View Poll Results: !

Voters
0. You may not vote on this poll
  • 1

    0 0%
  • ?

    0 0%
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 401 to 498 of 498

Thread: Post your ideal LRT system

  1. #401

    Default

    except that the route that follows terwilliger wouldn't work, as you have suggested, the stations would not be very accessible by foot, transit or parking... there would be no room to park at the stations, there would be no room for bus transit center at the LRT stations, and no room to building park n rides...Also to mention that this train would travel through areas that has some of Edmonton's highest disposal income, and is also Edmonton lowest density areas, you think people in this area are going to choose the "slum train" as you so eloquonently put it in another thread over their leather seat lexus?.

    mix horrible access to LRT, low density, very high wealth area and very low interest in taking transit...

    and your idea about not turning terwilliger into a freeway? Sorry. That has always been the plan, and it's needed almost already. Not to mention that there will be needed by huge growth of people south of the henday in growing communities like the Windermere, nor to mention that the Capital Region Board, including the city of Edmonton, city of Leduc, county of leduc, and government of Alberta have all identify this road as a future freeway corridor.

    I've also mentioned that the LRT crossing on university avenue can't deal with any more crossings. It's at capacity now with SLRT. Adding another line along this route would cause a major bottle neck of unseen portions this side of the planet. This is why the NAIT LRT line won't go to south campus, and they are going to build the side track for it to switch tracks south of Health Sciences.
    Last edited by Medwards; 22-09-2011 at 10:33 AM.

  2. #402

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    and your idea about not turning terwilliger into a freeway?
    My thought is to build LRT first, with AHD access, I don't think a freeway is as critical now, but it could still be built if needed later. As to the exact route SW, I think there are quite a few options that could be considered, including older plans via Riverbend. I think LRT would do very well though in Terwillegar depsite the lack of denisty, simply because it is a difficult drive into downtown or UofA which I know many people would be happy to substitute for a train.

    As to Health Sciences crossing, I think there are options there if that becomes a problem in the future, such as either taking it under or over the road, or re-routing the road primiarily past the uofa/hospital and closing it going west at the intersection.

    No rush though, priorities are Millwoods, WEM and ST Albert. That will keep busy for some time.
    Last edited by moahunter; 22-09-2011 at 11:06 AM.

  3. #403
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    Terwilligar is pretty close to 111st, and there are no natural station locations as Medwards says, not room for bus terminals, park& ride, and poor pedestrian access and low density, all the way down Terwilligar drive. For SSW residents south of 23ave, better access to the existing LRT is just as good, for a lot less money. The westward shift of the planned SLRT extension brings it pretty close to windermere, about as close as Abbostsfield is to the "local" LRT station at Coliseum.

    That doesn't mean that the SW couldn't use improved transit. I would like to see a 53ave bus/bike bridge over whitemud ravine, which would provide much improved access to LRT at southcampus for existing terwilligar residents, for maybe $20m. Unfortunately, density and development patterns in that quadrant don't support more than a bus.

    The southside in general is more linear than the north side, extending south as a band rather than fanning out as the north side does. As a result, the south side can be served by fewer (but longer, and high capacity) rapid transit lines. I figure that after a line to millwoods the next south route should be commuter rail on the CP corridor, assuming CP has most of it's operations at -41ave by then. And with multiple roughly parallel N-S rapid transit lines in the south there's a good case for high-quality E-W bus lines, whether BRT or limited stop B-lines connecting the LRT lines and feeding them.
    Last edited by highlander; 22-09-2011 at 12:58 PM.

  4. #404

  5. #405

    Default

    ^^I don't think the CP corridoor would make any sense at all, it largely industrial. That was looked at already with the Millwoods line and the S line, and it was decided it didn't make sense.

    There is plenty of room for a Park in Ride in the SW either past existing developments, in the TUC on AHD, or even within the greenspace set aside from a freeway on Terwillegar drive.

    I think it is inevitable that LRT will go to the SW, it just doesn't make any sense not to service where most of the growth is happening. SW is expanding far faster than anywhere in the North. As to the south not fanning out, I think that's nonesense, the SW is clearly following the desirable river valley land further SW, not turning S.

  6. #406

    Default

    except that largely industrial area will be changing over the next 20-30 years as CP pulls out, and infill occurs.

  7. #407

    Default

    ^like all that land has filled in on the North line? Like Fort Road? Like the Quarters? Like the Muni? Wishfull thinking, send the LRT where the people already are moving / neighborhoods are growing / demand exists, not where some planner dreams of building. SW sprawl isn't going to slow down anytime soon, and as some have mentioned, the density of these new neighborhoods actually exceeds many of the mature ones, so is better suited to LRT.

  8. #408

    Default

    Like the area Cn pulled out of downtown that now is filling in with GMCC, Oliver Village, an arena, and multiple other thigns. Things don't happen over night in terms of redevelopment. (The Quarters new plan just got started, and muni is still an aiport, hardly good examples).

    18,000 people moving to Edmonton every year for the next 30 years is a lot of room to fill up, in the middle, on the outskirts.

    I think it would be a better idea to extend to the high level streetcar in to regular service from the CP lands on the old strathcona to NAIT on the north, rather than build LRT through the CP raillands in old strathcona (since the LRT to millwoods will go via Bonnie Doon).

    I find it funny how on one thread, you advocate for LRT to be used in mature areas only, and not to be pushed out to lewis estates, windermeres, etc, as they only enable sprawl further, but yet, here you are, enabling LRT in to "sprawl"
    Last edited by Medwards; 22-09-2011 at 01:47 PM.

  9. #409

    Default

    The Downtown Circulator would still run through Old Strathcona, either via the university or the CP ROW to Whyte and then on to Bonnie Doon. When the time comes it could be extended down the CP lands.

  10. #410
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    The downtown circulator is just an idea at this point, and not a very well thought out one (not to be confised with the downtown connector, which is decent).

    I'm convinced that it will never be built as currently planned. It's either too expensive, it it duplicates the existing line to the university, or it mises the university and it's overbuilt for the demand. Plus theres the difficulty of putting LRT (as opposed to streetcar, which could happen) on whyte ave.

  11. #411
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    The CP route was the original design route in the 1960s and 70, and only changed in the 80s when CP wouldn’t grant access to the high-level bridge. As it is the route south of Whyte is not ideal for local transit, but for longer distances it matters a lot less what the surrounding land use is. In any case, I think that in20+ years, after the Millwoods has been built and both the south east and southwest (extended to 119& ellerslie) are getting busy enough that relief is warranted, CP will have moved out of their existing Container yards, and possibly the whole yards north of argyle Rd will be moving along into redevelopment.

    If a line located alongside a freight line and surrounded by industrial land is an automatic failure, then what’s special about the original line, where 4car trains are packed at rush hour? No matter where we put a line, only a fraction of riders will walk to the station. Unless we make it difficult to get there by bus or car, in which case ridership will be miniscule.

  12. #412
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,552

    Default

    Below is an image of my ideal LRT system.


  13. #413
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,552

    Default

    Below is a copy of the SE Terminus Station for future low floor SE and Sherwood Park LRT lines:


  14. #414
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    202

    Default

    ^ & ^^

    I think that this layout makes a lot of sense.

    I wouldn't be hung up on how much is buried from churchill to the river but assuming it was then 102 ave would make an Ideal bus only road.

    Matter of fact I think that Edmonton would get the majority of the benefits of the downtown connector if we just went ahead with a transit mall on 102 ave and we could do it next week rather than in a decade.

  15. #415
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Meadows
    Posts
    1,976

    Default

    Oh but how would the Chinese elders jaywalk during the cut and cover construction period! Oh the horror!
    /sarcasm
    $2.00 $2.25 $2.50 $2.75 $2.85 $3.00 $3.20 $3.25

  16. #416
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    773

    Default

    LRT for the Edmonton Metro @ 10 million +

    Extended Commonwealth Line: Bruderheim to Wetaskiwin @ 118 km
    Extended Varsity Line: Health Sciences to Morinville @ 35 km extension from the Commonwealth Line
    Extended Papanoch L-LRT Ring: Stony Plain to Beaumont: @ 128 km
    Extended Crosstown Line: Lynnwood to Vegreville: @ 110 km
    Downtown Connector: @ 8 km
    Terwillegar-Lakewood Line: Whyte Ave to Tofield @ 77 km
    Alberta Ave Line: @ 14 km
    Londonderry Line: @ 7 km
    Redwater Line: @ 83 km
    Calmar-Leduc Spur: @ 17 km

    597 km @ $100 million/km = a cool 59.7 billion clams.

    http://www.bing.com/maps/?v=2&cp=53....604B2C31B7!133
    Xelebes

  17. #417
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,788

    Default

    ^No offence but I hope the city of Edmonton doesn't ever become that size land-wise ever because that would be the utmost worst urban sprawl ever, worse than what I experiance in California.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  18. #418
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    773

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmcowboy11 View Post
    ^No offence but I hope the city of Edmonton doesn't ever become that size land-wise ever because that would be the utmost worst urban sprawl ever, worse than what I experiance in California.
    Worse yet, where are we going to get 60 billion in today's money in the future?
    Xelebes

  19. #419

    Default

    Edmonton won't hit more than 2.5 Million in my life time. I doubt it gets much past 3 or 4 in my childrens life time, if ever.

  20. #420
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,788

    Default

    There would have to be something very major happen for that kind of influx of people to this region.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  21. #421
    Administrator *
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Queen Mary Park, Edmonton
    Posts
    2,744

    Default

    Even if Edmonton grew to that size, LRT would not be the answer. Commuter trains would probably be more effective for the longer distances.

  22. #422

    Default

    I still think that separate non-integrated LRT lines should be considered.

    I see no reason that all LRT lines have to be interconnected from the start. Lines could be put in to collect people living in the new outlying neighbourhoods, say in sections along the Anthony Henday and then drop them off at hubs where buses could take them to the core LRT system or 'wherever'.

    The value in this is that you get the LRT in place at the lowest possible cost by integrating it right into new neighbourhoods avoiding massive future redevelopment costs.

  23. #423
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,552

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kjh View Post
    ^ & ^^

    I think that this layout makes a lot of sense.

    I wouldn't be hung up on how much is buried from churchill to the river but assuming it was then 102 ave would make an Ideal bus only road.

    Matter of fact I think that Edmonton would get the majority of the benefits of the downtown connector if we just went ahead with a transit mall on 102 ave and we could do it next week rather than in a decade.
    102 Avenue east of 99 Street is already a well-established bus route with the 1,2,5 and 135 running along it.

    Without LRT taking up two traffic lanes, 102 Avenue downtown could become the focal point of an east/west bike corridor extending from Rundle Park/Ada Boulevard in the east to 170 Street/SPR in the west.

    The only missing link to such an E/W bicycle commuting corridor would be a multi-use bridge across Kinnaird Ravine connecting Ada Boulevard at 75 Street to Kinnaird Park. Here's a view of where the bridge could be located looking west: http://goo.gl/maps/pAvT

  24. #424
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,333

    Default

    KC the problem with new neighborhoods is they don't even the density to support bus traffic without developer subsidies let alone LRT. I do support the idea of allocating corridors for LRT in new areas to reduce future costs.

  25. #425
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    NW Edmonton
    Posts
    145

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dwells View Post
    I realize that the 'R' in LRT stands for 'rail' and not 'rapid,' but it galls me think that we are talking of spending in the neighbourhood of $40 million per kilometre to basically provide service that is similar to that provided by bus.

    I can understand the civic pride and desire to provide service to Fort Edmonton and to the Zoo, but every stop adds to the duration of the run and if I understand the control system and timing requirements, LRT stops are not 'on demand.'

    Please decide if you want to stop the train for a couple of minutes every few hundred metres OR if you want to provide a speedy transport to your destination. The two appear to be mutually exclusive.

    I like the ring route suggestion, especially if it only has to stop at transit hubs three to eight kilometres apart. Several hubs could act as transfer points to radial routes that end or pass through downtown. To deny the value of a ring route shows a very narrow, core-centric mindset and is similar to dissing AHD because it doesn't go downtown.
    Good points!

  26. #426
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Windermere
    Posts
    1,943

    Default



    These are the changes I would make to the LRT system plan if I had a say:

    In order of construction:

    Blue Line: no change from existing plans. Extend to Gorman in the NE and Heritage Valley in the SW. Eventual connection to EIA.

    Green Line: Instead of having the North LRT continue from NAIT to St. Albert, I would have it go through the airport lands, across the Yellowhead and CN tracks, along 127 Ave and up 97 Street.

    Red Line: Same route from Mill Woods as planned, without using low floor trains. I would keep all technology the same. This would allow the train to enter the downtown tunnel and continue west down Jasper Ave to serve the high density Oliver and West Jasper areas. The train would emerge at 121 Street and head north to St. Albert via the former CN right-of-way, stopping at the VIA/Greyhound station, and 127 st/153 ave.

    Orange Line: WEM via 87 Ave, underground under Whyte and to Sherwood Park via Sherwood Park Freeway.

    Yellow Line: Many years down the road: continue west on 105 ave from MacEwan station to Stony Plain Road, south on 170 street and eventually to Callingwood and the Hamptons.

    Purple Line: A spur from the blue line, following the right-of-way north of 23 ave to Lillian Osbourne/Terwillegar Rec then south on Terwillegar to Windermere.

  27. #427
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Meadows
    Posts
    1,976

    Default

    ^^Tunnel capacity issues.
    $2.00 $2.25 $2.50 $2.75 $2.85 $3.00 $3.20 $3.25

  28. #428

    Default



    Green Line (High Floor): Follows the same route of the planned NAIT/Northwest LRT Extension and the South LRT to Century Park

    Yellow Line (Low Floor): Edmonton's primary East-West line. Follows the original 87 Avenue West LRT Proposal from Lewis Estates; however, instead of it going joining the high floor system and funneling into downtown as originally proposed, a new tunnel and underground station under the University will be constructed where passengers will be able to to transfer to the high floor line at Health Sciences. The LRT will re-emerge on Whyte Avenue and will continue at-grade. Once at Bonnie Doon, the line will head North and share track with the Southeast LRT up until before Strathearn, where it will turn right at 95 Avenue into the heart of Holyrood, then up 75 Street, then down Baseline Road/98 Avenue into Sherwood Park. Major clusters along this line include West Edmonton Mall, Miserecordia, Meadowlark, the U of A, Whyte Avenue, Strathcona Junction, Bonnie Doon Mall, Holyrood, Capilano, and Sherwood Park.

    Blue Line (High Floor): Follows existing Northeast LRT until South Campus Station, where it branches off Southwest towards Whitemud and Terwillegar Drive and into the Windermere area. Planning can be coordinated with the University of Alberta over the Redevelopment of the South Campus area, and the creation of an LRT right-of-way along Terwillegar Drive will serve the growing transit needs of the Windermere area. Stations can be placed along Terwillegar Drive similar to how the Northeast LRT line in Calgary places its stations and the LRT track in the middle of Memorial Drive. Major clusters along this line include the South Campus Redevelopment, a variety of strip malls along Terwillegar Drive that could be redeveloped, the Terwillegar Recreation Centre, and Windermere Currents.

    Red Line (Low Floor): Follows the planned right of way for the Southeast LRT, except after 107 Street, in my vision, I'd have the LRT that is along 104 Avenue elevated, so that it reduces potential traffic congestion. In turn, 104 Avenue can be better purposed to become an automobile oriented road for commuters coming and leaving downtown from the West Side. At 124 Street, the LRT will then turn nothbound to better develop the pedestrian oriented character of 124 Street and its retail environment until 111 Avenue, where it will turn westbound and continue towards important destinations such as Coronation Park and Westmount Mall. Further extension could allow the line to terminate in the Northwest Industrial Area and into Winterburn and Westview Village outside of the Henday.

  29. #429
    Administrator *
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Queen Mary Park, Edmonton
    Posts
    2,744

    Default

    Here's my ultimate LRT plan:

    http://goo.gl/maps/TL0xx

    All the black lines are ones that the city has approved, and I'm not proposing any changes to them. The green lines are my additions and in order of priority, they are:

    1. Southwest Line

    An extension of the North LRT line, trains would branch off just south of South Campus. The current University Ave crossing would have to be grade separated as part of this project. Trains would pass through U of A's south campus, cross Whitemud Creek, and run up the wide ROW of 56 Ave to Whitemud Dr. At Whitemud Dr. it would turn south and continue in the middle of Terwillegar Dr. This line would terminate just south of Windermere Blvd, with a transit centre and TOD. Further extension south would be possible.

    2. Abbottsfield - Sherwood Park

    Expanding on my idea of a streetcar line, I think instead it could be a Low Floor LRT compatible with the SE line. The line would start in Abbottsfield, and head west along 118 Ave, into the redeveloped airport lands, and out on the other end on 118 Ave. It would turn south at 124 St, and head down to Jasper Ave. Continue east along Jasper until the existing streetcar ROW between 110 St and 109 St. Turn south, and over the High Level Bridge. The line would then turn east onto Whyte Ave. At Boonie Doon, it would head north, sharing the tracks with the SE LRT. At 95 Ave, it would continue north, while SE LRT heads west toward downtown. The line would head east down 98 Ave/Terrace Rd/101 Ave into Sherwood Park.

    3. St. Albert Extension

    An extension of the North LRT line into St. Albert. Pretty self-explanatory.

    4. Airport Express Train

    Not an LRT line (as I think LRT is too slow to be extended all the way to the airport). Instead, I would propose using DMU's (Diesel multiple unit) or EMU's (Electric multiple unit) along the current CP tracks and/or ROW. These trains usually have a top speed between 80 and 100 mph, which would allow for quicker service between Edmonton and the airport. Instead of going into Strathcona, or directly into downtown, I think the most realistic terminus would be at Wagner Station. That way, people can easily transfer to an LRT and go directly into downtown without making an additional transfer. Plus, there would be more land available than in Strathcona.

    Any ideas?

  30. #430
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,788

    Default

    I think that by the time LRT goes out to the airport I think it could go via the SLRT line and there will probably be 4 or 5 stops between century park and airport station.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  31. #431
    Administrator *
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Queen Mary Park, Edmonton
    Posts
    2,744

    Default

    I don't agree. The top speed of the LRT is 80 km/h. It would not be very competitive, as it would take 45 minutes or more to get from the airport to downtown. However, a heavy rail train, that is capable of going 80 - 100 mph, would be able to easily get between Wagner and the airport in less than 20 minutes.

  32. #432
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    10,733

    Default

    I wonder if it would be better to have a bus rapid transit route from Southgate (or South Campus) to Terwillegar, with stops at Michener, Bulyea, Rabbit Hill Road, 23 Avenue and Leger. It would virtually be non-stop.
    "Talk minus action equals zero." - Joe Keithley, D. O. A.

  33. #433
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,333

    Default

    Sadly the Edmonton Transportation department hasn't seemed to realize that cars and trains don't mix, my ideal system would have a few more tunnels under the major roads to prevent things like this from happening. FYI the train was going at 78 MPH not the 70 km/h that our LRTs travel.
    http://sploid.gizmodo.com/watch-a-tv...e-a-1498121008
    Last edited by sundance; 10-01-2014 at 09:43 AM.

  34. #434

    Default

    that will never happen in Edmonton. Never

  35. #435
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Parkdale - Goldbar - Downtown
    Posts
    5,237

    Default

    I would love a grade separation at the 112thave/ 82nd street crossings


    My ideal LRT system retains the high floor model, the SE alignemt would continue east from Central, cut & cover down Jasper and then cut through the bank the same way the existing proposal does. On the west, the LRT goes straight down Jasper after Corona, underground down Jasper all the way to 124st, then elevated along the bank of the river valley & up the ravine past 142st, then down 87nd ave. Extensions of the NE, SW lines are a no-brainer as well

    Massively more expensive, but a far better system than what's proposed IMO
    Parkdale

  36. #436

    Default

    the saddest thing is when you see a fire truck or ambulance in an emergency waiting for that pathetic flexible toy barrier to open ... that's when you get this sinking feeling that all those federal tax dollars were sucked out of your rear end to pay for Hongkooverites to merrily ride their train above or below the road

  37. #437

    Default

    My ideal LRT system is shown in the Nissan Rogue commercial. The woman takes the train to make her commute easier. She shows how to solve the first and last mile problem.

    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 11-01-2014 at 06:53 PM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  38. #438
    First One is Always Free
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Not Edmonton, regrettably.
    Posts
    45

    Default

    My ideal LRT system...I haven't given much thought to it, but I think I'd like to change the scenery of the north line from downtown to Clareview. For the love of all that's good and holy, get rid of all the junk yards and auto wreckers, and put up some greenspace so that the view is more attractive. Reading the bad news in the newspaper is a more pleasant experience than looking out the windows of an LRT.

  39. #439

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Leafs Fan in Edmonton View Post
    I haven't given too much thought to it, but I could comment on my ideal current system: and that involves changing the northern portion from downtown to Clareview. The view is disgusting for most of the trip, with junk yards and auto wreckers and whatever else. Change the view, and make it a better ride. It's a really, really bad ride.
    You obviously haven't taken train systems in other cities. Railways were and still are the main means of frieght handling so industry grew up around them. The LRT follows the old rail line from downtown to the northeast. In most cities, subways and commuter trains run along similar routes.

    I agree it isn't pretty but the only way it's going to change is if the area is re gentrified for residential removing the industry. To do this the city needs to rezone and there needs to be a market for the product. The proposed Stadium Station development will help. A new station at 95 Street with rezoning around it would also help; as will a new station on the lands just south of the Yellowhead Trail and zoning to support it.

    In my view, the City has done nothing to encourage development around the Northeast LRT Line and in the case of Clareview where they had an opportunity to develop high density TOD, they lost it by allowing big box retail close to the station.
    ETS Trolley Buses - 1939 to 2010 - R.I.P.

  40. #440

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stunkermann View Post
    the saddest thing is when you see a fire truck or ambulance in an emergency waiting for that pathetic flexible toy barrier to open ... that's when you get this sinking feeling that all those federal tax dollars were sucked out of your rear end to pay for Hongkooverites to merrily ride their train above or below the road
    Your comment is borderline offensive!
    ETS Trolley Buses - 1939 to 2010 - R.I.P.

  41. #441

    Default

    ^borderline.. it is
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  42. #442
    First One is Always Free
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Not Edmonton, regrettably.
    Posts
    45

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lightrail View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Leafs Fan in Edmonton View Post
    I haven't given too much thought to it, but I could comment on my ideal current system: and that involves changing the northern portion from downtown to Clareview. The view is disgusting for most of the trip, with junk yards and auto wreckers and whatever else. Change the view, and make it a better ride. It's a really, really bad ride.
    You obviously haven't taken train systems in other cities. Railways were and still are the main means of frieght handling so industry grew up around them. The LRT follows the old rail line from downtown to the northeast. In most cities, subways and commuter trains run along similar routes.

    I agree it isn't pretty but the only way it's going to change is if the area is re gentrified for residential removing the industry. To do this the city needs to rezone and there needs to be a market for the product. The proposed Stadium Station development will help. A new station at 95 Street with rezoning around it would also help; as will a new station on the lands just south of the Yellowhead Trail and zoning to support it.

    In my view, the City has done nothing to encourage development around the Northeast LRT Line and in the case of Clareview where they had an opportunity to develop high density TOD, they lost it by allowing big box retail close to the station.
    I've taken a fair number: Toronto and Vancouver come to mind where there's no junk yards or anything along rail lines. I've travelled the duration of the Lakeshore GO Train line in Southern Ontario, and I'm pretty sure there's no junkyards along there. Industry, yes...junk, no.

  43. #443
    Administrator *
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Queen Mary Park, Edmonton
    Posts
    2,744

    Default

    So not sure if this has been discussed before, but does anybody ever think there could be a southwest leg of the LRT (an extension of the Metro Line), that goes down to Devon? This would be many, many decades in the future mind you, but do you think that might happen?

  44. #444

  45. #445
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    edmonton
    Posts
    4,469

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chrisvazquez7 View Post
    So not sure if this has been discussed before, but does anybody ever think there could be a southwest leg of the LRT (an extension of the Metro Line), that goes down to Devon? This would be many, many decades in the future mind you, but do you think that might happen?
    If it's truly to be a City service then, yes, it will eventually spread as the city spreads (shock, horror for some, I know). The following link might be of interest to you, though. It shows how London's Underground developed over the years.
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...ate-built.html
    Nisi Dominus Frustra

  46. #446

    Default

    Post your ideal LRT system

    This has to be on someone's list.

    http://hotguysonthetrain.tumblr.com/
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  47. #447

    Default

    Not exactly a complete idea yet, however my ideal (south Edmonton) system addition would be to:
    1) Eliminate parking on Whyte Ave and build a low floor LRT from the Hub to The new mill woods line at Bonnie Dune Mall. (with possible extensions to the east and west built over time and stages as necessary) LRT would be short 2 car unit that obeys stop lights at Calgary Trail, 109th st and Gateway.
    1a) Eliminating parking on whyte would allow it to maintain current driving lane space, all the city would have to do is remove the barrier (trees and grass) running down the middle of whyte in some places and shift it slightly to whatever side is chosen to act as a barrier between lrt and roads. Stops can be built on this divider.
    2) Take the CP Rail lands south of Whyte Ave (Just south of Mkt and Fusion on Whyte) and build a new south transit hub station. This can be the location where the future high speed rail link to Calgary can come into the city and attach to the LRT via Whyte.
    3) Using the south transit hub, CP lands and rail corridor, connect train services directly to the airport (again using the whyte ave lrt link to connect to the main system and two lines)
    4) Again using the CP rail lands have a possible future LRT downtown relief line going under whyte ave, continue underground to a stop at the kinsmen center, across the river and continue underground to Churchill Square. Continue the line south to the South Common shopping area, and increase commercial and residential along Gateway Boulevard and 99st. Also install park and rides
    5) Convert the Downtown Edmonton Library at Churchill Square to a downtown transit hub like a mini Union Station in Toronto. This would link a number of lines and buses increasing rapid transit in the downtown and surrounding area.
    Last edited by DevelopmentallyDelayedEDM; 28-07-2014 at 02:19 PM.

  48. #448
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,333

    Default

    If more federal money is coming, I do hope some progress can be made on the Lewis Estates leg and extending the NAIT line. Caterina's comments on extending to Gorman do make sense as does the extending to Heritage Valley. I just wonder what the next 5 years will bring us.
    http://www.630ched.com/2015/11/05/so...big-lrt-bucks/

  49. #449
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    45,898

    Default

    West is so key to making this system 'work' for most Edmontonians. It will also be critical to ensure options for Rogers Place fans as I am still of the opinion that many people who drive now will indeed switch to transit after their frustration with trying to drive to the game.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  50. #450
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,333

    Default

    At least the Lewis Estates / Mill Woods line will get to 102nd Street on its 1st phase, a short walk from Rogers Place.

  51. #451
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    Of all possible short extensions I like south to ellerslie. There's enough built out there now, and it could be fed easily by a nice direct ellerslie bus.

  52. #452
    Administrator *
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Queen Mary Park, Edmonton
    Posts
    2,744

    Default

    Here's the latest iteration of what I would like to ultimately see in the Edmonton region. Includes LRT lines and commuter rail lines. Click on the image to get more detail.


    Rail Network Map by Chris Vazquez, on Flickr


    More information about each LRT line:


    Metro Line: I would like to see the Metro Line extended southwest from South Campus/Ft. Edmonton Park station to Windermere, and eventually to Devon. It would have stops in Landsdowne (good opportunity for TOD), and along Terwillegar Drive at Bulyea and 23 Ave. Having the line built in the median of Terwillegar Drive would provide incentive to fast-track the construction of interchanges.

    Capital Line: No change from the city's proposal

    Valley Line: Not much of a change, except I think eventually it could be extended south to Beaumont.

    Energy Line: This line is completely different than what the city is proposing. It would start at Churchill station (You might need to close 102 Ave to traffic completely for a block and have a third platform). It would head west to 107 St sharing the tracks with the Valley Line. Then it would go south down 107 St past the Legislature, and down into Rossdale. You would need to build a new low bridge across the river beside Walterdale Bridge. Then it would climb uphill where Fort Hill is now, underneath Saskatchewan Drive. It would jog over to 107 Street, and then go down Whyte Ave. Then at Bonnie Doon, it would head north to 98 Ave and make its way over to Sherwood Park.


    The commuter rail lines all use existing infrastructure except for a few things. The south line to Wetaskiwin would utilize the High Level Bridge, and would need a new branch built onto EIA lands. Additionally, the Stony Plain and Morinville Lines would need a new connection built between the Northeast LRT right of way and CN's mainline.

    Let me know what ya'll think.

  53. #453

    Default

    Sorry

    Encourages further urban sprawl IMEO
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  54. #454
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    381

    Default

    Fascinating Chris. Great minds are thinking alike in this city. Heard Mayor Iveson on TV talking about needing commuter rail to Heritage Valley.

    I do believe somewhere south of of 41 Avenue SW any commuter line would jump Hwy 2 to interline with the LRT and can easily reconnect to rail at Hwy 39 in Leduc.

    I also think your commuter line to Camrose would be more effective if it left from Nisku and cut across the north side of Beaumont to interline with the LRT and then east to the existing CN alignment to New Sarepta and on to Camrose.

    You can extend your Stony Plain line to Carvel and Wabamum. Wabamum could be the next Sylvan Lake.

    The Morinville line can be extend to Westlock. In fact, I'd skip Campbell Park and Sturgeon Valley and built a new line to the east: Westlock, Morinville, Cardiff, Carbondale, Duagh, Gorman to Churchill.

    You forgot one commuter line: Gorman->Gibbons->Redwater->loop around new track to Agrium/Sturgeon Refinery - >Lamoureaux/Fort Saskatchewan.

  55. #455
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    10,733

    Default

    I'm sure that Bremner (new development NE of Highway 21/16) may be of interest, given its proximity to the CN and CP lines.

    Also, I wonder if the CP rail line in the SE might be of interest, connecting with Davies Station, Sherwood Park and Fort Saskatchewan.
    "Talk minus action equals zero." - Joe Keithley, D. O. A.

  56. #456
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    edmonton
    Posts
    4,469

    Default

    Also, I think Sherwood Park needs its line to be more direct to DT by going straight across from Forest Heights to Quarters rather than straying off course and having passengers change at Holyrood. Alternative routes could be run, though it would necessitate having something like "Downtown via Quarters" or "Downtown via Old Strath" on destination boards.

    That would be similar to the Northern Line in London with its trains from High Barnet to Morden going via Charing Cross or Bank.
    Nisi Dominus Frustra

  57. #457
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton (belevedre)
    Posts
    6,485

    Default

    If Sherwood park wants LRT, best use to start with Wye Rd and Range Rd 223 going west all the way to where LRT stop at Bonnie doom mall is at.
    Edmonton Rocks Rocks Rocks

  58. #458

    Default

    I suggest three more important destinations



    By gum it would put them on the map...
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  59. #459
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    6,549

    Default

    This is long term PRT. I like it a lot. You've put a lot of thought into it CV and it's an excellent job. I would send a copy to city hall for future reference. I like the use of existing infrastructure for the commuter lines. It makes them viable.

  60. #460

    Default

    Fun concept, Chris.

    I'd add:

    Daylight service to Winnipeg and Vancouver (stops in Lloyd, North Battleford, Saskatoon, Regina, Brandon, Portage La Prairie, Jasper, Kamloops, and Whistler)
    3X Daily service to Lake Louise (stops in Red Deer, Calgary, Canmore, and Banff.)
    Let's make Edmonton better.

  61. #461
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Windermere
    Posts
    1,943

    Default

    I've also thought that the Metro Line should continue to Windermere. It could run down the median of Terwillegar Drive, and if that is turned into a freeway, would have no road crossings.

  62. #462
    Administrator *
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Queen Mary Park, Edmonton
    Posts
    2,744

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by howie View Post
    Also, I think Sherwood Park needs its line to be more direct to DT by going straight across from Forest Heights to Quarters rather than straying off course and having passengers change at Holyrood. Alternative routes could be run, though it would necessitate having something like "Downtown via Quarters" or "Downtown via Old Strath" on destination boards.

    That would be similar to the Northern Line in London with its trains from High Barnet to Morden going via Charing Cross or Bank.
    This is the one line that I thought about the most. Not sure what I want to do. I don't like the city's idea of having the Valley Line and the line to Sherwood Park interlining where all three legs have 2 routes. (ie, Sherwood Park - Lewis Estates, Sherwood Park - Mill Woods, Mill Woods - Lewis Estates). I would like to have a system where it would be less confusing. If you get on a train at the terminus station, you should be able to expect to always get to the same destination... Having to go through Old Strathcona to get to downtown from Sherwood Park wouldn't be much of a detour anyways. Maybe 15-20 minutes? Or you could transfer at Holyrood if you want to save time.


    Quote Originally Posted by jagators63 View Post
    If Sherwood park wants LRT, best use to start with Wye Rd and Range Rd 223 going west all the way to where LRT stop at Bonnie doom mall is at.
    I chose Baseline Road because it's more centralized and allows you to have a stop at Bethel Transit Centre. It also serves the Capilano area where TOD opportunities are available.


    Quote Originally Posted by JayBee View Post
    Fun concept, Chris.

    I'd add:

    Daylight service to Winnipeg and Vancouver (stops in Lloyd, North Battleford, Saskatoon, Regina, Brandon, Portage La Prairie, Jasper, Kamloops, and Whistler)
    3X Daily service to Lake Louise (stops in Red Deer, Calgary, Canmore, and Banff.)
    I didn't include intercity rail, but I would love to see at least service to Calgary, Saskatoon and Jasper on a regular basis. If you could upgrade the infrastructure, I would also like service to Fort McMurray and Peace River or Grande Prairie as well, but that might not be as realistic.


    Quote Originally Posted by TheGreatestX View Post
    I've also thought that the Metro Line should continue to Windermere. It could run down the median of Terwillegar Drive, and if that is turned into a freeway, would have no road crossings.
    Exactly. Similar to Crowchild Trail in Calgary. It could be a win-win, as monies put aside for LRT could also go towards making Terwillegar Drive a freeway.

  63. #463
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    10,733

    Default

    One possibility for the South Metro line, extend the line west from South Campus, running along 62 Avenue (the boundary of the U of A farm). The line could cross across Whitemud Creek into Riverbend (53 Avenue). The line could have a stop (like McKernan/Belgravia) at Brookside Park. The line could be extended south along the Whitemud/Terwilleger Drive, with a stop at Rabbit Hill Road and another at 23 Avenue.
    "Talk minus action equals zero." - Joe Keithley, D. O. A.

  64. #464
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton (belevedre)
    Posts
    6,485

    Default

    Very interesting idea from China called " Railless Train "

    http://newatlas.com/art-railless-train/49916/
    Edmonton Rocks Rocks Rocks

  65. #465
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    I don't even know anymore :/
    Posts
    1,044

    Default

    So it's a train-shaped bus that can follow the dotted line.

  66. #466

    Default

    useless for 6 months of the year.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  67. #467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The_Cat View Post
    One possibility for the South Metro line, extend the line west from South Campus, running along 62 Avenue (the boundary of the U of A farm). The line could cross across Whitemud Creek into Riverbend (53 Avenue). The line could have a stop (like McKernan/Belgravia) at Brookside Park. The line could be extended south along the Whitemud/Terwilleger Drive, with a stop at Rabbit Hill Road and another at 23 Avenue.
    There's no room for LRT along Terwillegar drive.

  68. #468

    Default

    Ideally you would do the very opposite of what the city of Edmonton would do. Ideally it would be elevated, it would travel faster than turtle speeds , it wouldn't restrict the flow of traffic. It would be efficient.

    Vote the bozos out !

  69. #469

  70. #470
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Windermere
    Posts
    1,943

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by The_Cat View Post
    One possibility for the South Metro line, extend the line west from South Campus, running along 62 Avenue (the boundary of the U of A farm). The line could cross across Whitemud Creek into Riverbend (53 Avenue). The line could have a stop (like McKernan/Belgravia) at Brookside Park. The line could be extended south along the Whitemud/Terwilleger Drive, with a stop at Rabbit Hill Road and another at 23 Avenue.
    There's no room for LRT along Terwillegar drive.
    Why can't it go down the median, between the future freeway? Like Crowchild

  71. #471

    Default

    crowchild has a much wider ROW

  72. #472

    Default

    83 ave is certainly narrow but lookie lookie, they can run a slothcar down it.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  73. #473
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Windermere
    Posts
    1,943

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    crowchild has a much wider ROW
    No it doesn't.


  74. #474

    Default

    it has more room, and places to put stations. Where would you put the stations / park n ride / bus loops on Terwillegar between Henday + Whitemud?

  75. #475
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Windermere
    Posts
    1,943

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    it has more room, and places to put stations. Where would you put the stations / park n ride / bus loops on Terwillegar between Henday + Whitemud?
    At Riverbend Square and at the Rec Centre/Leger??? How is this hard to comprehend?

  76. #476
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    10,733

    Default

    This might be Edmonton's LRT.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vnAqBSv7lhQ
    "Talk minus action equals zero." - Joe Keithley, D. O. A.

  77. #477

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheGreatestX View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    it has more room, and places to put stations. Where would you put the stations / park n ride / bus loops on Terwillegar between Henday + Whitemud?
    At Riverbend Square and at the Rec Centre/Leger??? How is this hard to comprehend?
    Riverbend square? There's no room there.

    The rec center is a good distance from Terwillegar drive to be an effective spot for an LRT station along the route.

    Take a look at crowchild and the stations along there.

  78. #478

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The_Cat View Post
    This might be Edmonton's LRT.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vnAqBSv7lhQ
    Wouldn't have to run...
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  79. #479
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    173

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by TheGreatestX View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    it has more room, and places to put stations. Where would you put the stations / park n ride / bus loops on Terwillegar between Henday + Whitemud?
    At Riverbend Square and at the Rec Centre/Leger??? How is this hard to comprehend?
    Riverbend square? There's no room there.

    The rec center is a good distance from Terwillegar drive to be an effective spot for an LRT station along the route.

    Take a look at crowchild and the stations along there.
    Well, there is a lot of width to put an lrt down the middle of the road. medwards youre totally wrong there.
    Sure, it would be hard to put in parknrides, but why would they put them between the whitemud and the henday anyway, the parknrides would be south of the henday. If they really wanted to they could fit a park and ride at the rec center.
    but regarding if they can or can not align a lrt down terwilligar and put stations in, both the rfiverben square and rec center would work. There just wouldnt be ample space to expland and i think thats what medwards problem is.

  80. #480

    Default

    the area down the middle is for a future freeway

    https://www.edmonton.ca/projects_pla...gar-drive.aspx

    and if we use the city's current metric for where it should build LRT, there is next to no redevelopment opportunities along fantasy terwillegar route ..

  81. #481
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    edmonton
    Posts
    4,469

    Default

    The most obvious route to Windermere, and that ever-growing segment of the southwest by LRT, would surely be a spur off the SLRT at 127 St. and continuing west along the southern edge of AHD - decades away, though. A bridge over AHD at 111 St. is already planned as part and parcel of SLRT.
    Nisi Dominus Frustra

  82. #482

    Default

    Or spur off south of South Campus, turn west at 53 ave. Cross the Witemud Creek to Riverbend Roand and then turn south. Run down either side of the road with basically 1/2 width Belgravia/Parkallen type stations. Then follow Rabbit Hill road to Leger and beyond.

  83. #483

    Default

    You're not going to cross whitemud creek there. That place is a 'nature reserve' and gooooood luck. You so much as look at a tree the wrong way and some of the people around there come out in arms. You would also grade separate to fix university avenue crossing, as it can't support another line.

  84. #484

    Default

    There's already a pipeline crossing in that area. Also, you could do a bridge similar to the new Walterdale that is only supported on the banks.

  85. #485
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    173

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    the area down the middle is for a future freeway

    https://www.edmonton.ca/projects_pla...gar-drive.aspx

    and if we use the city's current metric for where it should build LRT, there is next to no redevelopment opportunities along fantasy terwillegar route ..
    Just because the city has plans to put a freeway there doesnt mean it can't built an lrt too. That makes it more of a closer example to crowchild. Either the city is wasting space on purpose or people like you with no imagenation are why the city has such ****** routes. There definatley could be a freeway and a lrt going down terwilligar. Am i saying its the best route? No. I'm just saying it is totally possible. //landscape engineer here

  86. #486
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    173

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    You're not going to cross whitemud creek there. That place is a 'nature reserve' and gooooood luck. You so much as look at a tree the wrong way and some of the people around there come out in arms. You would also grade separate to fix university avenue crossing, as it can't support another line.
    What about go over it?

  87. #487

    Default

    Going over it would be crossing it, would it not? It's not like the LRT or BRT was going to ford the whitemud creek, and a top of valley to top of valley solution is still as intrusive as crossing at mid level. Just no. If the rest of the line made any sense at all, sure, I could possible change my mind, but you can bet that there will never be LRT down Terwillegar freeway in your or my lifetime, if ever. BRT can easily use the roads that already exist.

    BRT is the long term plan for the SW

  88. #488

    Default

    For a more direct connection for Riverbend/Terwillager, what about an extension that branches off at Century Park and heads west to end at Leger? 5 km. Then most of the bus routes in the area could remain local with just a couple to connect to other areas. Would have double train frequency from CP to Churchill, which, given the extension to Heritage Valley, would help with overcrowding.
    Last edited by kkozoriz; 04-03-2018 at 01:20 PM.

  89. #489

    Default

    a 1 one station extension that needs to cross a ravine? BRT!

    Also, the SLRT can not support more lines beyond health sciences due to University avenue, and the many other level crossings between it and CP.

  90. #490

    Default

    They've already done both lines running past Health Sciences. You could also have Belgravia type stations at 119 St and/or Rabbit Hill road.
    Last edited by kkozoriz; 05-03-2018 at 08:54 AM.

  91. #491

    Default

    Yes, they have, and in order to accomplish that, they reduced frequency.

    BRT is a much better solution for the SW.

  92. #492

    Default

    The problem is that the more transfers, the less people will use buses. They'd be taking one bus to Leger, BRT to the LRT and then LRT downtown. With my system, it's one transfer.

  93. #493

    Default

    Actually, just one bus to LRT, like how it already is. Your system is very expensive for little to no benefit.

    Buses already go directly to LRT, and will be even more direct with ETS 2020

  94. #494

    Default

    Or you could design the system so that the local buses actually go somewhere. If rather than looping in northern riverbend buses could cut across the ravine on a 53 ave bus (&ped) bridge and then direct to south campus then they wouldn't have to make an extra transfer either, and without the massive expense of LRT.

    Other bus routes in windermere could be extensions of the main straight-line bus routes that should operate frequently on 23ave and on Elerslie Road, both of which should meet LRT seamlessly.
    There can only be one.

  95. #495

    Default

    The 24 and 25 in Windermere already go directly to CP via the Henday. My wife uses one of these buses almost daily. 15 minutes from our door to CP, and 20 minutes to downtown.

    When we lived in T-Towne, it was much the same, though the buses used 23rd avenue instead of the Henday. (routes 35, 37)

  96. #496

    Default

    Good to know they're doing things right, or at least right-ish.
    There can only be one.

  97. #497

    Default

    I think many things are going to start looking more right once we get this new vision for the bus network.... really looking forward to the changes.

  98. #498

    Default

    Me too, even if it is a long time coming.
    There can only be one.

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •