Edmonton: $5B LRT expansion proposed for south, northwest, northeast Extension - Page 2

fortroad · #21 Posted **Jan 20, 2008, 4:08 PM**

^ I thought that the plan for these lines was to complete them in 5 years or am I just confused?

frinkprof · #22 Posted **Jan 20, 2008, 4:31 PM**

I don't see how this will cost $5B just for the NLRT and the extensions to the NELRT and the SLRT. I realize that parts of the NLRT will be underground, but it is still only 3 additional stops.

Calgary spent less than a billion for the entire WLRT line (which includes a likely more expensive above grade portion, and an underground portion and 6 stations), plus 3 new stations to existing lines. A lot of the ROW was secured long ago, which is probably where a lot of the costs for Edmonton are coming from, but $5B just doesn't add up to me.

Is is possible that the WLRT is included in these costs? How much is it projected to cost? Anyone know?

IKAN104 · #23 Posted **Jan 20, 2008, 5:38 PM**

Or does the $5 billion include a link to YEG? The article does mention YEG as part of the plan although they used the word "possibly", it does not say WLRT is part of the plan.

frinkprof · #24 Posted **Jan 20, 2008, 5:45 PM**

^Even so. I would say that $5B in Calgary would pay for WLRT, SELRT to Douglasdale, extensions to the NW and NE, plus most, if not all, of the 8th Avenue Subway.

CMD UW · #25 Posted **Jan 20, 2008, 6:06 PM**

I am trying to figure out the $5B price tag as well. I know that the NAIT Line will cost around $900 million, but that involves tunneling, land acquisition, etc. But the NE and South extensions are not really complicated at all.

MalcolmTucker · #26 Posted **Jan 20, 2008, 6:21 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by CMD UW

I am trying to figure out the $5B price tag as well. I know that the NAIT Line will cost around $900 million, but that involves tunneling, land acquisition, etc. But the NE and South extensions are not really complicated at all.

$900 million to get to Nait? With the length of the line I would guess you could put it underground for the entire stretch for that much! A third the cost of the Canada Line and what? 1/8th the length?

Is Edmonton using gold plated catenary wire or something? I know not planning definite corridors decades ago raised costs by not allowing optimal land acquisition, but damn.

Has council been told about this cost to get to Nait? I wonder if there will still be the LRT coalition then?

feepa · #27 Posted **Jan 20, 2008, 6:47 PM**

I would think that the 5 billion price tag would be shared with the new regional funding being setup, and not just Edmonton itself, which makes getting it out of city boundaries important

Coldrsx · #28 Posted **Jan 20, 2008, 7:06 PM**

working with stantec is the other 2.7 billion:>

IKAN104 · #29 Posted **Jan 20, 2008, 7:48 PM**

I wouldn't doubt that there is a disconnect between the price tag mentioned and the plan as reported. After all, journalism is more about interesting headlines than accuracy.

CanadianCentaur · #30 Posted **Jan 20, 2008, 9:14 PM**

About the $5 billion - I wonder if they're trying to hedge against rising construction costs and inflation over the next decade or so? It's astounding by how much costs for projects in Edmonton have risen. I find it kind of odd that WLRT was not included as priority on par with NLRT, though it was certainly mentioned.

Still, I believe that having such an ambitious LRT expansion plan is what Edmonton needs, whether it'll be 30 years or three years before construction gets started on any of these lines.

Greco Roman · #31 Posted **Jan 20, 2008, 9:25 PM**

Wow. This is a hell of an ambitious plan. I really hope this goes through.

Great news for Edmonton if it does.

Corndogger · #32 Posted **Jan 20, 2008, 9:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by kyle_olsen

$3.3 is just MSI, there is the gas tax sharing aswell from the provincial government. That provides the balance. Federal gas tax sharing provides a good chunck of change too (also not on going beyond 2011, subject to be cancelled for partisan purposes) The New Deal for Cities and Communities (NDCC) which I believe has just been renamed and the funding has been doubled and extended for another 5 years.

By 2011 the amount flowing should be close to $625 million a year (thats without the new federal NDCC, and with a phase out of the federal gas tax transfer as the current agreement states).

That also does not include the GST rebate which should amount to close to $20 million a year.

There is enough money, truth be told it is almost an embarrassment of riches compared to other provinces. (and roughly equivalent to if BC fully funded the Skytrain thing they just announced)

If all announced funding comes forward from the provincial and federal governments there should be close to $720 million a year coming in by 2011.

*Reminder, these are the rough figures for Edmonton and region as those are roughly comparable to Calgary's amounts. *

Hopefully all of that money does come through because we need it all and much more. It might sound like a lot but we need to remember very little was done for over a decade. I just hope we don't blow the majority of it on transit, bad planning and being ripped off by construction companies, etc. The more P3 projects we engage in the better as far as I'm concerned.

rapid_business · #33 Posted **Jan 20, 2008, 10:41 PM**

I wonder how much funding would come from the feds? It seems Federal funding is making headway into more and more public transit plans. (Toronto, KW...Edmonton???)

ssiguy · #34 Posted **Jan 21, 2008, 3:00 AM**

This is great news for Edmonton. That said, how the hell did they get the $5 bil pricetag?
Toronto's TransitCity incluses 120km of which atleast 6km is underground and its coming in at $6bil. I know labour costs are higher but Edmonton is of much lower density so it has more undeveloped and underused corridors than Toronto.

BTW, how does Edmonton transit work? Does it include the outer suburbs like St.Albert/Strathcona etc?
Do buses from those areas actually go to downtown Edmonton and if so why isn't Edmonton allowing them to instead of charching them for the priveledge?

mersar · #35 Posted **Jan 21, 2008, 3:16 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ssiguy

BTW, how does Edmonton transit work? Does it include the outer suburbs like St.Albert/Strathcona etc?
Do buses from those areas actually go to downtown Edmonton and if so why isn't Edmonton allowing them to instead of charching them for the priveledge?

Edmonton transit operates mostly within the city and has a few express routes to some surrounding places such as Spruce Grove, however both Strathcona and St. Alberta run their own transit system and they have a few commuter routes that run into downtown Edmonton and U of A.

CMD UW · #36 Posted **Jan 21, 2008, 6:06 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by kyle_olsen

$900 million to get to Nait? With the length of the line I would guess you could put it underground for the entire stretch for that much! A third the cost of the Canada Line and what? 1/8th the length?

Is Edmonton using gold plated catenary wire or something? I know not planning definite corridors decades ago raised costs by not allowing optimal land acquisition, but damn.

Has council been told about this cost to get to Nait? I wonder if there will still be the LRT coalition then?

There's alot more to costs versus length of the line. Each line has various constraints (ie. infrastructure relocations, electrical system upgrades, tunnels, road realignments, closures, property acquisitions, etc.)

You can't compare construction costs of other lines unless you have the costing figures right in front of you.

rapid_business · #37 Posted **Jan 21, 2008, 12:47 PM**

/\ I know... but $5 billion? You think the were talking about WLRT too and just left it out?

Mikemike · #38 Posted **Jan 21, 2008, 3:32 PM**

I think that it's pretty clear that the 5b would include WLRT and SELRT, and likely the extended NLRT as well. They have the underground section of NLRT at 80m, and last time NLRT was discussed (also post crazy inflation) $300m to nait was estimated. The S and NE extentions should be about what calgary is paying for extentions.

The Solidly planned stuff should be less than $1b.

Hardhatdan · #39 Posted **Jan 21, 2008, 5:01 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mikemike

I think that it's pretty clear that the 5b would include WLRT and SELRT, and likely the extended NLRT as well. They have the underground section of NLRT at 80m, and last time NLRT was discussed (also post crazy inflation) $300m to nait was estimated. The S and NE extentions should be about what calgary is paying for extentions.

The Solidly planned stuff should be less than $1b.

The NLRT just to NAIT will reach close to 1B$

Mikemike · #40 Posted **Jan 21, 2008, 5:38 PM**

For 3 km of mostly at grade? I really, really, hope that you are wrong.

SLRT was more than twice as long, with bigger challenges, and still is about $750m after inflation on all the later contracts. Other than Underground from churchill that was mentioned at $80m a week or so ago, there's no real engineering challenges on NLRT. Even if they go over or under kingsway/111Ave (I think they should) there's no way that this should cost that near $1b.