Page 1 of 9 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 856

Thread: North East LRT Extension | Clareview to Gorman | Planning/Discussion

  1. #1
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    656

    Default North East LRT Extension | Clareview to Gorman | Planning/Discussion

    Anyone else notice that Clareview is no longer the most northerly point of civilization in Edmonton? Trains are full by the time they leave Clareview, and this usually indicates that the station is drawing people from far beyond the immediate area. Indeed, there is a need NOW for a station at 153 Avenue and 167 Avenue. They would be very cheap to build, as the rail right-of-way still exists!

  2. #2
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    44,943

    Default

    or how about more frequency...
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  3. #3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO
    or how about more frequency...
    or both!!!
    Lets add another station north of Clairview with LOTS of park n ride

    (I hear Clairview is full by 7 am now-a-days)

  4. #4
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    7,385

    Default Re: LRT needs to be extended NORTH now!

    Quote Originally Posted by bobinedmonton
    Anyone else notice that Clareview is no longer the most northerly point of civilization in Edmonton? Trains are full by the time they leave Clareview, and this usually indicates that the station is drawing people from far beyond the immediate area. Indeed, there is a need NOW for a station at 153 Avenue and 167 Avenue. They would be very cheap to build, as the rail right-of-way still exists!
    The extension past Clareview station is going to be looked at shortly.

  5. #5
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    13,432
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    I thought the plans were well underway?
    Since calm logic doesn't work, I guess it is time to employ sarcasm. ...and before you call me an a-hole...remember, I am a Dick.

  6. #6

    Default

    Aren't we also ready to upgrade the catenary to finally support 5 car trains? Every platform (except Health Sciences) has been ready to support 5 car trains for ages now. (And of course we'd need more vehicles too. When are the new ones coming again?)

    It's great that the system is getting so well used finally.

  7. #7

    Default

    I'd prefer 4 car trains at an increased frequency, myself.

  8. #8
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    6 degrees north of you
    Posts
    784

    Default

    New cars/trains are supposed to start arriving in May 2008.
    You'll never see better than a 5 minute frequency without major upgrading to the signal system. It's all run in 'blocks' with safety perimeters around each block. And those blocks are controlled by block signals. They're spaced too far apart to allow better frequencies.
    During the closing ceremonies of the World Games, they had the trains at 4 minute frequencies, but this was only accomplished because as the train pulled into Clareview and University stations, another motorman was waiting at the other end, to jump in and pull away. Then the motorman who brought that train in had 4 minutes to walk the platform to do the same thing for the next train.
    Health Sciences should've been built to be a 5 car platform.
    And heck, just this past week, with the arrival of spring, they were installing heaters at the Health Sciences platform

  9. #9
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    The catenary can't take 5car trains? I assume the upgrade would just take new transformers?

    I agree with bob, though. The extention could be very cheap, and could be well used.

    Microbus,
    I thought that the new trains are just to maintain service on a longer track (to Century park). There was a mention in the paper of the City and ETS considering 11 new cars that would actually used to upgrade service.

    Re: frequency, If signal blocks are the issue, How does swapping drivers help run trains more frequently? what it would help is keeping the vehicles moving more of the time and is more like virtually adding rolling stock.

    What is the actual signalling frequency limit? If 5 minutes is the limit, Signals will need to be upgraded in the downtown tunnel if North LRt goes ahead, anyways.

    I've read that Moscow subway frequence is 90s with standard signals.

  10. #10
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    6 degrees north of you
    Posts
    784

    Default

    Swapping drivers helps the trains run 1 minute closer to each
    other, hence a 4 minute headway instead of 5... that 1 minute
    saving is from the motorman changing ends.
    In the downtown tunnel area, you could run trains closer, as
    each station starts a new block. So from Central to Corona, you
    could have trains 2 minutes apart. But the block from Churchill to
    Central is a bit longer, and the one from Corona to Grandin is
    longer yet. Then Grandin to halfway across Dudley S Menzies
    bridge is another block, then University, then Health Sciences.
    Going north from Churchill, 92 st crossover is the next block,
    then Stadium, Coliseum, just south of 66 St, Belvedere,
    DL McDonald, then Clareview. There are other blocks in one
    direction only... SB at Future Station, NB at 115 ave, and NB
    just north of the 66 St tunnel.
    I remember hearing about 11 more cars to increase service too.
    The catanary can take 5 car trains, though if the signal system
    was upgraded to allow 2 or 3 minute service, they'd probably have
    to add a substation or two to handle the power requirements
    of the extra trains.
    Personally, I think 5 car trains at 5 minute intervals would handle
    the current passenger loads, and would probably suffice for the
    next few years. As for downtown having a branch to NAIT, they
    would really need to add a few blocks... one between Central
    and Churchill, and one between Churchill and Future.
    Then they could probably get 2 or 3 min headways at Churchill,
    which would allow 5 or 6 min coverage both to Clareview and to
    NAIT.
    All in all, it all goes back to the original design. When the LRT
    was first designed, I think it was for 7/8 minute service for peaks.
    So substations and blocks were put in to allow 5 minute headways
    just in case. I'm sure, back in 1978, they weren't imagining
    Edmonton having a population of a million within 30 years.

  11. #11

    Default

    So where is the next logical place to put a station north east of Clairview? I was looking around on a map, and keeping about the same distance as between Clairview and belvedere, the next station would be in the middle of a farm field? Maybe its better to increase the park and ride facilities at clairview to include a parkade first?

  12. #12
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    6 degrees north of you
    Posts
    784

    Default

    167 Ave makes sense to me, as 153 ave would be too close
    to Clareview. 167 Ave would have lots of room for Park n Ride,
    without being too close to residences. It could also have
    a transit centre for buses servicing Evergreen and Matt Berry areas.
    If that farm field is a corn field, they could even add a maze
    to get from the parking lot to the station

  13. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by microbus
    167 Ave makes sense to me, as 153 ave would be too close
    to Clareview. 167 Ave would have lots of room for Park n Ride,
    without being too close to residences. It could also have
    a transit centre for buses servicing Evergreen and Matt Berry areas.
    If that farm field is a corn field, they could even add a maze
    to get from the parking lot to the station
    But when? Theres currently nothing up there right now? As the original poster of this thread has stated...extend NE LRT NOW!!!

    How about we just expand the park n ride facilities at Clairview for now (parkade) until something gets built up there... Matt Berry and Evergreen do not simply justify an LRT station ....

  14. #14
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    1,178

    Default

    Has anyone done a study to see how many of the users of the park and ride are from out of town?

  15. #15
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    6 degrees north of you
    Posts
    784

    Default

    But to build a parkade at Clareview could be problematic as
    they'd have to shut down most of the parking lot to build on it.
    So then where should all the cars go?
    When they first built Clareview Station, there wasn't much around
    it at all. As a matter of fact, 137 Ave was a level crossing, and
    the bus road into Clareview was like a paved country road with
    no curbs and for buses only. There wasn't even a park n ride
    there then.

  16. #16
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    Remember that this is the area that mandel has mentioned for new eco-friendly suburb. I think that stations at both 153rd and 167 would be good, and they should be built soon, before the area is fully developed and car-focused. 139-153-167 would be intervals of more than 1 mile (1.6km). That's far enough spaced to allow fast service and close enough to allow convenient access for users.

    I think that the further stations have better TOD potential than clairview because they are situated to be at the core of new neighbourhoods, further from manning drive.

    Park& ride lots further up could also allow temporary closure of parts of the clairview lots to build structured parking, and possibly open more space for tod development.

  17. #17
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,530

    Default

    Why not extend it all the way to Fort Saskatchewan and its big plants (Dow, Sheritt, etc), with the Fort chipping in on its portion?

  18. #18
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    Fort sask is ok in principle, but there is a real disparity between needed capacity south of 167, which could be 10,000 people per hour on any section of track, and north to fort sask, which might see 2,500 all day. As a compromise, a deisel LRT that could run on the CN track and connect to ETS at the terminus. There's no need to run 4-car trains every 5 minutes up there.

  19. #19
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    City Of Champions
    Posts
    3,854

    Default

    Is the area around 18st and 167 ave being developed as we speak? Are there plans currently in the works?

    Hopefully we're working with a single or few land owners/developers so a large scale plan can be provided and can work with the city to maximize the TOD potential.

  20. #20
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    280

    Default

    The area just south west of the 167 Ave & 18 st intersection is right where the Anthony Henday is proposed to go. The Alberta Hospital takes up a lot of the area to the north of 167 Ave. Not sure how much is left for development.

    If you look at the Kirkness Outline Plan, theres a proposed LRT station "...in the vicinity of 151 Avenue". Personally, I'd like to see it around 153 ave.

  21. #21
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    7,385

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Carbon-14
    The area just south west of the 167 Ave & 18 st intersection is right where the Anthony Henday is proposed to go. The Alberta Hospital takes up a lot of the area to the north of 167 Ave. Not sure how much is left for development.

    If you look at the Kirkness Outline Plan, theres a proposed LRT station "...in the vicinity of 151 Avenue". Personally, I'd like to see it around 153 ave.
    Ohhh, there's enough land to develop out there. Trust me. And given the growth taking place in this city, the lands 'out there' will soon be developed. And yes, the city is already looking at the future station beyond Clareview.

  22. #22
    C2E Super Addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    1,036

    Default NELRT Extension (Gorman)

    http://alberta.ca/home/NewsFrame.cfm...EC42C048C.html

    April 30, 2009
    Government of Canada and Alberta invest in public transit for the city of Edmonton

    Edmonton... The Honourable Rona Ambrose, Canada’s Minister of Labour, and the Premier of Alberta Ed Stelmach, today announced that both the Government of Canada and Government of Alberta are investing up to $100 million each in support of a number of transit projects in Edmonton, Alberta.

    “Investments in public transit will not only create jobs and stimulate the economy, but will also leave the lasting links that will pave the way for Edmonton’s growth and prosperity in the future,” said Minister Ambrose. “Our Government is proud to work with our partners to create jobs, encourage environmental sustainability and help improve the quality of life for the families of Edmonton.”

    “This major investment in public transit will help create and maintain jobs for Albertans,” said Premier Stelmach. “By encouraging Albertans to use the Light Rail Transit, it will also help increase traffic safety for both motorists and pedestrians and reduce the province’s carbon footprint.”

    The priority projects identified in the Edmonton package include:

    extending the Northeast Light Rail Transit by expanding the present light rail system from Clareview to Gorman Town Centre;
    station upgrades that will involve lengthening platforms along the South Light Rail Transit line to allow for additional capacity associated with longer 5 car trains; and,
    further investments to three park-and-ride stations and signaling system upgrades to facilitate moving people through the transit system in Edmonton more quickly.
    The total cost of the priority projects identified in the Edmonton package is approximately $300 million. The federal government will contribute up to one-third of total eligible costs, to a maximum federal contribution of $100 million. The province is also providing $100 million toward the projects. The balance of the funding will be provided by the City of Edmonton.

    “These priority projects align with Edmonton's goals and will have significant impacts City wide, in terms of how we move people and minimize our environmental impact,” said Mayor Stephen Mandel. “This brings needed dollars to some of the most significant issues in our growing city, and the full participation of all orders of Government is appreciated and needed to make meaningful progress.”

    Preliminary planning and design will soon be underway on these projects, and construction could begin as early as this summer for the park-and-ride, signaling, and platform extension components. The Northeast LRT could begin soon thereafter.

    Beyond this announcement, the Government of Canada is taking important steps to support economic growth. Canada’s Economic Action Plan, announced in Budget 2009, is a balanced stimulus plan that includes massive investments in infrastructure, tax relief and transfers. This plan will provide close to $12 billion in new infrastructure stimulus funding over two years, which will address needs in communities across Canada, as well as contributing to long-term economic growth through investments in public infrastructure, such as roads, water treatment, green energy and transit.

    Central to Alberta’s Budget 2009 is Alberta’s Capital Plan, which supports $7.2 billion in 2009-10 and a record $23.2 billion over three years to build roads, health care facilities, schools and other public infrastructure. This year’s investment alone will support over 80,000 jobs across the economy directly benefitting Albertans and Alberta communities. This capital investment complements the government’s four-point plan for economic recovery, which calls for keeping an eye on spending, using savings to protect programs and services for Albertans while keeping taxes low, continuing to invest in infrastructure, and promoting the province on the world stage.

    A backgrounder with more information on the projects is attached.


    -30-
    Media inquiries may be directed to:
    Chris Hilton
    Office of the Minister of State for Transport
    Rob Merrifield, Ottawa
    613-991-0700

    Infrastructure Canada
    613-948-1148
    Jerry Bellikka
    Communications
    Alberta Transportation
    780-237-5509

    Blaire McCalla
    Communications Consultant
    Office of the Mayor
    780-496-8105






    April 30, 2009
    Funding of Edmonton transit projects

    The Government of Canada is setting aside up to $100 million to support a number of transit projects identified as priorities in the City of Edmonton. These projects include:

    North-east Light Rail Transit Expansion - Clareview to Gorman Towne Centre
    North-east Light Rail Transit Signal System Upgrade
    Eaux Claires Transit Centre Park & Ride
    Heritage Valley Neighbourhood Park & Ride
    Lewis Estates Park & Ride Expansion
    South Light Rail Transit Platform Extensions to 5-Car Length
    The total cost of the projects identified in this package is approximately $300 million. The federal government will set aside up to one-third of total eligible costs of the aggregate of the six projects, to a maximum federal contribution of up to $100 million. The province is providing $100 million, and the balance of the funding will be provided by the City of Edmonton.

    Preliminary planning and design is underway on these projects, and construction could begin as early as this summer for the park-and-ride, signaling, and platform extension components. The Northeast LRT could begin soon thereafter.

    These projects have transit system and community-wide benefits, such as:

    contributing to improving overall mobility;
    mitigating congestion;
    ensuring that the region can accommodate future growth;
    generating direct and indirect employment opportunities; and,
    helping to mitigate greenhouse gas and air pollutant emissions.
    In addition, this investment provides immediate economic stimulus and long-term sustainability, for a greener infrastructure system in Canada.

    Federal financial support for Edmonton’s transit infrastructure improvements is conditional on meeting applicable federal eligibility requirements for infrastructure funding

  23. #23

    Default

    station upgrades that will involve lengthening platforms along the South Light Rail Transit line to allow for additional capacity associated with longer 5 car trains;
    Ok, so SLRT isn't even complete, and we are already talking about expanding the stations? I'm scratching my head now why we didn't just bother to go 5 car stations right from the get go. Completely and utterly stupid in my mind, and I bet it will cost more money then if we just built it the right way the first time.

    And 300 M? Small drop in the bucket. (1/3 Fed, 1/3 Prov, 1/3 City)

    How much is NLRT going to cost? 800 M???

  24. #24
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,277

    Default

    "South Light Rail Transit Platform Extensions to 5-Car Length"

    At least Southgate and Century Park aren't YET open, they JUST finish construction on Belmac and South Campus only to start renovations, sigh

  25. #25

    Default

    ^ mindboggling, isn't it.

    How much extra cost is that going to cost? How much would've been saved if we did it right the first time? Did we not learn from our southernly neighbours? I miss the planners who dreamt big, and went big during the 60's and 70's

  26. #26
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    44,943

    Default

    these are all good projects, even if some are stupid in retrospect, but we really truly need a WLRT before we attempt to make the rest work marginally better.

    87ave

    87 ave

    87 ave !!!!!!!!!!!!
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  27. #27

    Default

    ( The conversation about additional subsections looks to be split by a mod to over here http://connect2edmonton.ca/forum/showthread.php?t=12698 in case anyone was looking for it )

  28. #28

    Default

    I thought the existing platforms are all large enough to accomodate 5-car trains, except the Health Sciences station?

  29. #29
    Plug C2E into my veins!!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Westwood
    Posts
    16,165

    Default

    That's what I thought too... I'm disappointed there was no funding announced for the NLRT.

    Also, do you think the renos to extend the stations from 4 car to 5 car lengths will be more expensive? Or with the lower construction costs of today's economy, would it be roughly the same or even lower to do these renos now? I look forward to seeing and hearing more about these propose park'n'ride lots. I hope it's not just a big empty field of cars, but plans for some businesses and even condos (perhaps a better designed version of the areas around Claireview) around them might be incorporated.

  30. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    these are all good projects, even if some are stupid in retrospect, but we really truly need a WLRT before we attempt to make the rest work marginally better.

    87ave
    Given that NAIT is projected to finish by 2014... the west will be waiting to about 2025 I am guessing

  31. #31
    Plug C2E into my veins!!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Westwood
    Posts
    16,165

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    these are all good projects, even if some are stupid in retrospect, but we really truly need a WLRT before we attempt to make the rest work marginally better.

    87ave
    Given that NAIT is projected to finish by 2014... the west will be waiting to about 2025 I am guessing
    Still no significant funding for construction announced... I was hoping we would get some indication of future announcements in today's press-release. I guess we just have to wait and see.

  32. #32
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    44,943

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    these are all good projects, even if some are stupid in retrospect, but we really truly need a WLRT before we attempt to make the rest work marginally better.

    87ave
    Given that NAIT is projected to finish by 2014... the west will be waiting to about 2025 I am guessing
    I would very much hope that design and engineering can be done in the next 2-3 yrs so that construction could start even before NLRT is completed with a west line open in 5-7 yrs.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  33. #33
    Plug C2E into my veins!!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Westwood
    Posts
    16,165

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    these are all good projects, even if some are stupid in retrospect, but we really truly need a WLRT before we attempt to make the rest work marginally better.

    87ave
    Given that NAIT is projected to finish by 2014... the west will be waiting to about 2025 I am guessing
    I would very much hope that design and engineering can be done in the next 2-3 yrs so that construction could start even before NLRT is completed with a west line open in 5-7 yrs.
    That's a bit optimistic I think... I would say 10 years minimum... just look how long it has taken for SLRT to be completed.

  34. #34

    Default

    How long has SLRT taken? 2006-2010? Thats 4 years.

  35. #35
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    44,943

    Default

    ^in one of the most ridiculous costing and labour environments in our province's history. There is absolutely no reason a line from 114st to 170st along 87ave even with a bridge could not be designed and built in 3-4 yrs.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  36. #36

    Default

    So why is NAIT not going to be open to 2014? If NAIT is going to take 5 years from today (and it is a long way ahead of WEM in planning - property is even being acquired), I think it is a safe bet that WEM will take at least double that (as City is afraid to start more than one line at a time like Calgary and other places do).

  37. #37
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    44,943

    Default

    ^there is a lot of re-alignment to work out with that route whereas an 87ave route could potentially be less complicated other than the bank issues.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  38. #38
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    363

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    as City is afraid to start more than one line at a time like Calgary and other places do
    Clearly the city is not afraid of this, otherwise they would not have a NLRT to NAIT and NELRT extension construction overlapping, as this is what will occur per today's announcement. The NAIT funding will come with the prov's Green Trip etc plan.

    WLRT will likely be built before 2020. This is just a guess, but times are a' changing, and public transit is a big deal and going to become an even bigger deal in the next 5-10 years.

    So long as the routes are picked and prelim engg is done for the rest of the lines, I believe the city stands to have them funded eventually.

    WLRT+SELRT line built before 2020, that's my prediction...

  39. #39
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    871

    Default

    I could never figure out why expand to Gorman. There is nothing there? Areas around LRT stations should have at least 75 units/ha. Personally, I would rather see the expansion go south of CP

  40. #40
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    If these are supposed to be shovel-ready project then these make sense, although the need for thses projects might be lower than NLRT, WLRT or even further South extension. It also might be that we were going to get this amount of money no matter what we prioritized, so someone picked the projects that fit the available coin.

    Isn't NLRT already phantom funded by previously announced provincial money, just not 100% allocated? I think the 2114 timeline is pretty much a sure thing, and maybe a year early if prices stay as they are (or continue to drop).

  41. #41
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Iqaluit, Nunavut
    Posts
    2,028

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    I thought the existing platforms are all large enough to accomodate 5-car trains, except the Health Sciences station?
    For at least Southgate and Century park, they are designed for 4 cars, with all of the engineering drawings outlining the future 5th car platform extension area. The 5th car platform extension area is generally at one end and would mean that the emergency exit ramp would have to be removed and then more platform (including crawlspace? Not sure) would have to be added and then a new ramp installed.

  42. #42

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander View Post
    I think the 2114 timeline is pretty much a sure thing, and maybe a year early if prices stay as they are (or continue to drop).
    I know this is a typo, or at least I hope so !!!!!!!!!!!
    Edmontonian and proud of it!

  43. #43

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jasper View Post
    I could never figure out why expand to Gorman. There is nothing there? Areas around LRT stations should have at least 75 units/ha. Personally, I would rather see the expansion go south of CP
    Claireview (from my understanding) is at capacity. Gorman will pick up the left overs.

    I've heard you can arrive at Claireview for 630 am and still not find parking spot...

    Also, remember, there was nothing around when Claireview station was build, but soon there after stuff started filling in

  44. #44
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmontonfan View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by highlander View Post
    I think the 2114 timeline is pretty much a sure thing, and maybe a year early if prices stay as they are (or continue to drop).
    I know this is a typo, or at least I hope so !!!!!!!!!!!
    Typo indeed. 2014.

  45. #45
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,277

    Default

    I think the choice with Gorman is Clairview LRT park and ride lots are generally quite full
    http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&ie=...21586&t=h&z=16

    For more info on the route go here;
    http://www.edmonton.ca/transportatio...lrt-study.aspx

  46. #46

    Default

    Hate the name Gorman btw. Maybe when it opens it will be the Superstore/Canadian Tire/Victoria Drive Gorman Station
    ETS Trolley Buses - 1939 to 2010 - R.I.P.

  47. #47

    Default

    The immediate goal with the extension to Gorman would be to catch more commuters from the north/east sides of town given its proximity to the Henday. TODs likely to soon follow.

    The thought of seeing health sciences torn up kinda ticks me off, since it seems so bone headed to cheap out on the SLRT stations on what would have been a pretty minor expense on the original project.

    Was initially worried that $300 million (NEARLY HALF OF THE NLRT PRICE-TAG) was being spent foolishly on MARGINAL IMPROVEMENTS to service, BUT something else is probably in the works:

    http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/...400/story.html

    "While the biggest LRT priority is building a line from downtown to NAIT, the city still expects to receive the funding it needs for that work from the provincial Green Trip program, Boutilier said.
    “This isn’t taking money away from one project to another. This is money for additional stuff.”"

    Once NLRT is funded, pretty much all the SHOVEL-READY LRT projects we have will be rolling, so maybe the $300 million is a good project to grab funds (esp. federal dollars) while we can. Wish maybe we had a more urgent (ie SELRT) project that was shovel-ready to spend the money on.

  48. #48
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    363

    Default

    Argh, at least Century Park, Southgate are U/C, and South Campus is in the middle of a field to make the platform extension fairly painless.

    But after all of the nice landscaping around Mac/Bel, that is going to be ruined...and Health Sciences as well, at least for that one it is surrounded by construction zones.

  49. #49
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Ozerna, North Edmonton
    Posts
    8,961

    Default

    According to Global news, this $300 million must be used within a specific timeframe (ie. by 2011) as stated by the Federal Governent. This is the main reason the Gorman extension will be completed with this funding as projects like the NLRT would take longer.

  50. #50

    Default

    When Gorman opens, by the time the LRT gets to Belvedere, the trains will be full and nobody will be able to get on board.

    The NAIT LRT monies have been pushed back a year but they are still steamrolling forward by expropriating businesses on 105th.

    The politics of LRT are getting so bazaar (building to NAIT when we should be looking at the west end and Millwoods),the costs are getting so high and the times lines from route selection to actual operation sooooo long, does LRT expansion really work or are we just going thru the motions and not getting anywhere?

  51. #51

    Default

    LRT Expansion works. Costs are getting cheaper, and NAIT is an destination that needs to have LRT to it (and further expansion to the North, and north west).

    West End and Millwoods also need to be served.

    When Gorman opens, perhaps we will start seeing 5 car trains? Hence why they want to expand the remaining SLRT stations to 5 car capacity.

    Good on them for steamrolling ahead - costs of land aren't going to be any cheaper in the future.

  52. #52

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    ^there is a lot of re-alignment to work out with that route whereas an 87ave route could potentially be less complicated other than the bank issues.
    Ok.. this is about LRT funding, sorry guys but there are other forums for this.

    I am upset we don't have major Funding announcement for the Nait line yet. My heart stoped for a second when I say the post title..

    I thought for sure tunneling was going to start!!

  53. #53

    Default

    Aren't full trains (ie LOTS of people using transit) a good thing?? If demand from Gorman gets the city to start running 5 car trains in rush hour, isn't it a good thing for the city to have packed 5 car trains heading to downtown and beyond?? could always increase frequency at peak times to accomidate the load (again a plus!).

  54. #54

    Default

    At least now that the operating standard will be 5 car trains all other stations built in the future will be to this standard.

    No further debate.

  55. #55
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Edmonton Downtown Core
    Posts
    4,428

    Default

    Can University Station (underneath Rutherford, Arts, HUB etc. on main campus) now accommodate 5 cars? or will that require a major excavation?? I mean if THAT station can not accommodate 5 cars - what is the point of doing anything with the others??? Imagine this blarring through the speakers: "Passengers in car 5 are not allowed to disembark at University Station and doors will remain locked".

  56. #56

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EdmTrekker View Post
    Can University Station (underneath Rutherford, Arts, HUB etc. on main campus) now accommodate 5 cars? or will that require a major excavation?? I mean if THAT station can not accommodate 5 cars - what is the point of doing anything with the others??? Imagine this blarring through the speakers: "Passengers in car 5 are not allowed to disembark at University Station and doors will remain locked".
    All the underground statios are at least 5 car lengths.. FOr some reason I think they are as big as six, but I may be nuts.

  57. #57

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    All the underground statios are at least 5 car lengths.. FOr some reason I think they are as big as six, but I may be nuts.
    You're nuts. Underground stations are built for 5 cars only.

    From COE LRT Design Guidelines ... http://www.edmonton.ca/transportatio...0_Stations.pdf

    Churchill 129.0 m
    Central 125.3 m
    Bay 129.881 m
    Corona 123.0 m
    Grandin 123.0 m
    University 123.0 m

  58. #58

  59. #59

    Default

    I am curious as to the logistics of lengthening the platforms. Will they drop in precast sections? Will they close one half of the platform so that they can set up forms and cast in place?

    I am also curious as to how much they saved initially by not building the platforms to 5-car length. What's the going rate of a 4-car platform relative to a 5-car platform (25 metres)? And what it costs to add the 25 metres now.

  60. #60
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    10,536

    Default

    Gorman will be a start for the LRT extensions, and probably the easiest leg to complete. At the same time, AHD will be completed to Manning Freeway, with the promise of the final part being completed. Although this isn't NAIT LRT, this will make travel easier for residents of NE Edmonton and Fort Saskatchewan.
    "Talk minus action equals zero." - Joe Keithley, D. O. A.

  61. #61

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deedub35 View Post
    I am curious as to the logistics of lengthening the platforms. Will they drop in precast sections? Will they close one half of the platform so that they can set up forms and cast in place?
    This is just a guess, but I think they'll probably close the entrances to the station on one side and complete the addition one side at a time. I have to take a closer look, but at a station like health sciences I hope they can just extend the platform on either side of the ramp in the middle with some easy concrete work. Hopefully there will be no demo or other work required on the ramps, etc. that extend past where the current platform ends on both sides.

  62. #62

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    ^there is a lot of re-alignment to work out with that route whereas an 87ave route could potentially be less complicated other than the bank issues.
    Ok.. this is about LRT funding, sorry guys but there are other forums for this.

    I am upset we don't have major Funding announcement for the Nait line yet. My heart stoped for a second when I say the post title..

    I thought for sure tunneling was going to start!!
    This is specific targeted funding from the feds for top 3 priority LRT projects that the City had listed. NLRT is not on this list, because they are hoping to tap into different, provincial funding for this project. The Feds announcement came first, but doesn't mean that NLRT isn't a top priority...just different funding sources for different projects. The way things work these days.
    Last edited by GreenSPACE; 30-04-2009 at 11:44 PM. Reason: spelling mistakes
    www.decl.org

  63. #63

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deedub35 View Post
    I am curious as to the logistics of lengthening the platforms. Will they drop in precast sections? Will they close one half of the platform so that they can set up forms and cast in place?

    I am also curious as to how much they saved initially by not building the platforms to 5-car length. What's the going rate of a 4-car platform relative to a 5-car platform (25 metres)? And what it costs to add the 25 metres now.
    It is designed for a 5-car extension, but didn't think they'd need it so soon. Now transportation department is realizing that by the time the SLRT is all up and running, they will be at capacity already...they weren't expecting that so soon, so they are ramping up plans to run longer trains.
    www.decl.org

  64. #64

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by EdmTrekker View Post
    Can University Station (underneath Rutherford, Arts, HUB etc. on main campus) now accommodate 5 cars? or will that require a major excavation?? I mean if THAT station can not accommodate 5 cars - what is the point of doing anything with the others??? Imagine this blarring through the speakers: "Passengers in car 5 are not allowed to disembark at University Station and doors will remain locked".
    All the underground statios are at least 5 car lengths.. FOr some reason I think they are as big as six, but I may be nuts.
    The U2 and SD160 control systems can handle a maximum of five cars - so five cars is the limit for Edmonton's LRT.

    The platforms downtown are long enough, but I think the signaling needs upgrading to handle the longer trains (some signals will need to be moved). Most likely the power supply will need upgrading too
    ETS Trolley Buses - 1939 to 2010 - R.I.P.

  65. #65

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NINTman View Post
    Argh, at least Century Park, Southgate are U/C, and South Campus is in the middle of a field to make the platform extension fairly painless.

    But after all of the nice landscaping around Mac/Bel, that is going to be ruined...and Health Sciences as well, at least for that one it is surrounded by construction zones.
    All stations are designed to be expandable to 5 car length. You'll notie that at one end, extra space has been left and the tracks remain at platform width for a while, before closing to running width. Belmac will be extended to the north (that's why the walkway crossing is so far north of the existing platforms) and Health Sciences will be extended to the south (ditto the walkway ramp)
    Last edited by lightrail; 01-05-2009 at 12:19 AM.
    ETS Trolley Buses - 1939 to 2010 - R.I.P.

  66. #66
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    10,536

    Default

    I guess one condition of the federal infrastructure funding is that all projects have to be complete within three years. Hence the line to Gorman, extended platforms and the Park and Rides.
    "Talk minus action equals zero." - Joe Keithley, D. O. A.

  67. #67

    Default

    Forgive my ignornace, I understand that when someone is offering you $200,000,000 to build infrastructure you jump on the chance, but where is the city getting the remaining $100,000,000 from?

    And does acquiring this $100,000,000 hurt the chances of future projects because we'll have to pay that back at some point, and we can only carry so much debt?

  68. #68
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,277

    Default

    Possibly Trevor, one would have to check the budget documents to see if this is money that was already budgeted to this or not, and if they will have to shuffle projects and spending around.
    http://www.edmonton.ca/city_governme...ty-budget.aspx

  69. #69
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Holyrood
    Posts
    4,846

    Default

    I hope the Gorman area has a plan that calls for real and walkable TOD at the LRT station. I don't want to see another Clareview up there.
    Strathcona City Separatist

  70. #70

    Default

    ^Is that likely, if one of the justifications for this expansion is that the ParkNride at Clareview is full? There won't be room for a large at grade parking lot, if a walkable community is placed there.

  71. #71
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Holyrood
    Posts
    4,846

    Default

    ^ I know, that does worry me.
    Strathcona City Separatist

  72. #72
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    I think that gorman was supposed to be the more community walkable station to the NE, nd an eventual 'final' station near the Henday was supposed to have all the park&ride.

  73. #73

    Default

    One key I see here is the push to Build the Gorman station within 3 years will likely advance forward the timetable to complete the final leg of AHD.

    I do think the 5 car expansion on the just-completed stations is ludacris. Whoever caused that fiasco should go stand in the corner for 15 minutes.


    Make no mistake people, we are on a roll:

    First south LRT expansion open.
    Second south LRT expansion opening in under 12 months.
    NLRT expansion moving ahead, partial tunnel already being built.
    NELRT expansion to Gorman going ahead, expected completion in 2012. (3 years time limit)
    North AHD from Yellowhead to Manning freeway under construction already.
    AHD interchange upgrades at Stony Plain Road and Yellowhead.
    Park n Ride facilities at multiple points on AHD.


    Without some major catastrophe, I would expect positive announcements on ECCA (closure and redevelopment) in the next 12 months, and a new NHL arena and WLRT/SELRT following in the 12 months after that...


    And nothing wrong with Gorman being a walkable station. People can walk, or take a express shuttle bus from the park and ride to a 'walkable' station. Isn't that how the south park n ride at century park will work? Shuttle from AHD to the lrt station?

  74. #74
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Holyrood
    Posts
    4,846

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blainehamilton View Post
    Make no mistake people, we are on a roll...

    ...

    And nothing wrong with Gorman being a walkable station. People can walk, or take a express shuttle bus from the park and ride to a 'walkable' station. Isn't that how the south park n ride at century park will work? Shuttle from AHD to the lrt station?
    We are indeed on quite a roll.

    It's not the station I'm worried about, it's the neighborhood development around it that needs to be zoned, planned, designed, etc. properly to maximize the potential of this station.
    Strathcona City Separatist

  75. #75

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sundance View Post
    Possibly Trevor, one would have to check the budget documents to see if this is money that was already budgeted to this or not, and if they will have to shuffle projects and spending around.
    http://www.edmonton.ca/city_governme...ty-budget.aspx
    I spent some time and looked through it, the only mention of Gorman was on Page 492, and stated it is "Unfunded". It has me a little worried that, because they only need to put up 1/3 of the money that it may delay the other expansions planned (NLRT) even more...

    The more I read about the Gorman Town Centre from the links in this thread the more I like the concept - we're finally putting the LRT into a new development where things can be built around it, similar to Clareview. Everything can be planned to take advantage of the transit being right there.

  76. #76

    Default

    A development around Gorman will spring up in very short order. LRT will take 3 years to build and put in service to that location.

    How much has the area of The Grange / Glastonbury / The Hamptons boomed in the last 3 years?

    What about MacEwan / Rutherford / Blackmud Creek?

    Watch Windermere /Ambleside be fully built and densified in the next 3 years or so.



    As soon as a shovel for the NELRT expansion to Gorman hits the ground, you can bet a host of new developments are going to fly up in the following 3 years. It's already happening on the other side of Manning Freeway north/south of 167ave at 50st.

  77. #77

    Default

    Looked at health sciences today, it looks like they'll just extend the platform on the south side of the station, not quite sure how the ramp will work with that, might have to remove it and rebuild it (especially with the way the railing is set up).

    Also looked at Southgate and I'm not sure which side (or both?) will be extended. There's freshly poured ramps on both sides, and it's a shame cause it looks that because of they way they're set up, atleast one will have to be demolished to extend the platform (gotta love demolition on a new contruction site.....)

  78. #78

    Default

    Are you sure Southgate isn't already a 5 Car Platform..

  79. #79

    Default

    You may be right, it does look quite long, I was just under the impression that the above ground SLRT stations were designed as 4-car and the original budget for extending the platforms (many millions) seemed like too much just for Health Sciences, South Campus, and MacBel.

  80. #80

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    Are you sure Southgate isn't already a 5 Car Platform..
    Yes. According to COE website ...

    "The LRT platform will be nine meters wide and 100 meters long. This is long enough to accommodate a four car LRT train. In the future, there is space available to expand the platform and accommodate a five car train."

    http://www.edmonton.ca/transportatio.../stations.aspx

  81. #81

    Default

    Booo.. I hope this won't delay the opening any!

    anyways, all future stations will now be 5 car, as we will be running a five car system YAY!

  82. #82
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    239

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blainehamilton View Post
    One key I see here is the push to Build the Gorman station within 3 years will likely advance forward the timetable to complete the final leg of AHD.

    I do think the 5 car expansion on the just-completed stations is ludacris. Whoever caused that fiasco should go stand in the corner for 15 minutes.


    Make no mistake people, we are on a roll:

    First south LRT expansion open.
    Second south LRT expansion opening in under 12 months.
    NLRT expansion moving ahead, partial tunnel already being built.
    NELRT expansion to Gorman going ahead, expected completion in 2012. (3 years time limit)
    North AHD from Yellowhead to Manning freeway under construction already.
    AHD interchange upgrades at Stony Plain Road and Yellowhead.
    Park n Ride facilities at multiple points on AHD.


    Without some major catastrophe, I would expect positive announcements on ECCA (closure and redevelopment) in the next 12 months, and a new NHL arena and WLRT/SELRT following in the 12 months after that...


    And nothing wrong with Gorman being a walkable station. People can walk, or take a express shuttle bus from the park and ride to a 'walkable' station. Isn't that how the south park n ride at century park will work? Shuttle from AHD to the lrt station?

    We are on a role....and it's great! I would however really like to see some solid movement forward on the WLRT. I think this is the most noteable missing piece right now. I think it is also critical to transit service in the city.

  83. #83
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,688

    Default

    This is a very good sign for our LRT system. I understand Gorman station going up pretty quick as there is really not much to any demolision that will be required and for the time being not much for road crossings. I wonder what kind of station they will build at the Gorman location. I think the only unfortunate thing is that they couldn't also include SLRT extension to Ellerslie Road in this announcement. As for the Gorman site, I don't doubt that there are a bunch of devellopers that have been waiting for this announcement. Once they know what to buy and where to build they will start construction.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  84. #84
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Iqaluit, Nunavut
    Posts
    2,028

    Default

    After a recent discussion with a coworker, I can't help but think this expansion to Gorman is not a sustainable choice.

    Do we really need to push out further from the city eating up farmland for what MIGHT become a TOD in an area with 0 density now? I DO doubt there are a bunch of developers waiting for this announcement. Or wait, I don't doubt it, but I doubt the developers are the type that will build a nice TOD. Rather, I see them building another large section of suburban sprawl neighborhoods.

    We have enough area now. We have enough transit to the NE now. If this issue is parking at Clareview, then build a parkade. We need to densify, and getting bigger isn't doing that.

  85. #85

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Channing View Post
    After a recent discussion with a coworker, I can't help but think this expansion to Gorman is not a sustainable choice.

    Do we really need to push out further from the city eating up farmland for what MIGHT become a TOD in an area with 0 density now? I DO doubt there are a bunch of developers waiting for this announcement. Or wait, I don't doubt it, but I doubt the developers are the type that will build a nice TOD. Rather, I see them building another large section of suburban sprawl neighborhoods.

    We have enough area now. We have enough transit to the NE now. If this issue is parking at Clareview, then build a parkade. We need to densify, and getting bigger isn't doing that.
    Perhaps there is more to it. I don't have any facts to support this though. Maybe it is a one time only grant that needs to be applied for by a certain date and used by a certain date. Maybe the Gorman extension is shovel ready and the only one that the city can build under this grant. As much as we all want the NAIT line to be built perhaps it won't meet the deadline. Rather than get nothing through this grant the city applied for this grant to build something that is really not required yet.

  86. #86
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Iqaluit, Nunavut
    Posts
    2,028

    Default

    Yeah but it's not something for nothing. It's $100 million for spending $100 million (Plus the province has to spend $100 million). Why not spend the $100 million on something we need?

    I'm not sure we'll need a Gorman extension ever, let alone now.

  87. #87

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Channing View Post
    I'm not sure we'll need a Gorman extension ever, let alone now.
    Someone mentioned in another thread that you can't predict the future. This quote might get you on a website about famous prediction quotes.

    "I'm not sure we'll need a Gorman extension ever, let alone now." -- Channing, 2009

  88. #88
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Iqaluit, Nunavut
    Posts
    2,028

    Default

    Whether or not my prediction comes true, it can be made true or not by the choices we make now.

    I think the choice to build further north east is a mistake, not for transportation reasons, but for the sustainability of our city.

  89. #89
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    44,943

    Default

    ^while i agree in theory, i think putting Gorman in for a park and ride is a good idea today. Given that though, we really must begin to get serious about a WLRT and SELRT along with YEG.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  90. #90
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Iqaluit, Nunavut
    Posts
    2,028

    Default

    Why is Gorman better for a Park and Ride better than expanding the facility at Clareview? Tracks, a station and all that seems like a lot of infrastructure for just a park and ride.

  91. #91
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,688

    Default

    Well as it has been stated a few times in this thread, it is my belief as well that this grant is being given to the city with a timeline. Yes I agree that I would rather see this money go towards the NLRT or WLRT or SELRT but none of those will be able to be completed any time soon. One thing about the Gorman site that makes it a good future park and ride location is it's potential proximity to the future Anthony Henday Drive. I say that through this grant if the feds and the province want to give us money to build a station I say take advantage of it when we can.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  92. #92
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Iqaluit, Nunavut
    Posts
    2,028

    Default

    While this does give the city $100 million for the extension, it takes $100 million from elsewhere so that we can contribute our share. That's $100 million away from NLR, WLRT or SELRT.

    And while Gorman might be close to the FUTURE AHD, Clareview will be just down a very large road (Manning Freeway) and so the extra minute or so in your car should be okay.

    So my question is, are we building Gorman station because we need:

    A) Another station because Clareview park and ride is full and we need more park and ride.

    B) The future potential of having a park and ride close to AHD.

    C) All the downstream stations have already maximised their TOD potential, we need more TOD.

    D) They're giving us money, let's just bulid whatever we can, not what makes sense.

    E) Something else. Let me know.

  93. #93

    Default

    Where is there room to expand at Clareview?

    Also, that money is for shovel ready projects. Stuff that can be started/completed within 3 years. Not quite NLRT

    Also, its A, B, Not C yet, but later yes.
    Last edited by Medwards; 04-05-2009 at 11:42 AM.

  94. #94
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Iqaluit, Nunavut
    Posts
    2,028

    Default

    Expand UP! Parkade Structure! $100 million buys you 2500 stalls at $40k per stall.

  95. #95

    Default

    But the new station is needed for multiple reasons, and when build, will relieve congestion at clareview anyways...

  96. #96
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Iqaluit, Nunavut
    Posts
    2,028

    Default

    What reasons is a new station NEEDED? No one has given me one.

    I'll admit, I don't ride the train from clareview often. What are the congestion problems? Traffic? Well upgrade the road accessing it. People on the train? Building another station isn't going to fix that, the 5 car platform extension will help that.

  97. #97

    Default

    Clareview is already a 5 car platform.

    The new station is needed for a variety of reasons, some right now, some in the future.

    1) Most of the area around Clareview is full. Building Gorman station will provide new opportunity for TODs in the NE areas.
    2) Clareview station is full - parking, and capacity wise. Its reached its design capacity. There's no point to building 2500 stalls @ 40k per, when a new station which will be needed anyways can take up that demand.
    3) Location. Future Anthony Henday drive will be close, and people from all over the North end of Edmonton will start using this station. Plus all the new users with growth in this Gorman / Pilot Sound area.

  98. #98
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Iqaluit, Nunavut
    Posts
    2,028

    Default

    Clarview might be a 5 car platform, but we don't run 5 car trains yet.

    1) Most of the area around Clareview is full. Building Gorman station will provide new opportunity for TODs in the NE areas.
    Let's see the existing TOD's areas utilized (Statium, Bellevedere, even Clareview can be impvoed) before we build new areas, especially because we are sprawling the city out further, and this new transit is just as likley to provide new suburban sprawl oppurtunitys as TOD's.

    2) Clareview station is full - parking, and capacity wise. Its reached its design capacity. There's no point to building 2500 stalls @ 40k per, when a new station which will be needed anyways can take up that demand.
    A new station won't fix the park and ride issue. You'll still need to build parking. And if we're building at Gorman, it still should be parkade, not more sprawling parking lots.

    3) Location. Future Anthony Henday drive will be close, and people from all over the North end of Edmonton will start using this station. Plus all the new users with growth in this Gorman / Pilot Sound area.
    3km closer, than Clarview, seperate by a major freeway. People from the north end of Edmotnon could be using Clarview jsut as easily as Gorman.
    Last edited by Channing; 04-05-2009 at 12:16 PM.

  99. #99
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,277

    Default

    Channing as for you increased TODs at other stations the city is considering exactly this, they are holding a meeting on Wednesday, information here;
    http://www.edmonton.ca/city_governme...009/13759.aspx

    As for parkades they do cost about $40,000 per stall even if the city charged $3/car it takes a long time to pay for them, sprawl parking lots are unfortunately cheap. Don't forget the city was trying to implement a $1/car charge. There are about 260 business days in a year, so if my math is right it would take 150 years (roughly) to pay off one stall.

  100. #100

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Channing View Post
    What reasons is a new station NEEDED? No one has given me one.
    Other than the reasons stated above by others, think of the economic reasons.

    NOW:
    Overall cost $300M.
    Feds give $100M.
    Prov gives $100M.
    City chips in $100M.

    LATER:
    Overall cost ? (Probably a lot more)
    Feds give ? (No guarantees)
    Prov gives ? (No guarantees)
    City chips ? (We are on the hook for AT LEAST $100M).

    The city is taking advantage of a limited time grant. Yes they have to spend $100M. Let's hope it doesn't take away from the other LRT projects.

Page 1 of 9 12345 ... 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
  •