Page 69 of 70 FirstFirst ... 1959656667686970 LastLast
Results 6,801 to 6,900 of 6925

Thread: Valley Line LRT | Downtown to Millwoods | Under Construction

  1. #6801
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    South Beverly Heights in a small house with a large lot!!
    Posts
    2,018

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    The new train is to be installed at Bonnie Doone so the public can crawl all over it. Very excited.
    have a link?
    Make the RIGHT choice before you take your last breath......

  2. #6802

    Default

    Nope... it was in the paper

    here ya go https://globalnews.ca/news/4300647/e...lrt-car-train/
    Last edited by edmonton daily photo; 15-07-2018 at 09:53 PM.
    "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

  3. #6803

  4. #6804

    Default

    Yay for the Google machine!
    "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

  5. #6805
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    edmonton
    Posts
    4,531

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    The new train is to be installed at Bonnie Doone so the public can crawl all over it. Very excited.
    Um, crawl along with it, perhaps?
    Nisi Dominus Frustra

  6. #6806

    Default

    O Howie, glad to see ya haven’t changed. This Lrt has already been a game changer not only for my community of Bonnie Doone but also those around me.

    Its fantastic and no Indont mind the construction.
    "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

  7. #6807

    Default

    oh god, look whos back! The guy who cheered on the NAIT line, and now can't see how bad this train will be.

    Where have you been gitzel!? we've missed you. Well, not missed you. Just many many things you've stood up for have been proven quite the opposite!

  8. #6808

    Default

    Yeah, I am surprised that he crawled out from under that rock too!

    I notice that he gets immediately on his soap box and says; "Its fantastic and no Indont mind the construction." spelling mistakes and all.

    Sure EDP does not mind the construction. Anything that buggers up the daily commute for 90% of the population to force them to use transit is all good with EDP! No matter if the commute by transit is slow, costs the taxpayer 100% for capital expenditures and 55% in subsides to operate. And I say this knowing that my moniker is "Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.", something the COE is failing on all three counts.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  9. #6809

    Default

    I wonder if he left C2E when he left Oliver... he probably has a car now too, and reality of being an adult slowing sinking in as he ages into his 40s.

  10. #6810

    Default

    Mass transit design should not have the goal: "If LRT can't beat a car, then cripple the roads."
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  11. #6811

    Default

    1 lane reduction and it's now crippling?
    Live and love... your neighbourhood.

  12. #6812

    Default

    Think about the Capital & Metro line grade level crossings and the impacts on left turns along the routes.

    You know this, it was in all the papers...


    If EDP had his way, cars would be banned.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  13. #6813

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    I wonder if he left C2E when he left Oliver... he probably has a car now too, and reality of being an adult slowing sinking in as he ages into his 40s.
    Better then being a gawd damned child like you are acting like right now? Was wondering when you would pounce and start attacking him like you have done for years on this fourm

  14. #6814

    Default

    Its my biggest fan! Hey Kris!

  15. #6815

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    Its my biggest fan! Hey Kris!
    Sup matt......

  16. #6816
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,374

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cnr67 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by The_Cat View Post
    My guess is that the CN train could make it as far as 75 Street (near the Davies Station).
    There is a spur that still runs toward DT and stub ends at the Coliseum...
    When you consider the closest railway to the LRT barn is that spur, it makes sense. Least amount of work

  17. #6817

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sundance View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by cnr67 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by The_Cat View Post
    My guess is that the CN train could make it as far as 75 Street (near the Davies Station).
    There is a spur that still runs toward DT and stub ends at the Coliseum...
    When you consider the closest railway to the LRT barn is that spur, it makes sense. Least amount of work
    You realize its not going to the old LRT barn its going into its own LRT barn just off the whitemud right?

  18. #6818

    Default

    Is that barn ready yet Kris?

  19. #6819

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    Is that barn ready yet Kris?
    You cry about Ian O needing to follow the rules yet you breaking them here good job hypocrite

  20. #6820

    Default

    kris, if Im breaking rules, please let admin know.

    Matt

  21. #6821

  22. #6822

    Default

    You might as well ignore them Gen. They will just attack you.

    I have bought a house near the Bonnie Doone station. The Lrt construction has little to no effect on my life. I welcome it’s opening greatly.
    "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

  23. #6823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    oh god, look whos back! The guy who cheered on the NAIT line, and now can't see how bad this train will be.

    Where have you been gitzel!? we've missed you. Well, not missed you. Just many many things you've stood up for have been proven quite the opposite!
    ... Says the man who advocating putting all lines through the dt tunnel..... you really should um... evolve.
    "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

  24. #6824

    Default

    Maybe you've missed the last several years of discussion here. Catch up....

    And yes, I still advocate for full utilization of our transit assets. The downtown tunnel can carry a lot more capacity than it is. Such wastefulness. With the PROPER signalling, the downtown tunnel can carry 3 lines. It's at 1.5 now. Before you resume your previous rage fits of disorder, consider that the LRT documentation for the original line calls for that.

    Weren't you the one advocating for the NAIT line and saying how wonderful it will be etc, etc, etc.... It doesn't need separation at busy intersections... man, how wrong you and the city are. now they will need to shut down the line to correct those mistakes in the future.... and expensive fix... a lot more than it would be if they.... hold on .... hold on...



    GET IT RIGHT THE FIRST [email protected]!$#@(%[email protected]

  25. #6825

    Default

    Thanks so much for these updates. Very excited about this project and long awaited LRT to Millwoods.

    The upcoming testing should be exciting and happening before I thought it would. Visually its nice to get a glimpse of it moving on tracks and further to the eventual opening of the line in two years. We're at a stage now where we're seeing some segments of line being completed.
    Last edited by Replacement; 18-07-2018 at 08:23 AM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  26. #6826

    Default

    I lived by the Kingsway lrt intersection. It wasnít that bad. It inconcienced me no more than any other major intersection in the city. Tbh and at times I had to drive through it 4-5 times a day for work.

    Now I live by the dreaded 83st intersection. Again I donít see any major issue. Thus far everything has been very manageable. Except for the signaling issues Iím happy with the lrt development. Happy enough Iím thinking of becoming a driver for the valley line.
    Last edited by edmonton daily photo; 18-07-2018 at 11:25 AM.

  27. #6827
    First One is Always Free
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    The new train is to be installed at Bonnie Doone so the public can crawl all over it. Very excited.
    As of this morning there is a new LRT car on display in the Bonnie Doon mall parking lot. Looks great!

  28. #6828

    Default

    Have to go check it out this time. Any word on whether it is open this time to walk in and take a look inside or is just possible to look at the outside of it?
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  29. #6829

    Default

    Thanks BDD! Canít wait to check it out. If anyone goes make sure you go into the mall and check out the engagement center for the site redevelopment as well. I would hope they have it open.

    Also any announcement on the new Tennant?

    Personally I think that the mall owners are doing an amazing job of being part of the local community. Their level of engagement and their outreach is unlike I have seen elsewhere.

  30. #6830
    First One is Always Free
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    The new train is to be installed at Bonnie Doone so the public can crawl all over it. Very excited.
    As of this morning there is a new LRT car on display in the Bonnie Doon mall parking lot. Looks great!

  31. #6831

    Default

    here is some more info on the topic http://transedlrt.ca/advisories/firs...e-has-arrived/

    Hours:

    • Friday, July 27: 12:00 p.m. – 6:00 p.m.
    • Saturday, July 28: 10:00 a.m. – 4:00 p.m.
    • Sunday, July 29: 10:00 a.m. – 4:00 p.m.
    • Monday, July 30: 12 p.m. – 6:00 p.m.
    • Tuesday, July 31: 12 p.m. – 6:00 p.m.
    • Wednesday, August 1st: 12 p.m. – 4:00 p.m.

  32. #6832
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,895

    Default

    Also, as of last night while I was driving past the valley line section south of 34 avenue, I observed that they have begun installation of tracks. I will try to get some pictures soon.

  33. #6833
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    46,539

    Default




    @estolte
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  34. #6834

    Default

    Went to go check out the train, super sexy.

  35. #6835

    Default

    The train may be super sexy but the route is super ugly, super expensive and will be super slow. Can someone remind me why we are spending 2 billion for a train that will be no quicker than the existing bus route (15)?

  36. #6836
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    10,850

    Default

    The Bombardier spokesman told me that the trains had a top speed of 88 km/h. I could see the trains capable of 60-65 km/h down 75 Street.
    "Talk minus action equals zero." - Joe Keithley, D. O. A.

  37. #6837
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,993

    Default

    There were more people at this thing than at Bonnie Doon Mall itself!
    ďYou have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.Ē - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  38. #6838

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The_Cat View Post
    The Bombardier spokesman told me that the trains had a top speed of 88 km/h. I could see the trains capable of 60-65 km/h down 75 Street.
    sadly, the TRAM won't travel that fast down that stretch according to the project agreement.

    https://www.edmonton.ca/documents/Ro...quirements.pdf

    only a few stretches, ironically separated from traffic, where 80km/h will be permitted.

    from page 13/14 of the pdf:

    66/28ave to mil woods town centre stop: 50km/h

    milbourne/ woodvale stop to 75/ mcintyre road: 55 km/ h (speed limit is 60km/h for traffic)

    n of mcintyre road through elevated guideway: 80km/ h (but there is a stop there, so, short lived)

    95 ave/85st to 83st/69 ave: 50km/ h

    connors rd/ cloverdale rd to 95 ave/ 85 st: 40 km/ h

    bridge/ tunnel: 80 km/ h

    102 ave downtown: 30km/ h


    page 10 states: "the maximum scheduled one way travel time shall not exceed 32 minutes"

  39. #6839
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    46,539

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    The train may be super sexy but the route is super ugly, super expensive and will be super slow. Can someone remind me why we are spending 2 billion for a train that will be no quicker than the existing bus route (15)?
    I guess you are missing the entire point of this line and future low-floor lines. This is NOT a point to point commuter train, but rather a transportation option for those with, without or no need of a car.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  40. #6840
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    I don't even know anymore :/
    Posts
    1,112

    Default

    ^But the city has sold it as a commuter train. It's the same issue as the West LRT, they've tried to say its both an urban LRT and a commuter train and it will end up being neither.

  41. #6841
    Administrator *
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Queen Mary Park, Edmonton
    Posts
    2,755

    Default

    Construction update, recorded yesterday.


  42. #6842
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    46,539

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by seamusmcduffs View Post
    ^But the city has sold it as a commuter train. It's the same issue as the West LRT, they've tried to say its both an urban LRT and a commuter train and it will end up being neither.
    I have to politely disagree. It was sold as an urban transportation option.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  43. #6843
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,993

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chrisvazquez7 View Post
    Construction update, recorded yesterday.

    Great effort as always, Chris!
    I see they still haven't started anything on 95 Ave yet (aside from some pylons) - they damn well better get cracking on that yesterday.
    ďYou have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.Ē - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  44. #6844

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    The train may be super sexy but the route is super ugly, super expensive and will be super slow. Can someone remind me why we are spending 2 billion for a train that will be no quicker than the existing bus route (15)?
    During the morning rush the 15 takes 45 min to get from millwoods transit center to Churchill square. The lrt is expected to take 30 min. A bike is slotted in at just over 50 min.

    This is as per the info found here https://www.edmonton.ca/documents/VL..._25-Nov-15.pdf

    And using the route planning tool on the ďTransitĒ app. One of if not The official app of ets.

    You are welcome and entitled to your opinion but you are not entitled to facts. A reduction of apx 30% innteavel time, plus a/c plus a reduced number of stops seems like a very attractive option that also allows you to visit arguably more interesting places than the 15.

  45. #6845

    Default

    Further to this. Since biking is only 8 or so minuets faster than the bus maybe we should cancel bus altogether or maybe there is value in having more than one transportation option.

  46. #6846

    Default







    Passed by the new train today and took a gander. The pantograph was missing in the unit, presumably because there was no point setting it up - I looked underneath at the bogie and there wasn't anything to indicate a third rail. It's very strange to see this sort of configuration - this single unit would be considered a complete consist in the traditional sense, split into seven articulated 'modules' which presumably cannot be dissembled. According to the leaflets up to four of these units can be coupled, but Edmonton's system will only allow for two.

    A couple kids had great fun with the horn, startling the heck out of adjacent traffic and passersby. I heard a lot of French being spoken as well.
    Last edited by Foolworm; 29-07-2018 at 11:53 PM.

  47. #6847
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,374

    Default

    It will use a pantograph, with level crossings 3rd rail systems can be deadly.

  48. #6848
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    I don't even know anymore :/
    Posts
    1,112

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by seamusmcduffs View Post
    ^But the city has sold it as a commuter train. It's the same issue as the West LRT, they've tried to say its both an urban LRT and a commuter train and it will end up being neither.
    I have to politely disagree. It was sold as an urban transportation option.
    Which frankly doesn't make sense. Where is the density of residents and commercial options in Strathearn/Bonnie Doon/Cloverdale etc.? There's no reason for people to travel between these communities, and there's not near enough people living in them to use the system. There needs to be destinations and attractions to create trips. What do these communities have? A dead mall, a few schools, a bit of residential, and the river valley. It's just not enough. I'm all for urban LRT, but at where the city is right now it doesn't support that form of transportation. As it stands now this line is for taking people from Millwoods and these communities to downtown.

    I know there will be TOD eventually, but we all know how well Edmonton does that. And TOD tends not to be destinations, but simply places people live to easily get to their jobs, which again points to it being a commuter line.

  49. #6849

    Default

    Um... my friend. Bonnie doone redevelopment, Holyrood Gardens redevelopment, Strathearn redevelopment.
    Not to mention the millwoods mall redevelopment.

    All of which are moving ahead except one as the owners of Strathearn are playing chicken with the city.

    Lastly the line ends in one of the most dense places in Edmonton, dt.

    Re Bonnie Doone.

    As I just bought property here I donít think you understand the scope of new development thatís taking place both via condo development and the rear I g down and splitting of lots, skinny houses and duplexes everywhere on top of existing 4 plexus and small scale apartments you likely never knew existed.

  50. #6850

    Default

    Can we start a separate thread on 'what transit system should YEG develop?' so we can focus these LRT threads on the actual projects? It seems every time someone posts something actually related to the construction of this project the thread just gets derailed (pun intended) with the same 5 people arguing about whether we should have gone for a low floor system or not. A debate worth having, but maybe in a separate thread imo.
    "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits" - Einstein

  51. #6851
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    I don't even know anymore :/
    Posts
    1,112

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    Um... my friend. Bonnie doone redevelopment, Holyrood Gardens redevelopment, Strathearn redevelopment.
    Not to mention the millwoods mall redevelopment.

    All of which are moving ahead except one as the owners of Strathearn are playing chicken with the city.

    Lastly the line ends in one of the most dense places in Edmonton, dt.

    Re Bonnie Doone.

    As I just bought property here I donít think you understand the scope of new development thatís taking place both via condo development and the rear I g down and splitting of lots, skinny houses and duplexes everywhere on top of existing 4 plexus and small scale apartments you likely never knew existed.
    I'm skeptical that those developments will happen in a reasonable timeframe, and skeptical that they will add sufficient density to make this an urban LRT. An extra 1000-3000 people per station won't create a surge in ridership. I would love to be proven wrong, but I just don't see it.

    I'm very familiar with Bonnie Doon. Lot splitting and duplexes don't add the population you would think, in some cases they even decrease the population depending on who moves in.

  52. #6852

    Default

    This one didn’t quite turn out as expected - but wasn’t the proposal a fairly significant factor in the LRT design and spend?:

    Century Park, Edmonton - Wikipedia
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Century_Park,_Edmonton


    2016:
    Developer planning to restart long-delayed Century Park development | Edmonton Journal

    https://edmontonjournal.com/business...-homes-to-4500


    2017:

    Developer’s vision for Century Park approved by Edmonton city councillors, community - Edmonton | Globalnews.ca

    Excerpt:
    2007:
    “City councillors approved a large development Monday that they hope will become a template for transit-oriented development in Edmonton.


    Council approved a 3,995-unit residential development around south Edmonton’s Century Park LRT Station.

    ProCura Real Estate Services’ proposal is nearly twice as ambitious as a stalled development proposal that never came to fruition more than 10 years ago. ...”


    https://globalnews.ca/news/3522738/d...ors-community/
    Last edited by KC; 30-07-2018 at 12:28 PM.

  53. #6853

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by seamusmcduffs View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    Um... my friend. Bonnie doone redevelopment, Holyrood Gardens redevelopment, Strathearn redevelopment.
    Not to mention the millwoods mall redevelopment.

    All of which are moving ahead except one as the owners of Strathearn are playing chicken with the city.

    Lastly the line ends in one of the most dense places in Edmonton, dt.

    Re Bonnie Doone.

    As I just bought property here I donít think you understand the scope of new development thatís taking place both via condo development and the rear I g down and splitting of lots, skinny houses and duplexes everywhere on top of existing 4 plexus and small scale apartments you likely never knew existed.
    I'm skeptical that those developments will happen in a reasonable timeframe, and skeptical that they will add sufficient density to make this an urban LRT. An extra 1000-3000 people per station won't create a surge in ridership. I would love to be proven wrong, but I just don't see it.

    I'm very familiar with Bonnie Doon. Lot splitting and duplexes don't add the population you would think, in some cases they even decrease the population depending on who moves in.

    I agree. A 1960's 1,000sqft home that had a family of 6 replaced by a 2x 2,000sqft duplex that houses two childless couples.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  54. #6854

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by seamusmcduffs View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    Um... my friend. Bonnie doone redevelopment, Holyrood Gardens redevelopment, Strathearn redevelopment.
    Not to mention the millwoods mall redevelopment.

    All of which are moving ahead except one as the owners of Strathearn are playing chicken with the city.

    Lastly the line ends in one of the most dense places in Edmonton, dt.

    Re Bonnie Doone.

    As I just bought property here I don’t think you understand the scope of new development that’s taking place both via condo development and the rear I g down and splitting of lots, skinny houses and duplexes everywhere on top of existing 4 plexus and small scale apartments you likely never knew existed.
    I'm skeptical that those developments will happen in a reasonable timeframe, and skeptical that they will add sufficient density to make this an urban LRT. An extra 1000-3000 people per station won't create a surge in ridership. I would love to be proven wrong, but I just don't see it.

    I'm very familiar with Bonnie Doon. Lot splitting and duplexes don't add the population you would think, in some cases they even decrease the population depending on who moves in.

    I agree. A 1960's 1,000sqft home that had a family of 6 replaced by a 2x 2,000sqft duplex that houses two childless couples.
    Who may bike to work downtown because they are close and the bike infrastructure has been improved.

    Then there’s a new west LRT route that will give people more choices of places to live if they want to be near an LRT.

    And just wait till the gondolas start popping up everywhere!




    Seven reasons why home working is the future

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business...orking-future/
    Last edited by KC; 30-07-2018 at 12:36 PM.

  55. #6855
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Sherwood park
    Posts
    2,425

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by seamusmcduffs View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    Um... my friend. Bonnie doone redevelopment, Holyrood Gardens redevelopment, Strathearn redevelopment.
    Not to mention the millwoods mall redevelopment.

    All of which are moving ahead except one as the owners of Strathearn are playing chicken with the city.

    Lastly the line ends in one of the most dense places in Edmonton, dt.

    Re Bonnie Doone.

    As I just bought property here I don’t think you understand the scope of new development that’s taking place both via condo development and the rear I g down and splitting of lots, skinny houses and duplexes everywhere on top of existing 4 plexus and small scale apartments you likely never knew existed.
    I'm skeptical that those developments will happen in a reasonable timeframe, and skeptical that they will add sufficient density to make this an urban LRT. An extra 1000-3000 people per station won't create a surge in ridership. I would love to be proven wrong, but I just don't see it.

    I'm very familiar with Bonnie Doon. Lot splitting and duplexes don't add the population you would think, in some cases they even decrease the population depending on who moves in.

    I agree. A 1960's 1,000sqft home that had a family of 6 replaced by a 2x 2,000sqft duplex that houses two childless couples.
    It had a family of six that grew up in the sixties and seventies, then had two people living in it from the 80's until the old man died in the early 2,000's. Now the widow is moving to God's waiting room.

  56. #6856

    Default

    ^ pretty much
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  57. #6857

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    The train may be super sexy but the route is super ugly, super expensive and will be super slow. Can someone remind me why we are spending 2 billion for a train that will be no quicker than the existing bus route (15)?
    I guess you are missing the entire point of this line and future low-floor lines. This is NOT a point to point commuter train, but rather a transportation option for those with, without or no need of a car.
    i guess you are missing that this is a transportation tool meant to be the spine of the entire network moving people quickly through the network rather than a slow meadering bus! Why are we spending billions of dollars to replciate what the current bus service already achives?!?

  58. #6858

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    The train may be super sexy but the route is super ugly, super expensive and will be super slow. Can someone remind me why we are spending 2 billion for a train that will be no quicker than the existing bus route (15)?
    During the morning rush the 15 takes 45 min to get from millwoods transit center to Churchill square. The lrt is expected to take 30 min. A bike is slotted in at just over 50 min.

    This is as per the info found here https://www.edmonton.ca/documents/VL..._25-Nov-15.pdf

    And using the route planning tool on the “Transit” app. One of if not The official app of ets.

    You are welcome and entitled to your opinion but you are not entitled to facts. A reduction of apx 30% innteavel time, plus a/c plus a reduced number of stops seems like a very attractive option that also allows you to visit arguably more interesting places than the 15.
    a few simple modications to the bus route could easily bring that time down. Why do you hate buses so
    much?

  59. #6859

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GizmoForMayor View Post
    Can we start a separate thread on 'what transit system should YEG develop?' so we can focus these LRT threads on the actual projects? It seems every time someone posts something actually related to the construction of this project the thread just gets derailed (pun intended) with the same 5 people arguing about whether we should have gone for a low floor system or not. A debate worth having, but maybe in a separate thread imo.
    this discussion has nothing to do in terms of low or high floor. Both can essentially do the same thing

  60. #6860

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by GizmoForMayor View Post
    Can we start a separate thread on 'what transit system should YEG develop?' so we can focus these LRT threads on the actual projects? It seems every time someone posts something actually related to the construction of this project the thread just gets derailed (pun intended) with the same 5 people arguing about whether we should have gone for a low floor system or not. A debate worth having, but maybe in a separate thread imo.
    this discussion has nothing to do in terms of low or high floor. Both can essentially do the same thing
    Ok, but the point still stands: this thread should be about the ongoing construction and yet a few people constantly derail it to discuss whether a different system/layout should have been used. I second the notion that there should be a separate thread to discuss that.

  61. #6861

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OJR View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by GizmoForMayor View Post
    Can we start a separate thread on 'what transit system should YEG develop?' so we can focus these LRT threads on the actual projects? It seems every time someone posts something actually related to the construction of this project the thread just gets derailed (pun intended) with the same 5 people arguing about whether we should have gone for a low floor system or not. A debate worth having, but maybe in a separate thread imo.
    this discussion has nothing to do in terms of low or high floor. Both can essentially do the same thing
    Ok, but the point still stands: this thread should be about the ongoing construction and yet a few people constantly derail it to discuss whether a different system/layout should have been used. I second the notion that there should be a separate thread to discuss that.
    Do you mean a thread to discuss conceptual differences between low floor, high floor, etc.? That would be much more interesting to me. Then the discussion could point to any number of actual routes, construction projects underway, operating lines, etc for examples of successes and failures.

    However, any thread of a specific project that is underway will still elicit debate over alternative features, design, appearances, processes that aren’t part of the plan. Plus speculation as to upcoming aspects of the construction. A thread to purely archive photos, note observations and log progress may be what you’re really after. Comments could be limited to factual observations, no debate just educational material.

  62. #6862

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by GizmoForMayor View Post
    Can we start a separate thread on 'what transit system should YEG develop?' so we can focus these LRT threads on the actual projects? It seems every time someone posts something actually related to the construction of this project the thread just gets derailed (pun intended) with the same 5 people arguing about whether we should have gone for a low floor system or not. A debate worth having, but maybe in a separate thread imo.
    this discussion has nothing to do in terms of low or high floor. Both can essentially do the same thing

    Correct. We were sold that the low floor would be far cheaper but the savings are very marginal, if any. Low floor is just more fashionable today. The problem for us is that now we have two different fleets of LRV's, duplication of garages and no ability to share services or rolling stock.

    The ridiculous part about this is that ETS and the Transportation Department conspired to kill the electric trolleys stating such lies as that they used dirty coal based electricity while the ETS website said that LRT used clean electricity. They wanted to kill trolleys because a modern electric trolley, especially a modern double articulated trolleybus was a real threat to the ETS plans for expensive and slw streetcars. This was the conspiracy that was clearly put into action



    http://www.tbus.org.uk/article.htm




    The whole West and East LRT concept was built on a sham and a conspiracy to spend billions on a slow streetcar on a single line that does not do what the 127 km trolley network with a new fleet or modern trolleys could do for less cost, more versatile, better routes and ability to expand and modify. You were decieved.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  63. #6863

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Do you mean a thread to discuss conceptual differences between low floor, high floor, etc.? That would be much more interesting to me. Then the discussion could point to any number of actual routes, construction projects underway, operating lines, etc for examples of successes and failures.

    However, any thread of a specific project that is underway will still elicit debate over alternative features, design, appearances, processes that aren’t part of the plan. Plus speculation as to upcoming aspects of the construction. A thread to purely archive photos, note observations and log progress may be what you’re really after. Comments could be limited to factual observations, no debate just educational material.
    Yes, the first part, except I don't think it should be limited to low floor vs. high floor, but rather should be open to discussing the best possible way forward for public transportation in Edmonton (that could even include PRT, I suppose... ).

    Regarding your second paragraph, I agree that debates will still happen on any given specific project, even when it is already underway. That is perfectly fine and I for one would very much welcome that. I don't want a thread that is 'sterile', but there should actually be a point to the particular discussion, rather than just simply a rehashing of the same old debates (by the usual suspects) over and over, long after the horse has clearly been beaten to death several times over...

  64. #6864

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    The whole West and East LRT concept was built on a sham and a conspiracy to spend billions on a slow streetcar on a single line that does not do what the 127 km trolley network with a new fleet or modern trolleys could do for less cost, more versatile, better routes and ability to expand and modify. You were decieved.
    I loved the trolleys and mourn their demise, but I also welcome the incoming LRT/tram system. These two could have happily co-existed. I don't see why in your mind it has to be one or the other? There are many cities around the world that have both.

  65. #6865

    Default

    We had both for years and they complimented each other. Problem was they ran down the fleet with ancient GM trolleys rather than upgrading like the Vancouver New Flyers and running the full capacity 100 unit fleet.

    In fact Edmonton had the unique 95th street LRT and trolley lines that crossed.

    Trolleys had the busiest routes in high density neighborhoods and business zones like 109th Street, 97th 124th, 118th ave, 112th, Whyte and many others from Southgate to 118th with poles in place to Northgate. 50th street to 156th street.

    Complimentary for sure but ETS and the Transportation Department saw the trolleys as a threat to their grandiose and expensive plans.

    It is all about money and not about providing better transit to the user.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  66. #6866

    Default

    I still don't understand the difference between a trolley route/capacity/vehicle and bus etc. The trolleys were replaced by buses. I don't think routes are all that bad now - and will be streamlined and improved soon - nor has capacity shrunk? I'm just a little lost. LRT is growing and the bus routes and getting more frequent routes. What's bad about that?
    Live and love... your neighbourhood.

  67. #6867

    Default

    ^The Trolleys were electric. Isn't that a huge difference in terms of local pollution and or non renewable fuel usage?


    ironically the city has since explored options for rechargeable bus technology which would be prohibitively more expensive, require expensive battery replacements, much more costly maintenance etc.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  68. #6868

    Default

    Is the fact they were electric the only good reason to have kept them and the difference? Sorry to get this thread off topic, but I never understood the difference besides one has wires and one uses gas.
    Live and love... your neighbourhood.

  69. #6869

    Default

    Electric trolleys are cheaper to run, quieter, more powerful, less maintenance, and a host of other benefits including a smoother ride. You see several cities now with mega-trolleys that can carry up to 250 people. Far lower costs to use existing roads or modify them than the $130+M per km of LRT.

    One of the selling points of LRT is that route is permanent and that gives rise to developers of transit oriented development even if diesel buses already exist in the area. Trolleys have the same fixed routes and people prefer them to diesel buses.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  70. #6870

    Default

    So since we will likely never have trolley buses in the foreseeable future, would battery-powered articulated buses in ROWs be same/worse/better than LRT or just go ahead with articulated hybrid buses in ROW's? Trolleys are cheaper to run in Edmonton than our current fleet or diesel or hybrid buses? It would need a ROW no matter what of some sort, yes? Light upgrades and que jumps?
    Live and love... your neighbourhood.

  71. #6871
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    1,423
    There was no need to change that plaque. We are the City of Champions.

  72. #6872

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GenWhy? View Post
    So since we will likely never have trolley buses in the foreseeable future, would battery-powered articulated buses in ROWs be same/worse/better than LRT or just go ahead with articulated hybrid buses in ROW's? Trolleys are cheaper to run in Edmonton than our current fleet or diesel or hybrid buses? It would need a ROW no matter what of some sort, yes? Light upgrades and que jumps?
    Hybrid buses are diesel buses that have additional electric motors and limited battery capacity. They promise 30 percent fuel savings but in real use only save 10 percent. The buses cost about $300,000 more and very expensive to maintain. At 10 percent fuel savings, the extra costs are never recovered. These issues doomed the 6 hybrids that ETS bought. They were never better than the single trolley that ETS rented for 6 months from Vancouver.

    We already have some bus lanes and cue jumping, most notably on 97th St. and 109th st. It works and makes transit more efficent. They could have run mega trolleys to Millwoods and even made the flyover the 83rd and Argyll, over the tracks and to the Davies Yard and onto Millwoods T/C. The flyover could have been for trolleys and buses only as a shortcut and faster bus service. Also would have helped buses going to and from the garage. Heck you could have built a flyover the Bonnie Doon traffic circle and even has a trolley only tunnel and bridge to downtown. (Diesels are not good in tunnels) Not having to rip up all the roads, use much of yhe roads we have with minor improvements and upgrades, would have been a huge cost savings and we would have a much bigger electric network, just as fast as LRT service and ability to merge and intertwine several routes using the same infrastructure.

    In this city, the miopic transit planners see only rails and steel wheels of an expensive version of a 200 year old technology as the only solution that was to be forced down the throats of the taxpayer and transit user.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  73. #6873
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    46,539

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    i guess you are missing that this is a transportation tool meant to be the spine of the entire network moving people quickly through the network rather than a slow meadering bus! Why are we spending billions of dollars to replciate what the current bus service already achives?!?
    But we aren't.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  74. #6874

    Default

    You are right IanO, the billion dollar streetcar line will not even replicate the current bus service. Currently there are more than a dozen bus routes to and from Millwoods and they have varied routes that have a multitude of originations and go to a multitude of destinations. Now we will have a single line. You will have to transfer once or twice to get anywhere else which may mean additional waiting times and a longer total trip time.

    Yeah, not even close to replicating the current bus service.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  75. #6875

    Default

    No, no, no ePRT. You're missing the point. LRT is meant to get people to downtown, the only part of the city that means anything. If you aren't going downtown, you hate the city. Anything of any importance HAS to be downtown, otherwise we're a podunk little town that nobody will love.

    Didn't you get the memo?

  76. #6876

    Default

    Sorry, I forgot

    Then there is reality

    The Edmonton 2015 Traffic Flow Map shows that the majority of traffic goes around downton, not to it.
    https://www.edmonton.ca/transportati...2015_AAWDT.pdf
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  77. #6877

    Default

    Also, if you want to go downtown from somewhere that's not within walking distance of a planned LRT stop then you've obviously chosen to live in the sticks and don't deserve service.
    There can only be one.

  78. #6878
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Strathearn, Edmonton
    Posts
    4,233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    You are right IanO, the billion dollar streetcar line will not even replicate the current bus service. Currently there are more than a dozen bus routes to and from Millwoods and they have varied routes that have a multitude of originations and go to a multitude of destinations. Now we will have a single line. You will have to transfer once or twice to get anywhere else which may mean additional waiting times and a longer total trip time.

    Yeah, not even close to replicating the current bus service.
    If the LRT was completely grade separated, it still wouldn't accomplish what the "more than a dozen bus routes to and from Millwoods" do.
    I thought the major argument was that LRT should have been more direct and grade separated? Are you advocating that they just have just left bus service in place? By putting in an LRT, regardless of how fast it is, you are introducing those additional transfers/wait times.
    Are you saying that if the LRT is more direct that there is an offset in overall trip time that offsets the additional transfers and waiting times, thus the LRT becomes a good project? My understanding was the LRT, as being constructed, is still faster than the typical bus route and you are getting that offset.

  79. #6879
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Strathearn, Edmonton
    Posts
    4,233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    No, no, no ePRT. You're missing the point. LRT is meant to get people to downtown, the only part of the city that means anything. If you aren't going downtown, you hate the city. Anything of any importance HAS to be downtown, otherwise we're a podunk little town that nobody will love.

    Didn't you get the memo?
    The LRT as being constructed is supposedly, by the COE's explination, in direct opposition to this. It was mean to be a more integrated model to transport people between nodes, not just burbs to Downtown.

    A more direct and traditional style of LRT would be aligned with the burbs to Downtown. However, most detractors of the plan under construction would advocate for that. So now I'm a bit confused as it seems the argument is headed in both directions against the project.

    Well, honestly that seems about right...a project can never win.

  80. #6880

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    i guess you are missing that this is a transportation tool meant to be the spine of the entire network moving people quickly through the network rather than a slow meadering bus! Why are we spending billions of dollars to replciate what the current bus service already achives?!?
    But we aren't.
    Great answer and supporting arguments Ianohmy No one can debate that point now that youve put the above

    /s

  81. #6881
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    46,539

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DanC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    No, no, no ePRT. You're missing the point. LRT is meant to get people to downtown, the only part of the city that means anything. If you aren't going downtown, you hate the city. Anything of any importance HAS to be downtown, otherwise we're a podunk little town that nobody will love.

    Didn't you get the memo?
    The LRT as being constructed is supposedly, by the COE's explination, in direct opposition to this. It was mean to be a more integrated model to transport people between nodes, not just burbs to Downtown.

    A more direct and traditional style of LRT would be aligned with the burbs to Downtown. However, most detractors of the plan under construction would advocate for that. So now I'm a bit confused as it seems the argument is headed in both directions against the project.

    Well, honestly that seems about right...a project can never win.
    Exactly. This is NOT about point A to B, it is about A through Z.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  82. #6882

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by GenWhy? View Post
    So since we will likely never have trolley buses in the foreseeable future, would battery-powered articulated buses in ROWs be same/worse/better than LRT or just go ahead with articulated hybrid buses in ROW's? Trolleys are cheaper to run in Edmonton than our current fleet or diesel or hybrid buses? It would need a ROW no matter what of some sort, yes? Light upgrades and que jumps?
    Hybrid buses are diesel buses that have additional electric motors and limited battery capacity. They promise 30 percent fuel savings but in real use only save 10 percent. The buses cost about $300,000 more and very expensive to maintain. At 10 percent fuel savings, the extra costs are never recovered. These issues doomed the 6 hybrids that ETS bought. They were never better than the single trolley that ETS rented for 6 months from Vancouver.

    We already have some bus lanes and cue jumping, most notably on 97th St. and 109th st. It works and makes transit more efficent. They could have run mega trolleys to Millwoods and even made the flyover the 83rd and Argyll, over the tracks and to the Davies Yard and onto Millwoods T/C. The flyover could have been for trolleys and buses only as a shortcut and faster bus service. Also would have helped buses going to and from the garage. Heck you could have built a flyover the Bonnie Doon traffic circle and even has a trolley only tunnel and bridge to downtown. (Diesels are not good in tunnels) Not having to rip up all the roads, use much of yhe roads we have with minor improvements and upgrades, would have been a huge cost savings and we would have a much bigger electric network, just as fast as LRT service and ability to merge and intertwine several routes using the same infrastructure.

    In this city, the miopic transit planners see only rails and steel wheels of an expensive version of a 200 year old technology as the only solution that was to be forced down the throats of the taxpayer and transit user.
    Gotcha and thanks for the reply. I guess the last stake was political. Good or bad, better or worse. LRT was an easier sell as I've seen since the Century Park/South Campus extensions (not talking about the style of the expansion). Maybe it needed/needs more communications and PR to get bus lanes and que jumps and flyovers to sell it to regular Edmontonians? I personally don't know, but we may find out after this leg is running and the ETS route redo to a more efficient system with real express bus service.
    Live and love... your neighbourhood.

  83. #6883

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by DanC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    No, no, no ePRT. You're missing the point. LRT is meant to get people to downtown, the only part of the city that means anything. If you aren't going downtown, you hate the city. Anything of any importance HAS to be downtown, otherwise we're a podunk little town that nobody will love.

    Didn't you get the memo?
    The LRT as being constructed is supposedly, by the COE's explination, in direct opposition to this. It was mean to be a more integrated model to transport people between nodes, not just burbs to Downtown.

    A more direct and traditional style of LRT would be aligned with the burbs to Downtown. However, most detractors of the plan under construction would advocate for that. So now I'm a bit confused as it seems the argument is headed in both directions against the project.

    Well, honestly that seems about right...a project can never win.
    Exactly. This is NOT about point A to B, it is about A through Z.
    ie: A local feeder bus route, not a true LRT line. Again, why are we spending so much money duplicating what the existing bus service provides? LRT was brought in to this city in lieu of freeways into downtown - It's almost like we want to make getting downtown as hard as possible. It's stopping at more than just 'nodes' as HHD put it, it's stopping as nearly as frequently as a bus. It's taking an urban streetcar, and trying to make it work in a suburban area. It's being sold as an LRT line like we already have, but it's not that at all.

    We are being sold a hodge podge solution that doesn't really check off any boxes completely. A solution that is not really scalable when demand increases.

    It's a great solution for local service downtown, but really shouldn't be pushed out to the suburbs, especially suburbs that are inward facing, and don't really have a great 'walk-on, walk off' residential areas attached to it. Have you all been to millwoods before specially along the route being built?!
    Last edited by Medwards; 01-08-2018 at 10:47 AM.

  84. #6884

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DanC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    No, no, no ePRT. You're missing the point. LRT is meant to get people to downtown, the only part of the city that means anything. If you aren't going downtown, you hate the city. Anything of any importance HAS to be downtown, otherwise we're a podunk little town that nobody will love.

    Didn't you get the memo?
    The LRT as being constructed is supposedly, by the COE's explination, in direct opposition to this. It was mean to be a more integrated model to transport people between nodes, not just burbs to Downtown.

    A more direct and traditional style of LRT would be aligned with the burbs to Downtown. However, most detractors of the plan under construction would advocate for that. So now I'm a bit confused as it seems the argument is headed in both directions against the project.

    Well, honestly that seems about right...a project can never win.
    One of the few times I agree with you.

    Millwoods deserved a line. User volumes demarked that a lot of transit use was occurring around the #8, 15, 81, etc routes. With the #8 particularly having huge volumes as it was the every 15min bus. To me the LRT route is fine in that it takes most of what works in the #8 route. Plus that it lops off the meandering to Lakewood, to Milgate, and makes it more of a straight line as befits LRT line cost/km. That the particular line happens to capture the heart of Millwoods, BonnieDoon, Muttart, Quarters makes it potentially even an advanced line anticipating that Quarters could have some more future vibrancy. But that with this line Quarters focus needs to be all in from a civic standpoint. There can't be more inertia in that region. It needs to become more of a destination in itself.

    But this is a line that goes through some key areas and important areas for the city moving forward and the only line that could be better, imo, is one that went closer to Old strathcona but LRT first going to Century Park made that seem like redundancy. So that the capital line as situated impacted where this line would go. To a degree.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  85. #6885

    Default

    Meds, as someone from Millwoods that has used buses a lot I feel that the present line is positive. It removes the Lakewood and Milbourne and Milgate redundancies. All the bus routes basically inconvenience ALL the traffic (the vast majority of it) being funneled from MWTC to areas that people are not necessarily going to in great volumes. So that everybody ends up meandering on a circuitous route and at Milbournes convenience over everybody else. With all the present routes even being a vestige to that area of Millwoods being the oldest and the first developed. So that for decades ETS has continued to funnel riders away from more direct routes to their destinations.

    Needs to be remembered that not only is the Valley line occurring but a major revamping of all the routes in the city and most of it looks good and including improved feeder route efficiency.

    As far as it being pushed out to the suburbs you might be selling Millwoods and area a bit short considering density both in the area of the MWTC terminus, and surrounding areas is increasing. Not to mention how much this services rapidly expanding population around Ellerslie, around Laurel, etc. So that the terminus, given the amount that Edmonton has expanded in every direction in recent decades, could be even be considered more central now than it would've been even 20yrs ago.

    When the City first went to Clareview there was a lot less built out surround at that time and one could see the edge of town from there. With MWTC that isn't the case. The burgeoning population numbers in the region quadruple that found in the Clareview station region when it was first developed.


    This is a pretty good hub. Its also situated well geographically. So that anybody east of 91 street all the way past Ellerslie will likely be using this line, anybody West of 91st would be using Capital line. This also being a demarcation that neatly fits 91st being a primary demarcation line in the sand in South Edmonton.


    Where the city has failed is to not provide better access in any transportation in the rapidly growing SW regions.

    The one thing I am unsure of in your post is your comment on how scaleable the line is as demand continues to increase. I haven't worked out the respective numbers for that.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  86. #6886

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by DanC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    No, no, no ePRT. You're missing the point. LRT is meant to get people to downtown, the only part of the city that means anything. If you aren't going downtown, you hate the city. Anything of any importance HAS to be downtown, otherwise we're a podunk little town that nobody will love.

    Didn't you get the memo?
    The LRT as being constructed is supposedly, by the COE's explination, in direct opposition to this. It was mean to be a more integrated model to transport people between nodes, not just burbs to Downtown.

    A more direct and traditional style of LRT would be aligned with the burbs to Downtown. However, most detractors of the plan under construction would advocate for that. So now I'm a bit confused as it seems the argument is headed in both directions against the project.

    Well, honestly that seems about right...a project can never win.
    Exactly. This is NOT about point A to B, it is about A through Z.
    Still trying to figure out your cryptic posts. What exactly is your definition of "A through Z" in regards to public transit?
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  87. #6887
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    46,539

    Default

    Not a feeder Meds, but a transportation option/replacement for many. Buses work well in many cases, but along key linkages, LRT is a more desirable option. A lot of people will not take 'the bus' for a variety of reasons, but the same will take LRT.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  88. #6888

    Default

    Define 'a lot of people' what will the modal transfer be from using their cars to take an LRT or LRT & Bus?

    I know people who used the bus to get to work and when the SLRT eliminated routes, their one bus journey became a bus to LRT to Bus double transfer and the average trip was longer and more unpredictable if you missed your transfer, adding 10 or 20 minutes. This added stress to their trip and backtracking from Southgate station to get to and from their home; taking a bus going south to Southgate first on their northern destination. Since the SLRT route changes to the bus network, they have driven their car to work.
    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 01-08-2018 at 11:50 AM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  89. #6889
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    8,836

    Default

    I still take a bus to lrt and a bus. Been doing that for decades. I'd like to see more multi use trails and bike lanes. Where are the bike lanes East along 137th after 50th Street? Hopefully when ETS gets these new bus route changes sorted out, its going to be just one bus to work for me.
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  90. #6890

    Default

    LRT should be limited stops at major locations. Employment nodes, major education, shopping, etc. High or low floor doesn't matter. It should be stopping at major nodes, allowing people to transfer to local service. If we wanted another form or LRT, connect those nodes without going through downtown. The Valley Line model could work for that. Connect secondary nodes to the main ones. TOD's, smaller shopping areas as examples.

    Look at the larger cities. Not all lines go though the middle of town. They have crosstown lines to the north, south, east or west. Some have circle routes. Bonnie Doon should be at most one or two stops from downtown. Instead, it's four.

    Jasper Place is a straight run to downtown and there's seven stops until you get downtown. From Clareview, it's only three.

    WEM stop to downtown has 11 stops before you're downtown.

    And, being a surface line, the trains are limited by the length of the blocks downtown. Once the trains are at capacity, you can't make the trains bigger like happened with the Metro line. You have to increase frequency which will impact traffic more in the SPR bottleneck.

    And they're going to do the same thing with the NW line, many more stops than necessary.

  91. #6891

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Define 'a lot of people' what will the modal transfer be from using their cars to take an LRT or LRT & Bus?

    I know people who used the bus to get to work and when the SLRT eliminated routes, their one bus journey became a bus to LRT to Bus double transfer and the average trip was longer and more unpredictable if you missed your transfer, adding 10 or 20 minutes. This added stress to their trip and backtracking from Southgate station to get to and from their home; taking a bus going south to Southgate first on their northern destination. Since the SLRT route changes to the bus network, they have driven their car to work.
    Bus routes are changing.
    Live and love... your neighbourhood.

  92. #6892

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Not a feeder Meds, but a transportation option/replacement for many. Buses work well in many cases, but along key linkages, LRT is a more desirable option. A lot of people will not take 'the bus' for a variety of reasons, but the same will take LRT.
    not if the lrt is as slow as a bus...

  93. #6893
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    46,539

    Default

    Sexier.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  94. #6894

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Sexier.


  95. #6895
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    10,850

    Default

    How long does it take to load a bus at each stop? I'd guess up to a minute at places like Bonnie Doon. Even if the LRT time is on par with bus time, I'm guessing that each LRT station still covers the same area with one-third of the stops.
    "Talk minus action equals zero." - Joe Keithley, D. O. A.

  96. #6896

    Default

    You need to look beyond the basic bus service ets offers. See ottawa for a great example

  97. #6897

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dark Magnus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Sexier.

    ”stop picking on iano” magnoblade, probably

  98. #6898

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Sexier.
    So a $1.6Billion porn star is what you want?

    IanO, do you even take transit?

    Still don't know what you mean, "A through Z"?
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  99. #6899
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    46,539

    Default

    I take ETS multiple times a week.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  100. #6900

    Default

    Can you answer the first and third questions?
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

Page 69 of 70 FirstFirst ... 1959656667686970 LastLast

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
  •