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

[frinkprof]

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.

I think you are right in that the $5B in 2008 dollars would be for the near-buildout of the system. That would include NLRT to NAIT, WLRT, SELRT, extensions to the NE and South, and maybe taking it out of the city's boundaries on the North, NE and South lines.

In that way, there is definitely some further clarification that the article that started this thread needs.

Anyway, $5B would do a hell of a lot for LRT in Edmonton. If all the above were to be built, it would probably triple ridership or more.

[Mikemike]

From the current <50,000/day on one leg I think full build out to 5-6 legs would hit at least 200,000/day, and if it's done right (good service, a well integrated bus network) then 300,000+ wouldn't be out of the question. For reference, Edmonton's current total transit ridership is about 250,000/day.

[CMD UW]

Originally Posted by Mikemike

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.

Read my post, you CANNOT compare costs with other lines unless you have the costs in front of you.

FYI - the Nait line has alot more engineering challenges than you may think.

[Mikemike]

Am I supposed to take what you say as gospel truth? I read it. I just don't agree.

I understand that there are challenges, but if it does cost $900m then they are clearly not really looking for solutions.

If you don't mind me asking, where did this $900m number come from? I assume that you "have the costing figures right in front of you'?

If so, how much of the total is 'roadway realignments and improvements? what other unessential features are added to the bill. Does that include 20% tip?

[CMD UW]

Yes, if you know whats right you'll take my words as gospel truth.

Put it this way, I have alot of access to the engineering / costing information for the Nait line.

[jeffwhit]

How about some maps for the out of towners?

[Hardhatdan]

Originally Posted by Mikemike

Am I supposed to take what you say as gospel truth? I read it. I just don't agree.

I understand that there are challenges, but if it does cost $900m then they are clearly not really looking for solutions.

If you don't mind me asking, where did this $900m number come from? I assume that you "have the costing figures right in front of you'?

If so, how much of the total is 'roadway realignments and improvements? what other unessential features are added to the bill. Does that include 20% tip?

The figures covers total cost and a substantial contingency to balance out construction inflation.
Please clarify what you mean by non-essentials on the project.

[Mikemike]

It seems very odd that they would be considering a plan that would cost $900m.
At the open house I asked whether 105st direct or 106st options had been considered, they said no, citing the townhouse development between 105& 106 as the reason. I mentioned that they could be acquired, and the rep mentioned the cost. Now, to go up 105 would require 1 row of townhomes, so 28@ 250,000 each thats $7m, or essentially nothing on a 900m Budget. Likewise, I mentioned the possibility of a 101St station, and again, cost was the issue, but what's 50m for a station (easy cut and cover, bare land, no space constraints) if you're spending 900m?

It also seems odd that you have a number that you claim is rock-solid, when none of the big details like a kingsway crossing (grade or underground)or where nait station would be at again, at grade or underground) have been determined. Surely those would be big ticket items, making any number we have right now worthless?

[Hardhatdan]

Originally Posted by Mikemike

It seems very odd that they would be considering a plan that would cost $900m.
At the open house I asked whether 105st direct or 106st options had been considered, they said no, citing the townhouse development between 105& 106 as the reason. I mentioned that they could be acquired, and the rep mentioned the cost. Now, to go up 105 would require 1 row of townhomes, so 28@ 250,000 each thats $7m, or essentially nothing on a 900m Budget. Likewise, I mentioned the possibility of a 101St station, and again, cost was the issue, but what's 50m for a station (easy cut and cover, bare land, no space constraints) if you're spending 900m?

It also seems odd that you have a number that you claim is rock-solid, when none of the big details like a kingsway crossing (grade or underground)or where nait station would be at again, at grade or underground) have been determined. Surely those would be big ticket items, making any number we have right now worthless?

That is a lot of wonderful guessing and grasping.
Strong basis for an estimate you have going.

[JAH]

re: SLRT expansion plans to Heritage Valley

Anybody know why the city would want to run the LRT west along AHD to 127 st and then south, rather than just straight south down 111 st? I know the UofA owns farm land along 127 St there.. does anyone know what their plans are for this big parcel of land?

[Hardhatdan]

Originally Posted by JAH

re: SLRT expansion plans to Heritage Valley

Anybody know why the city would want to run the LRT west along AHD to 127 st and then south, rather than just straight south down 111 st? I know the UofA owns farm land along 127 St there.. does anyone know what their plans are for this big parcel of land?

I believe it is due to a large parcel of Gov. of Alberta land that would be donated to provide a large surface park and ride.

[Mikemike]

Originally Posted by Hardhatdan

The figures covers total cost and a substantial contingency to balance out construction inflation.
Please clarify what you mean by non-essentials on the project.

I'm mostly referring to the roadway improvements/revisions that seem to consume most of the property requirements but which appear unrelated to the project at hand. I don't know what wlse would be included because unlike CMD I don't have any more than what the city has posted online.

You're right about the contingency, though. After the last couple years of severe inflation it seems wise to guess high, even though prices appear to have stabilized. The timeframe is also not firm, so an axtra couple years may be accounted for, just in case. One other unknown (to me) is how many LRVs are included. One official source noted that all NLRT trains would travel all the way to Health Sciences- which is reasonable, but the extra LRVs required, could add $80m to the total. Upgraded signalling in the tunnel, if required, would also be added to the bill, although it could just as easily be part of WLRT, if that went first.

[JAH]

Sweet.. LRT construction literally in my backyard in 5 yrs. Belgravians, I'm gonna feel your pain

[Mikemike]

Originally Posted by Hardhatdan

That is a lot of wonderful guessing and grasping.
Strong basis for an estimate you have going.

Sorry if I confused you. All I was saying is that any number at this point has a lot of unknowns.

I admit that I don't know what a basic onderground station would cost. So that was a guess. I suppose I'll have to wait until the report comes out.

I just looked for the $300m number that I remembered, and it was from a Journal artical in april, 2007, but the estimate was a couple years old then.

[rapid_business]

Originally Posted by JAH

re: SLRT expansion plans to Heritage Valley

Anybody know why the city would want to run the LRT west along AHD to 127 st and then south, rather than just straight south down 111 st? I know the UofA owns farm land along 127 St there.. does anyone know what their plans are for this big parcel of land?

Look to the report that had all the potential options from CP going south. They break it down with preferential routes and reasoning.

[basilbrush]

So what is the per KM cost of underground LRT these days? I thought it was around the $250M mark for straight line work.

[Coldrsx]

^i would like to know cut and cover versus TBM

[Mikemike]

The first stage of the NAIT line will be to build an LRT tunnel under 101st Street at 105th Avenue, a tunnel that will pass under the site of a new Epcor building planned for 101st Street.
The city report says building the LRT tunnel at the same time as the Epcor building will be cheaper than waiting until afterward. Cost of the LRT tunnel is estimated at up to $80 million.

From a Journal artical posted in the Edmonton Public Transit thread.


From a quick google map scale comparison, the underground section is about 500m. It apparently will be quite deep to go under some CN tower related stuff, and the connection to Churchill won't be all that easy, but that's $160m/km. Looks like a real deal, although we don't know if that number includes anything more than the shell, or even if they are talking about that whole 500m, or just fromchurchill to 101St.

If it is the whole 500m, then an additional $20-30m/km should get us track and overhead wire, so say 180-200m/km. Not including stations or stock. I think that that would be a little tunneling and mostly cut and cover.

[mick]

300m/km for a mostly at grade route is ludicrous. I can't think of an LRT line, at grade or separated, in NA in the last ten years that comes close that. You should be able to go the whole way underground, cut and cover, at that price. BC has just pledged 1.4 billion to build the evergreen line, 11km of what appears to be grade-separated sky-train (123million/km), in the lower mainland. 2.8billion to build 13km of sky-train (likely bored tunnel) along broadway to UBC (233million/km). Calgary's WLRT line is budgeted at 700million for 8km. I fail to see how we can claim 300m/km is reasonable.

[e909]

How exactly are they building the line to NAIT? Are they tunneling out of Churchhill or just extending the line as it comes out already?

I think the budget to get the LRT out of the ground at the university was ~$150 million, wasn't it?