Page 62 of 62 FirstFirst ... 12525859606162
Results 6,101 to 6,121 of 6121

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

  1. #6101

    Default

    CoE to Millwoods: Take the train or else!
    "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" - Blaise Pascal

  2. #6102
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    169

    Default

    This traffic study would be a great thing to do and share with the public for consultation before design and construction are underway. I know it couldn't be as detailed without an exact route but I'm sure they can get some rough numbers at key intersections to say if we go at grade average wait times will be appprox. "x" and if we elevate/dig wait times will be "y". Maybe i am simplifying too much?

    I think i am reading the reports correctly but it looks like at a great many number of the intersections by 2044 they are suggesting traffic volumes will be down by 2044? I am hopeful the uptake of lrt will be significant but with the growth in the region I find it hard to believe volumes will be down?

    The whole re routing thing is a funny concept because in theory that would slow things down overall on it's own as people currently would be using what is deemed the fastest route for their trip. Once you re-route and add more people onto those slower options they become slower. Not that i went to the school of traffic flow but that would stand to reason in my head anyways.

  3. #6103

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Base View Post
    This traffic study would be a great thing to do and share with the public for consultation before design and construction are underway. I know it couldn't be as detailed without an exact route but I'm sure they can get some rough numbers at key intersections to say if we go at grade average wait times will be appprox. "x" and if we elevate/dig wait times will be "y". Maybe i am simplifying too much?
    Evidently they can't tell us how badly we're gonna get screwed because it interferes with the contract negotiations. It's more important to keep the electorate in the dark than to make things more difficult for the private companies to profiteer off of the P3.
    Giving less of a damn than everů Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  4. #6104
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    I don't even know anymore :/
    Posts
    816

    Default

    Looks pretty bad. I have a hard time believing that the intersections through strathearn will be very congested though, the traffic volume on that road is extremely low.

  5. #6105

    Default

    Councillor Dave Loken was just quoted on CHED radio news, stating the results of the study were known back in Feburary, but only being presented to council now. He is not happy

  6. #6106

    Default

    Sure would have been nice to have all of this information out in the open back in April when Adminstration decided not to elevate the Bonnie Doon section, especially since it was already compiled at that time.
    Giving less of a damn than everů Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  7. #6107

    Default

    We had a one-time chance for millions but it had to be a P3. This is what we get.
    Live and love... your neighbourhood.

  8. #6108

    Default

    Also traffic volumes are pretty low in central Edmonton / 66st areas and can be remedied by this line, and better transit configuration. Loss of roadway and some signaling due to at-grade LRT will not be the end of us.
    Live and love... your neighbourhood.

  9. #6109
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    I don't even know anymore :/
    Posts
    816

    Default

    Edmonton needs mass transit so badly, but man, have they ever built it right? The only line that seems decent is the original line. There are so many examples around the world of what does and doesn't work, but we keep making the same mistakes.

  10. #6110

    Default

    My impression is that they've done 2 lines, with a major expansion south on the "original" line that gets a bad rap for traffic issues... you only get so much money, and the way the structure and funding models are established I'm not surprised they way both expansions have worked out. As a transit user, the Century Park to Health Sciences extension is fantastic and packed to the gills at rush hour. As for 114st / University crossing arms, I turn at the traffic circle east, head towards the Butter Dome, and go south on 114st. There's just an issue with south-bound traffic in general going onto Fox Drive - Whitemud.

    Metro Line: not running at full operation.
    Valley Line: a different style of building LRT for integration, development, and yes... some cost savings. It's the system of funding (largely grants) that breed this. Biggest km for best / cost-effective bid.
    Live and love... your neighbourhood.

  11. #6111

    Default

    ^The "cost effective" argument hasn't been proved, and there hasn't been any honest look at the trade-offs. When the only comparisons that admin can do are obviously incorrect statements like "elevated costs 3x more" then it's impossible to be properly informed to make that choice.

    There has been no cost effective bid.
    There can only be one.

  12. #6112

    Default

    The "we only get so much money" argument falls flat when you realize we seem to spend more money per km than many other superior systems.
    Giving less of a damn than everů Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  13. #6113

    Default

    ^^I was referring to the bid amoung the line's potential builders.
    Live and love... your neighbourhood.

  14. #6114
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    I don't even know anymore :/
    Posts
    816

    Default

    Isn't the reason our costs are so high is because they often include infrastructure and roadway improvements along with the LRT construction? So our costs end up being the LRT plus the roadwork, making our costs look a lot higher than they actually would be for just the LRT.

    No idea if this is actually true, haven't really looked into it, but I've heard it quite a few times.

  15. #6115

    Default

    Not making an argument in defence of anything. Just that, for some reason yes in compression our cost to build is higher, but due to those costs and the grants / funding we get, and because of the City relying heavily on property taxes, we get the product. The City made a decision on low floor. We get the product.

    Yes, I would have liked this to be a really well designed multi-billion dollar project for the future of Edmonton, but sell that as a planner to council, to councillors running on election platforms, to citizens. As a resident that in close to, and frequents the Bonnie Doon area, I think I'll prefer a this design for a variety of reasons through build form and urban design and building this community over the next 30 years after it's open in 2020. I'll take it over Brentwood/Metrotown/or Surrey Town Cetnre in Metro Vancouver, due to the fact that it's street and community-orientated. Development has to follow however, and new zoning has to be in place now to make the area great / more transit and walkable.

    Yes there are issues. It's time to look at bus lanes, new zoning, new "main streets" around stops, TOD, and complete street guidelines in older neighbourhoods.
    Live and love... your neighbourhood.

  16. #6116

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by seamusmcduffs View Post
    Isn't the reason our costs are so high is because they often include infrastructure and roadway improvements along with the LRT construction? So our costs end up being the LRT plus the roadwork, making our costs look a lot higher than they actually would be for just the LRT.

    No idea if this is actually true, haven't really looked into it, but I've heard it quite a few times.
    It is true to a degree, but in the Canadian context it's mostly just that our projects require way more roadway and utility work than Vancouver's because we insist on building it at ground level.

    So it makes complete sense to include it.
    There can only be one.

  17. #6117
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    I don't even know anymore :/
    Posts
    816

    Default

    ^^Yeah Brentwood is probably the least pedestrian friendly "urban" TOD ever, you feel like an ant scurrying between and around monstrosities of every form. Roadways, stations, buildings are all completely out of scale with people.

    ^So in any case, the 3x cost that everyone throws around is a little disingenuous, it wouldn't actually be that amount more to do a Skytrain type system..

  18. #6118
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    6,957

    Default

    @ Noodle: Apparently ETS is still expecting 30 minutes from Mill Woods to City Centre despite the congestion. From the images you provided here from Edmonton Journal, the whole line is going to be congested. Maybe that's 30 minutes on paper but 40 minutes in the real world. City council needs to fix this now so we don't have another Metro mess on our hands.
    Last edited by envaneo; Today at 12:47 PM.
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  19. #6119

    Default

    ^
    The thing is, with our supposedly community-oriented plan we'll have, in many locations, wider streets than before. whyte ave & 83st will gain extra lanes to make up for adding LRT-only phases to the cycle, plus you'll now have to cross the LRT tracks too.

    I suspect that 3X rule of thumb they keep repeating would be for track construction only, and only for the cheapest track construction method (tie & ballast). Once you have embedded rail like up 105st you've already eaten up most of the savings, and a station like southgate or Century park won't be significantly cheaper than full elevated like wagner.
    There can only be one.

  20. #6120
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    6,957

    Default

    In other words: Yikes!!!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    http://edmontonjournal.com/news/loca...uld-impact-you

    Great breakdown in that story. I'll pilfer the maps, but the article itself is worth a gander.


    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  21. #6121
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    I don't even know anymore :/
    Posts
    816

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    ^
    The thing is, with our supposedly community-oriented plan we'll have, in many locations, wider streets than before. whyte ave & 83st will gain extra lanes to make up for adding LRT-only phases to the cycle, plus you'll now have to cross the LRT tracks too.

    I suspect that 3X rule of thumb they keep repeating would be for track construction only, and only for the cheapest track construction method (tie & ballast). Once you have embedded rail like up 105st you've already eaten up most of the savings, and a station like southgate or Century park won't be significantly cheaper than full elevated like wagner.
    That gets me wondering, has the city ever done a detailed cost analysis for a system like the Skytrain, or have we always just assumed it would be too expensive?

Page 62 of 62 FirstFirst ... 12525859606162

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
  •