HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > SSP: Local Calgary > Calgary Issues, Business, Politics & the Economy

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted Feb 7, 2010, 8:13 PM
Oliver Klozov Oliver Klozov is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 210
It seems there is a potential buyer for the Drumheller and Oyen subs:

Quote:
Dwayne Marshman, the interim president of The Badlands Railway, says that
farmers, businesses and investors alike are being given a rare opportunity
to purchase, operate and run a short line railroad. The Badlands Railway and
Palliser Regional Municipal services want to purchase the 290 kilometre rail
line from Oyen to Lyalta, AB, which is being abandoned by CN. They just need
to raise enough money for the purchase. The Badlands Railway has been
holding community meetings to explain how the railway would work in an
effort to raise more funds. Marsham and his group are looking to purchase
the line from Lyatla to Hanna, a 176 km stretch, for $4.4 million and
lease-to-own the other portion of the line all the way to Oyen. The best
thing to do would be to purchase the whole line, Marshman said.
Unfortunately he doesn't believe they can get the funds together to buy the
whole line at once. To do that it would cost them between $10 and $14M. All
these numbers are tentative and will be finalized during negotiations with
CN. The group must put together a formal proposal to CN by Feb. 15 or risk
losing the rail line. Palliser and The Badlands Railway are hoping to go
into the meetings with a $250,000 deposit and lots of shareholders behind
them.
(Strathmore Standard AB 100126)

If this deal goes through it may or may not have an effect on how CN disposes of Sarcee Yard. It's not that the Badlands Railway will generate that many carloads but though CN will keep Calgary to Lyalta , it may grant Badlands trackage rights into Sarcee Yard and do the interchange (switch out Badlands locos) there.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted Feb 7, 2010, 8:14 PM
jsbertram jsbertram is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,545
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliver Klozov View Post
Joe

Joe must figure that trains can go up and down steep grades. There is nowhere that CP could run a line around Calgary. The southwest is out due to the Indian reserve and the northwest is out due to hilly terrain.

I could see CP building a replacement for Alyth Yard with a new hump facility somewhere to the southeast towards Carseland. I don't see them replacing Ogden Yard this century.
Let's dust off the old 70s-era Federal plans to remove the CPR tracks from downtown and build some rail tunnels under the Nose Hill (one EB and one WB).

Seriously.

The Western portals would be near Bearspaw Dam Road & 85th St running under Silver Springs and heading east towards Deerfoot trail. Since you're underground youi don't need to follow the grid of streets above, but you would probably have to work around the contours of Centennial Park. The Eastern portals would be near 64th Ave / Nose Creek so it can connect to the Edmonton/Red Deer/Calgary rail line.

All the tracks between Bowness, Downtown and Inglewood would be ripped up and the land redeveloped, or turned back to parkland (aka Rails to Trails).

Hopefully the recession is over by the time this gets all approved, so selling the old CPR lands for redevelopment downtown during the next economic boom should easily pay for the cost of the tunnels.

Costs for tunneling are typically $75 M per KM; portal-to-portal distance is around 11 KM; New CP Tunnels woujld cost $825 Million (BTW: The Mount Macdonald Tunnel under Rogers Pass is 14.5 KM and cost $500 M in 1988). Add $200 M for new tracks, signals &tc in the tunnels. We're up to just over $1 Billion for new construction.

So what is the value of 54 city blocks of land (bordered by 21st St W, 6th St E, 9th Ave and 10th Ave) that is mostly made up of railway tracks and parking lots? After excluding already developed areas like Palliser Square & parkade, Gulf Canada Square & parkade, and other developed sites like the Palliser Hotel and Metro Ford, you would still have around 50 blocks to sell for $150 M each. Doing the math ...... $7.5 Billion.

OK ... some blocks are worth less than others, so we'll probably net closer to $6.0 B for all the property after the expenses of returning it to 'brownfield'. That's still more than the tunnelling costs. And a nifty profit too.

We haven't touched the land between Crowchild Tr & Bowness. Maybe the CPR would be a good corporate citizen & donate it as parkland.

And the Inglewood land? I dunno. It's a becoming a hip & trendy neighborhood, so what would you do with it?

No doubt someone in the CPR will realise they could make more money leasing the land to developers, or develop it themselves (google "Marathon Realty").
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted Feb 7, 2010, 8:21 PM
frinkprof's Avatar
frinkprof frinkprof is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Gary
Posts: 4,864
Quote:
Originally Posted by Policy Wonk View Post
I would definitely be the last person on earth to propose that!
Given your posts in previous discussions on the matter, I figured so. Just didn't want to speak for you.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted Feb 7, 2010, 11:39 PM
para transit fellow para transit fellow is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aralaus View Post
One interesting thought for me coming out of this that hasn't been mentioned is how this might affect the Airport Tunnel. There is considerable industrial presence around YYC and I imagine some degree of freight would be going to or from the airport to the new yard. Currently this would require a detour to Deerfoot via either Stoney or TCH, where Airport Trail (via 96th Ave) would drop you right on the doorstep of the new yards. If I am Calgary I am getting CN on the line to put some pressure on Edmonton and Ottawa to get this done.
The problem with this is that someone will also have to pay for airport trail /96 ave to extend east of the city. The proposed CN yard is off mKnight/ Township road 250 -- an existing road. There isn't a primary road aligned with the proposed airport trail.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted Feb 7, 2010, 11:52 PM
para transit fellow para transit fellow is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aralaus View Post
Am I the only one that noticed that the train map mis-labelled two very important roadways in Calgary? (Deerfoot is labelled Blackfoot, Barlow as Deerfoot)
I think they have also mis-identified 84 street as "stoney trail" Notice how it travels south of 17 ave?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted Feb 8, 2010, 12:18 AM
mersar's Avatar
mersar mersar is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 9,876
Quote:
Originally Posted by para transit fellow View Post
I think they have also mis-identified 84 street as "stoney trail" Notice how it travels south of 17 ave?
On the map on CN's site, well technically by the time this facility opens Stoney will extend all the way south to 22X so its correct. Not that theres much difference between where Stoney is and 84th is anyways, less then half km. The other mistakes were being referred to on the railways map that Policy Wonk posted which uses an ancient calgary map for its base.
__________________

Live or work in the Beltline? Check out the Official Beltline web site here
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted Feb 8, 2010, 4:09 AM
YYCguys YYCguys is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,597
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsbertram View Post
Let's dust off the old 70s-era Federal plans to remove the CPR tracks from downtown and build some rail tunnels under the Nose Hill (one EB and one WB).

Seriously.

The Western portals would be near Bearspaw Dam Road & 85th St running under Silver Springs and heading east towards Deerfoot trail. Since you're underground youi don't need to follow the grid of streets above, but you would probably have to work around the contours of Centennial Park. The Eastern portals would be near 64th Ave / Nose Creek so it can connect to the Edmonton/Red Deer/Calgary rail line.

All the tracks between Bowness, Downtown and Inglewood would be ripped up and the land redeveloped, or turned back to parkland (aka Rails to Trails).

Hopefully the recession is over by the time this gets all approved, so selling the old CPR lands for redevelopment downtown during the next economic boom should easily pay for the cost of the tunnels.

Costs for tunneling are typically $75 M per KM; portal-to-portal distance is around 11 KM; New CP Tunnels woujld cost $825 Million (BTW: The Mount Macdonald Tunnel under Rogers Pass is 14.5 KM and cost $500 M in 1988). Add $200 M for new tracks, signals &tc in the tunnels. We're up to just over $1 Billion for new construction.

So what is the value of 54 city blocks of land (bordered by 21st St W, 6th St E, 9th Ave and 10th Ave) that is mostly made up of railway tracks and parking lots? After excluding already developed areas like Palliser Square & parkade, Gulf Canada Square & parkade, and other developed sites like the Palliser Hotel and Metro Ford, you would still have around 50 blocks to sell for $150 M each. Doing the math ...... $7.5 Billion.

OK ... some blocks are worth less than others, so we'll probably net closer to $6.0 B for all the property after the expenses of returning it to 'brownfield'. That's still more than the tunnelling costs. And a nifty profit too.

We haven't touched the land between Crowchild Tr & Bowness. Maybe the CPR would be a good corporate citizen & donate it as parkland.

And the Inglewood land? I dunno. It's a becoming a hip & trendy neighborhood, so what would you do with it?

No doubt someone in the CPR will realise they could make more money leasing the land to developers, or develop it themselves (google "Marathon Realty").
See "The Highline", a park in NYC, converted from an old rail line! Really nifty! http://www.thehighline.org/design/high-line-design Another idea would be to copycat the Arbutus Corridor, a disused rail line in Vancouver, now being used as walking paths. It's a really pretty walk.

Last edited by YYCguys; Feb 8, 2010 at 5:20 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #68  
Old Posted Feb 8, 2010, 5:08 PM
JBinCalgary's Avatar
JBinCalgary JBinCalgary is offline
Original Member since '99
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Calgary
Posts: 3,639
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post


Why would anyone even consider using CN trackage to get from Calgary to Edmonton for passenger travel? Ok, maybe VIA would, since they seem to have an unhealthy obsession with using CN no matter how much grief CN sends their way. A lot of the money that VIA got recently for capital spending is going into restoring sidings that CN took out or extending others. It's kind of amusing that in southern Ontario VIA service always improves once someone other CN owns the tracks - it doesn't matter who, be it VIA themselves, GO Transit or a shortline (or even CP on its residual tracks, notably Smiths Falls to Brockville) - all that matters is that CN not own it. Around Ottawa for example CN has abandoned pretty much everything so the track to Montreal is now owned by VIA, as is most of the track to Smiths Falls. CN, having (re)acquired Ottawa Central, now actually has to run at night from Ottawa to Montreal.

Anyway, how do you figure it would take 10 hours by way of the CP tracks? That's an average speed of something like 30 km/h.

At any rate, VIA is holding the property in downtown Calgary just in case. Similarly, they hold abandoned CP property in the Ottawa-area for a future HSR line to Montreal.
yeah pretty much, I just got in from a trip from mirror, met one train and it took 6 hours from mirror to calgary, 125 miles. the company wants the speed train outta calgary to go extended run to edmonton, but our agreement only allows for 10 hours edmonton-calgary. they want 12. calgary to kindersley was pretty close to 12 hours switch to switch
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #69  
Old Posted Feb 8, 2010, 8:14 PM
CalDal CalDal is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1
Twinning near Conrich?

Quote:
Originally Posted by JBinCalgary View Post
They only runs two trains in a day, and two trains out, so adding a secon line would be useless

I heard CN applied for twinning of track / load increase and to double stack cars, do you know where they want to twin the tracks?

If you look in the pics of their Conrich yard Brochure (http://www.cn.ca/documents/Shipping/...rochure-en.pdf on page 2) it looks like the line is twinned before AND after their new yard (note that it seems a single dotted line is one set of tracks, and they have 2 dotted lines coming in and going out)

Wouldn’t the length of the trains running to the Conrich yard have them wanting to twin the lines before Conrich and beyond? (Maybe even to Delacour)? They may not need to twin all the way from Calgary, but before and after the Conrich yard seems their plan.

What would this twinning / increased load / double stacking mean to property owners that border the existing CN line (before and after Conrich)? Will CN have to widen their 100 foot right of way (by appropriating / buying land?)?

Or can the twin the line within the 100 feet?



You said there was another 2 intermodal pads coming on later, where would they put them and how long till they would put those in? Would it be on the land to the West (not shown in their map, bordering RR 284- aka Conrich Road)?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #70  
Old Posted Feb 8, 2010, 9:11 PM
outoftheice outoftheice is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 452
RE: The LRT depot

This idea makes sense to me. There is a bit of a distance between the yard and the proposed SE LRT right of way, but I don't know of a place that makes more sense. The SE LRT will not share any track infrastructure with the existing LRT network which means they'll have to build new maintenance and storage facilities for it somewhere. I haven't heard of any proposed alternatives for the location of these facilities so the CN yards might just be a blessing for the city's SE LRT planning, even if it's a bit out of the way.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #71  
Old Posted Feb 8, 2010, 10:45 PM
Dado's Avatar
Dado Dado is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 2,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by CalDal View Post
I heard CN applied for twinning of track / load increase and to double stack cars, do you know where they want to twin the tracks?
They shouldn't have to apply to anyone for this. According to Section 98 (3)(a) of the Canada Transportation Act:

No approval is needed for the construction of a railway line within the right of way of an existing railway line

However...

Quote:
If you look in the pics of their Conrich yard Brochure (http://www.cn.ca/documents/Shipping/...rochure-en.pdf on page 2) it looks like the line is twinned before AND after their new yard (note that it seems a single dotted line is one set of tracks, and they have 2 dotted lines coming in and going out)
... it looks like they're going to build their new yard over existing road RoWs. If the municipal council is willing, they can sell that land to CN (railways don't like road RoWs to exist across their yards because the public can theoretically invoke a "right of way", not necessarily by car but certainly on foot or horseback). If not, CN can apply to Transport Canada to expropriate it on their behalf... yes, that's right, a federally-regulated railway can effectively expropriate land from lower levels of government.

Quote:
Wouldn’t the length of the trains running to the Conrich yard have them wanting to twin the lines before Conrich and beyond? (Maybe even to Delacour)? They may not need to twin all the way from Calgary, but before and after the Conrich yard seems their plan.

What would this twinning / increased load / double stacking mean to property owners that border the existing CN line (before and after Conrich)? Will CN have to widen their 100 foot right of way (by appropriating / buying land?)?

Or can the twin the line within the 100 feet?
They certainly should be able to. Each track requires 16 feet, so theoretically as many as 6 tracks can fit in the RoW. In practice the abutments for bridges, embankments/cuttings, service roads, signalling, etc., prevent more than three continuous tracks from fitting in without localized appropriations outside the RoW.
__________________
Ottawa's quasi-official motto: "It can't be done"
Ottawa's quasi-official ethos: "We have a process to follow"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #72  
Old Posted Feb 8, 2010, 11:04 PM
Dado's Avatar
Dado Dado is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 2,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliver Klozov View Post
It seems there is a potential buyer for the Drumheller and Oyen subs:
That's good news. It seems strange to want to get rid of track between Calgary and Saskatoon anyway, but then again here in the Ottawa Valley we've seen both CN & CP do something just as daft... some day they'll regret trying to funnel everything between western Canada and Montreal through Toronto.

Quote:
If this deal goes through it may or may not have an effect on how CN disposes of Sarcee Yard. It's not that the Badlands Railway will generate that many carloads but though CN will keep Calgary to Lyalta , it may grant Badlands trackage rights into Sarcee Yard and do the interchange (switch out Badlands locos) there.
CN might even sell/lease the track from Calgary to Lyalta, and possibly part of the Sarcee Yard. It's quite likely that CN would at the very least grant trackage rights into Sarcee Yard and quite possibly elsewhere in Calgary, including the future Conrich Yard.

When Ottawa Central was running, CN granted them running rights over CN trackage south of the CP mainline and into their yard at Coteau, near Montreal. Similar arrangements exist all over the place.

It only makes sense for the Class I railways to grant these kind of running rights to shortlines since it reduces the amount of switching that CN or CP has to do.
__________________
Ottawa's quasi-official motto: "It can't be done"
Ottawa's quasi-official ethos: "We have a process to follow"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #73  
Old Posted May 5, 2010, 12:25 PM
frinkprof's Avatar
frinkprof frinkprof is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Gary
Posts: 4,864
Quote:
New CN president says Calgary becoming rail logistics hub for western Canada


By Dan Healing, Calgary Herald May 4, 2010

CALGARY - The new president and chief executive of CN says he chose Calgary to give his first public speech Tuesday because it's a city "in the middle of the action."

Claude Mongeau, a 16-year CN veteran who succeeded Hunter Harrison at the top job in January, showed he knows how to get an ovation in Calgary as a chamber of commerce crowd responded to his words.

[...]
Link

New facility is 272 acres in size, costs $100M and opens in 2013. Certainly not a small project.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #74  
Old Posted May 6, 2010, 5:41 AM
bob1954 bob1954 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 870
JBinCalgary: You're an engineer? I was a trainman/conductor for the Illinois Central Gulf! I did'nt think there were any railroaders on this forum!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #75  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2011, 11:43 AM
JBinCalgary's Avatar
JBinCalgary JBinCalgary is offline
Original Member since '99
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Calgary
Posts: 3,639
Rumour around work has it that ground breaking will begin in the early spring.
Sucks to be an owner of those huge mansions at conrich as the site location is across the street!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #76  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2011, 11:48 AM
JBinCalgary's Avatar
JBinCalgary JBinCalgary is offline
Original Member since '99
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Calgary
Posts: 3,639
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post
That's good news. It seems strange to want to get rid of track between Calgary and Saskatoon anyway, but then again here in the Ottawa Valley we've seen both CN & CP do something just as daft... some day they'll regret trying to funnel everything between western Canada and Montreal through Toronto.



CN might even sell/lease the track from Calgary to Lyalta, and possibly part of the Sarcee Yard. It's quite likely that CN would at the very least grant trackage rights into Sarcee Yard and quite possibly elsewhere in Calgary, including the future Conrich Yard.

When Ottawa Central was running, CN granted them running rights over CN trackage south of the CP mainline and into their yard at Coteau, near Montreal. Similar arrangements exist all over the place.

It only makes sense for the Class I railways to grant these kind of running rights to shortlines since it reduces the amount of switching that CN or CP has to do.
I hear they are currently ripping up the CWR (continuous welded rail) on the oyen and drum subs. Saskatoon will continue to operate to oyen to spot grain. But between oyen and lyalta the removal has begun. Thus no buyers.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #77  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2011, 3:34 PM
You Need A Thneed's Avatar
You Need A Thneed You Need A Thneed is offline
Construction Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Martindale, NE Calgary
Posts: 5,569
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBinCalgary View Post
Rumour around work has it that ground breaking will begin in the early spring.
Sucks to be an owner of those huge mansions at conrich as the site location is across the street!
None of the larger houses are exactly "across the street." Several hundred metres away, at least.
__________________
My LinkedIn Profile.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #78  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2011, 6:08 PM
JBinCalgary's Avatar
JBinCalgary JBinCalgary is offline
Original Member since '99
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Calgary
Posts: 3,639
believe you me, its doesnt matter if they are across the street or a mile away. When we start yanking 15000 ton trains out of there and switching cars, The deepest sleeper wont be sleeping!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #79  
Old Posted Apr 17, 2011, 9:55 PM
albertantraingeek's Avatar
albertantraingeek albertantraingeek is offline
Getting sick of the NCF
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: NW Calgary
Posts: 154
I really don't like bumping, but I heard that this was supposed to start in the early spring, since it still is like mid-winter out there, I would like to know how this is coming along with the weather?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #80  
Old Posted Apr 17, 2011, 9:59 PM
albertantraingeek's Avatar
albertantraingeek albertantraingeek is offline
Getting sick of the NCF
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: NW Calgary
Posts: 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by xAnderblaze View Post
Maybe this will spur a snowball effect and we will see CP do a similar thing
Canadian Pacific Announced on their website plans for a Facility like this in Edmonton, there is a map, witch shows theirs to be MUCH larger than this CN one in Conrich.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > SSP: Local Calgary > Calgary Issues, Business, Politics & the Economy
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:47 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.