku, Leduc, maybe even Wetaskiwin. It would also serve the workplaces along Gateway Boulevard.

I think this is the right approach, especially if new rolling stock has to be purchased. Successful links to Leduc and Nisku may pique interest in lines to other regions like Spruce Grove and Stony Plain.

The benefit to regional rail is you can live in a lower cost of living area and just commute into the city for work or entertainment. Edmonton might be a really interesting case for it because of how many other smaller cities are next door.

 

[trevorhayden]

I'll believe any of this when I see the ribbon cutting.

 

[David A]

I'm glad someone mentioned Wetaskiwin. The current discussion just seems to just be about to the airport and Leduc, but there are other communities in the area that should be kept in mind now or for future expansion.

Another benefit is it could take some cars off the QEII, which can be very congested particularly between Edmonton and Leduc.

If Calgary is going to get commuter rail in two directions (north and south), then it probably makes sense to look at more than just the one route to the airport for Edmonton as well. So maybe that means looking at Spruce Grove/Stony Plain or somewhere else also.

 

[Garneau2Go]

I've got my mind going now. Looking at a map the closest major centers are:

Acheson
St. Albert
Sherwood Park
Fort. Saskatchewan
Beaumont
Devon
Leduc
Nisku
Stony Plain
Spruce Grove
Morinville

Now not all of them are large enough to warrant a rail link, but the Edmonton metro area is huge and a lot more decentralized than Calgary's. I think having some sort of regional rail would be a huge economic boon to the smaller towns and do a lot to help grow the region.

But let's get the airport done first.

 

[David A]

I do feel strongly if funding for commuter rail is now a possiblity to be discussed we shouldn't sell ourselves short and just take what is proposed.

Now would be a good time to consider whether something involving more communities or another route makes sense.

 

[yeggator]

I definitely have this concern and have raised it multiple times. Alberta’s population can’t support HSR. But it can support heavy rail regional trains. This and LRT is where capital should be spent. HSR should only be looked at once an extensive heavy rail passenger network serving all corners of the province is successful and well established.

Building regional rail to the airport would lay the groundwork for future high-speed rail via the implementation of grade separations, some double tracking, station construction and maybe even electrification (if we’re lucky). We should think of this like the CalTrain modernization project.

 

[The_Cat]

Edmonton has some potential rights-of-way for commuter rail.

CPKC south of Strathcona
CPKC line south of Argyll to Strathcona County
CN along Yellowhead
CN SE of Edmonton
CN along 142 Street to St Albert
CN line to Fort Saskatchewan

 

[YEG imagineer]

Ellis Don is part of the consortium of Innercity Rail Developers that is one of the 3 groups qualified for the VIA HFR Quebec City to Toronto project. Interesting that Minister Alghabra on a question from a reporter, kept it open with possibility of HSR.

 

[YEG imagineer]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/should-critical-infrastructure-like-high-speed-rail-be-left-to-the-private-sector-1.6917639

 

[David A]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/should-critical-infrastructure-like-high-speed-rail-be-left-to-the-private-sector-1.6917639

Lets think for a moment - the Federal government owns VIA, it has a strong focus on and funds for climate initiatives and even has extensive infrastructure funding plans.

Should they not be leading here and now rather than leaving it to other levels of government and some private company?

 

[CplKlinger]

Lets think for a moment - the Federal government owns VIA, it has a strong focus on and funds for climate initiatives and even has extensive infrastructure funding plans.

Should they not be leading here and now rather than leaving it to other levels of government and some private company?

That'd be absolutely lovely. Unfortunately, Via says in its annual reports it has no intention at the moment to explore any service expansion.

 

[David A]

That'd be absolutely lovely. Unfortunately, Via says in its annual reports it has no intention at the moment to explore any service expansion.

I realize that, its not VIA that is the problem here. It is those above it who have not connected the dots.

 

[IanO]

Throwback Monday