Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 300 of 856

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

  1. #201
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    3,713

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    I would like the gov't to get serious about affordable housing and start using some things like this..

    http://www.spacebox.nl/index.cfm?lng=nl&mi=1&pmi=41

    Just think what could be done with these affordable prefabs, Line them up along the NELRT right of way on one side.
    say hello to instant ghetto..... what better way to make lrt appealing than lining up a ghetto right along side it. And if you dont think it will turn out bad then your delusional.

    just saying...
    be offended! figure out why later...

  2. #202

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by richardW View Post
    say hello to instant ghetto.....
    I have relatives in Holland who live in a ghetto like this - the pre-fab thing has been around there for more than 60 years (I think it caught on after the war, my dad actually grew up in a pre-fab place). They do the houses up nice inside, but these type of structures get really old, ugly and cheap looking very quickly (although no worse or better than a trailer park).

  3. #203

    Default

    Yes life span is only 30 years, but I think it has to do with propper care and funding plays a part in all of this.

  4. #204

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Mercucio View Post
    Anyone who tries to tell you Edmonton sprawls more than Vancouver or Toronto really needs to travel more...
    The difference though, is that Vancouver and Toronto have sprawled to the point, where it is so unpleasant to commute to work by car (Vancouver's due to lack of good road system - partly geographical, Tornoto due to getting stupidly big) , that many people have "overcome" their fears of the "scary" people that marketers play to with their "gated communities" and bucked the continuing flight to the edge. They have interesting inner cities and downtowns as a result. That's never going to happen in Edmonton at a rate fast enough to fill the empty land or natural inner city decline as residents age, if we continue to invest more heavily in suburban transport systems designed to convert farm land ahead of servicing the existing city and suburbs.

    Once Gorman is built, then the lobbyists will come out and say, for a little bit more - why not build the next Gorman.... it will be a cheaper line than WEM or Millwoods... the trend of the last 50 years never ends. We keep extending and extending leaving behind empty holes that never get filled.
    Gorman is being built to connect to the Henday.. it's not because Gorman needs a station. It's all about the Ring Road, doesn't anyone see that?

  5. #205

    Default

    ^ What is your point? Is our LRT system for the people of Fort Sask. or should LRT be for residents of Edmonton especially those that choose to live on well established transit routes and transit centers like in Millwoods and WEM?
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  6. #206

    Default

    What is your point? People commute all over the region for work.

    LRT is for everyone in the Edmonton region.

    Edmonton needs to grow up and accept its neighbours. Its time to embrace the region, not pick fights and put up more borders.

    Go Capital Region Board.

    Last I checked the ring road serves Edmonton, and the rest of the region as well.
    Last edited by Medwards; 05-05-2009 at 02:34 PM.

  7. #207

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Is our LRT system for the people of Fort Sask. or should LRT be for residents of Edmonton especially those that choose to live on well established transit routes and transit centers like in Millwoods and WEM?
    This extension is being funded by three levels of government: Edmonton, Alberta, and Canada. This extension can be used by anyone.

  8. #208

    Default

    The common adage is that "if you build it, people will come"

    So if you build an LRT to the outskirts of the city, people will build further out to get cheap land, hence, Urban Sprawl. You will never have enough density without a massive bus network and huge parking lots.

    If you build better transit in high density neighbourhoods like Oliver, then people will move there and increase the density further and use existing infrastructure. It all comes down to what type of city you want to build and if you can afford the costs associated with urban sprawl.


    I guess when the Transportation Department heard on this forum that we wanted LRT to the community of Oliver in downtown, they must have crossed their wires and assumed that we were talking about the Oliver Hospital (Alberta Hospital out in Gorman)
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  9. #209

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    So if you build an LRT to the outskirts of the city, people will build further out to get cheap land, hence, Urban Sprawl. You will never have enough density without a massive bus network and huge parking lots.
    Who says that there will be single family development around this new station? Here is the opportunity for the city to build a well designed TOD from scratch. Build it dense and build it well. Not everyone wants to live in the core. Don't compare the future Gorman to the Clareview botch job.

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    If you build better transit in high density neighbourhoods like Oliver, then people will move there and increase the density further and use existing infrastructure. It all comes down to what type of city you want to build and if you can afford the costs associated with urban sprawl.
    Oliver is doing quite well despite of the lack of LRT. People live there not because of their alternative transportation options. However an LRT or tram along Jasper or 102 would give more options for the Oliverites so that they don't have to drive to work.

  10. #210
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    The ultimate goal is to build a station outside AHD with a massive park and ride. This will service the industrial area by allowing Diversified to park their busses over night and pick up works there in the morning. It will serve the trades people heading to the plants and commuters heading downtown. A two way commute. Pretty good use of recources don't you think?

  11. #211

    Default

    ^ But come on, people on this thread want us to believe that all work and employment nodes in this city are centric. Nobody works outside or near the Anthony Henday. Alberta Industrial Heartland? What's that? Fort Saskatchewan? There's no work up there. Just a bedroom community.

  12. #212
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Iqaluit, Nunavut
    Posts
    2,135

    Default

    What does this LRT station have anything to do with work near the AHD or Fort Saskatchewan?

    edit: Because I thought this was all to be residential and TOD near Gorman, not workspaces people from the rest of the City would commute too.

    edit 2: I'm not against LRT going to Fort Sasketachewan, but we don't need stops every 2km on the way there. (Until the stations nearer to the City fill up with TOD/density)
    Last edited by Channing; 05-05-2009 at 04:30 PM.

  13. #213

    Default

    There was an article on the Sun on it, it seems even NE residents don't want this:

    http://www.edmontonsun.com/News/Edmo...37336-sun.html

    But in Coun. Kim Krushell's mind, the northeast LRT extension is by no means a done deal.

    "It's not set in stone," she said yesterday.

    "Council will have to look at what's the priority. I don't think it would make any sense to have a line going up to northeast Gorman, which is basically in the middle of nowhere."
    Per the Mayors comments about sprawl today too, I hope dies a quick death, it isn't a priority right now. While I'm not a huge fan of NAIT line, it is more useful than this one.
    Last edited by moahunter; 05-05-2009 at 04:37 PM.

  14. #214

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deedub35 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    So if you build an LRT to the outskirts of the city, people will build further out to get cheap land, hence, Urban Sprawl. You will never have enough density without a massive bus network and huge parking lots.
    Who says that there will be single family development around this new station? Here is the opportunity for the city to build a well designed TOD from scratch. Build it dense and build it well. Not everyone wants to live in the core. Don't compare the future Gorman to the Clareview botch job.

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    If you build better transit in high density neighbourhoods like Oliver, then people will move there and increase the density further and use existing infrastructure. It all comes down to what type of city you want to build and if you can afford the costs associated with urban sprawl.
    Oliver is doing quite well despite of the lack of LRT. People live there not because of their alternative transportation options. However an LRT or tram along Jasper or 102 would give more options for the Oliverites so that they don't have to drive to work.
    As an oliverite I will tell you that transit BLOWS in oliver unless your going to the west end or DT. THere isn't even a buss that conviently connects oliver with Whyte ave. All the busses going towards DT come at the same time and then Jasper is a Transit Dead Zone for 15 min. It the the stupidest setup ever. This close to DT I should be able to walk out on the street and catch a buss at least every 5 min. The truley sad thing is us Oliverites prolly have the best access to the Transit system, but it could be drastically better.

  15. #215
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Ozerna, North Edmonton
    Posts
    8,961

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    There was an article on the Sun on it, it seems even NE residents don't want this:

    http://www.edmontonsun.com/News/Edmo...37336-sun.html

    But in Coun. Kim Krushell's mind, the northeast LRT extension is by no means a done deal.

    "It's not set in stone," she said yesterday.

    "Council will have to look at what's the priority. I don't think it would make any sense to have a line going up to northeast Gorman, which is basically in the middle of nowhere."
    Per the Mayors comments about sprawl today too, I hope dies a quick death, it isn't a priority right now. While I'm not a huge fan of NAIT line, it is more useful than this one.
    Those two NE residents do not want it near them (NIMBY's), but do not paint the whole quadrant as having the same opinions. I live in Ozerna and my wife uses the Clareview LRT everyday. It is FULL everyday and you have to get there early to get a parking spot. When/if the Gorman station opens, it will be closer to drive there from my neighbourhood and I hope it gets built to relieve some pressure off of Clareview. Clearly people living in close proximity use Clareview and even though there isn't a huge TOD presence near the Gorman site, I still believe it would be used to a similar capacity as Clareview. So if the Provincial/Federal government is waving $200 million for a make work project that is shovel ready to help the economy/employment, then the decision is really a no brainer.

  16. #216

    Default

    Lino Spano, who lives near 152 Avenue and 29 Street, said he will sell his home if the Gorman LRT station is built.

    Fine by me. By 2012 the ECCA lands should start to be developed into new residential areas. He can move there...

    2 NIMBYS are going to get steamrolled by this.

  17. #217

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    As an oliverite I will tell you that transit BLOWS in oliver unless your going to the west end or DT. THere isn't even a buss that conviently connects oliver with Whyte ave. All the busses going towards DT come at the same time and then Jasper is a Transit Dead Zone for 15 min. It the the stupidest setup ever. This close to DT I should be able to walk out on the street and catch a buss at least every 5 min. The truley sad thing is us Oliverites prolly have the best access to the Transit system, but it could be drastically better.
    As an Oliverite living on 110 street I tell you that I walk, bike, or LRT. I don't catch the bus so I am not aware of the bus situation. If I head to the west end or anywhere else far I drive.

  18. #218

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Glenco View Post
    The ultimate goal is to build a station outside AHD with a massive park and ride. This will service the industrial area by allowing Diversified to park their busses over night and pick up works there in the morning. It will serve the trades people heading to the plants and commuters heading downtown. A two way commute. Pretty good use of recources don't you think?

    Right, with your reasoning we need to make transit work with a massive car park. Parking lots are a waste of space and force nearby residents to walk further across these wastelands to get to transit. Pave over prime farmland with asphalt.



    If you go to San Francisco at some of the new TOD's you cannot see one parking lot. Housing, stores and offices connected by bus, streetcars and BART. They are built in older run down neighbourhoods and industrial brownfield site, not farmland.

    They built a mall in S.F. where they did not build one parking stall for mall visitors, all the people come by transit.

    Gorman does not meet any of the design criteria of TOD. Places like the Caital Packers site, Statium, Fort Road TOD, 95th street and many other places do.

    If you want to be educated on TOD, read something about it. http://www.grandboulevard.net/index.html

    http://www.grandboulevard.net/gp/GP.pdf

    The Guiding Principles for El Camino adopted by the Grand Boulevard Task Force have now been acted on by 22 local governments and are being considered by the other members of The Grand Boulevard Initiative.
    • Atherton
    • Belmont
    • Building Trades Council of San Mateo County
    • Burlingame
    • Colma
    • County of San Mateo
    • Daly City
    • Greenbelt Alliance
    • Hillsborough
    • Joint Venture Silicon Valley Network
    • Millbrae
    • Mountain View
    • Redwood City
    • SAMCEDA
    • San Bruno
    • San Mateo (City)
    • San Mateo City/County Association of Governments
    • San Mateo County Transit District
    • Santa Clara (City)
    • South San Francisco
    • Sunnyvale
    • The Committee for Green Foothills
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  19. #219
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Canada
    Posts
    5,566

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    ... All the busses going towards DT come at the same time and then Jasper is a Transit Dead Zone for 15 min. It the the stupidest setup ever.
    This is off topic - but I pointed this out to Transit about Whyte Avenue buses (why do they travel in ratpacks I asked?). I was told it doesn't happen ... nope ... nadda ... total figment of my imagination. Thank you for restoring my belief in my sanity.

  20. #220
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Folsom, CA
    Posts
    501

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by glasshead View Post
    A great exercise for a keener would be to calculate the population density of Edmonton, say bounded by the TUC limit.
    The population density figure (in 2006) was something like 1067 inhabitants per square kilometer in the Census subdivision for Edmonton, according to Statistics Canada: http://www12.statcan.ca/census-recen...B1=All&Custom=

    These numbers depend a lot on how the borders for the region under consideration are drawn. Cities like Halifax and Ottawa have large sections of farm field as part of their CSD or CDs.

    Still, for comparison some of the larger cities in Canada have CMA population densities that approach Edmonton's CSD population density...

    Vancouver: CSD: 5,039 (CMA: 735)
    Toronto: CD/CSD: 3,972 (CMA: 866)
    Montreal: CD: 3,714 (CMA: 853)
    Calgary: CSD: 1,360 (CMA: 211)
    Edmonton: CSD: 1067(CMA: 109)

    CD: Census Division, CSD: Census Subdivision, CMA: Cencus Metropolitan Area

  21. #221

    Default

    It makes sense to me:

    1) We are offered free money from the Feds for shovel-ready projects
    2) Gorman station (which we may not *really* need for another few decades) is the only shovel-ready LRT project we have

    Let's build the thing. Right now we are all questioning its value, but in 30 years Edmontonians will be saying how smart it was for us to build it out when we did (just like how we praise the downtown LRT tunnels now).

    I'll take some cheap infrastructure for the future, please.

  22. #222
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    Just as an exercise in logic... if we are to be happy with any $$ from the feds and province in shovel ready projects particularly for LRT, why would the city not propose using the money to build:

    1.new LRT stop at 95 ave between Stadium and Churchill
    2. a seasonal or permanent stop at the south end of the LRT bridge to serve the river valley and the Kinsmen
    3. a stop between Southgate and Century Park.

    While the need of these stops maybe debated, the argument of "hey, its free money for a shovel-ready project" should really trump all voices against.

  23. #223

    Default

    Anyone remember 23rd avenue? The interchange should've been built back in the 80's. We cry foul that there were delays upon delays, seeing the city pay the cost of most of it. Now we have money for a project, which, like it or not, will be needed, and will help to relieve some of the capacity stress going on at Clareview, and we all find silly reasons to poo-poo all over this. A-typical Edmonton Attitude. Complain that we don't get enough infrastructure build, complain when it isn't build when it should be, and then when we build something proactively, we complain about that too. YEESH.

  24. #224

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grish View Post
    Just as an exercise in logic... if we are to be happy with any $$ from the feds and province in shovel ready projects particularly for LRT, why would the city not propose using the money to build:

    1.new LRT stop at 95 ave between Stadium and Churchill
    2. a seasonal or permanent stop at the south end of the LRT bridge to serve the river valley and the Kinsmen
    3. a stop between Southgate and Century Park.

    While the need of these stops maybe debated, the argument of "hey, its free money for a shovel-ready project" should really trump all voices against.
    I didn't realize any of these projects were:
    a) required or needed at all.
    b) make much sense at all.
    c) shovel ready. There's no plans with CoE to do this... so... not shovel ready
    d) even talked about anywhere.

    LRT connects the nodes, but the way you want it grish, its a local feeder bus.

  25. #225
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    /\ "hey, its free money for a shovel-rady project"

    ps it is shovel ready. there is no property purchase, road diversion, or much of engineering studies etc required.

    your point (a) and (b) or (d) applies to Gorman. I have actually seen people talk about all three of these potential stops, so point (d) is out the window.

    But above all else---"Hey, it's free money"!

  26. #226

    Default

    Gorman is required to relive capacity stress off Clareview. (I'll assume you missed these points in this thread deliberately)
    It makes sense to build Gorman now, as the area will be developed over the next decade.
    and Gorman has been mentioned in a few different threads around here. Mostly without name "Gorman" but NELRT extension.

  27. #227

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by grish View Post
    Just as an exercise in logic... if we are to be happy with any $$ from the feds and province in shovel ready projects particularly for LRT, why would the city not propose using the money to build:

    1.new LRT stop at 95 ave between Stadium and Churchill
    2. a seasonal or permanent stop at the south end of the LRT bridge to serve the river valley and the Kinsmen
    3. a stop between Southgate and Century Park.

    While the need of these stops maybe debated, the argument of "hey, its free money for a shovel-ready project" should really trump all voices against.
    I didn't realize any of these projects were:
    a) required or needed at all.
    b) make much sense at all.
    c) shovel ready. There's no plans with CoE to do this... so... not shovel ready
    d) even talked about anywhere.
    LRT connects the nodes, but the way you want it grish, its a local feeder bus.
    1. and 3. in particular have both been talked about. I wasn't a big fan on 1. in another thread, but a number of people think this will get the Quarters moving (I seem to remember (?) Kcantor liked the idea). 3. has much been much debated.

    Both 1. and 3. are every bit as shovel ready as a Gorman line. I think they are probably more valuable and have greater potential to create a useful instead of sprawling TOD as well.

    The capacity argument on Clareview is nonesense. As others have posted, for a lot less money an above grade Parkade could be built at Clareview. It wouldn't be cheap, but much cheaper than this line to nowhere. Hopefully this idea is going to die though, I am pleased it is not a done deal.
    Last edited by moahunter; 06-05-2009 at 12:31 PM.

  28. #228

    Default

    how does a stop between Southgate and Century Park make a potential for a TOD? Its nothing but single family homes.

  29. #229

    Default

    Gorman is nothing but farmland... things can change - just look at VFC - single family homes will disapear there... we can kill a farm and sprawl, or kill a home and be more dense.

    How about the Quarters station though? Why isn't that better than Gorman?

  30. #230

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Both 1. and 3. are every bit as shovel ready as a Gorman line.
    This is a statement that can be debated till everyone is blue in the face and there would still be a disagreement.

    I interpret shovel ready as something that is planned and ready to go. If you look at the COE website ...

    The NELRT extension has an actual plan - engineering has been done.

    http://www.edmonton.ca/transportatio...ensionplan.pdf

    The SLRT extension has an actual plan - engineering has been done.

    http://www.edmonton.ca/transportatio...nningstudy.pdf

    All the other extensions are line drawings - sketches at best.

    Until I see a pdf document with architectural diagrams and dimensions, I don't consider a 95 avenue station, LRT bridge station, or 34 avenue station shovel ready.

  31. #231
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    /\ none of that answers the question"why does gorman stop get attention, design, planning and money while 95 ave, Kinsman, or the stop at 40 avenue and 111 street did not?"

  32. #232

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deedub35 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Both 1. and 3. are every bit as shovel ready as a Gorman line.
    This is a statement that can be debated till everyone is blue in the face and there would still be a disagreement.
    Perhaps that's true, but given that the line is already there - then it is already a lot more "built" than gorman - it's not just shovel ready, its already half shoveled. Just interpose a Belgravia station on the line, or better yet, just move the planned Gorman one to this spot (change a few street names on the pdf plan), and bingo.
    Last edited by moahunter; 06-05-2009 at 01:12 PM.

  33. #233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grish View Post
    /\ none of that answers the question"why does gorman stop get attention, design, planning and money while 95 ave, Kinsman, or the stop at 40 avenue and 111 street did not?"
    In terms of attention, design, and planning ... talk to the people in the transportation department. These stops aren't in their minds. Why? Maybe they think it's not necessary at this point in time.

    In terms of money ... the transportation department paid money to have the NELRT extension and SLRT extension designed. I imagine that the NLRT route is undergoing the design process right now so it is not what I define as "shovel ready". Once they frickin decide on a route, they will pay money to have WLRT designed. When they decide on a route to Mill Woods, they will pay money have have that designed.

    Also in terms of money ... the AB and CAN government are only funding transportation projects that are already DESIGNED. Not ones that WE think are necessary, needed, or easy to build.

  34. #234

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Just interpose a Belgravia station on the line, or better yet, just move the planned Gorman one to this spot (change a few street names on the pdf plan), and bingo.
    Microsoft Paint!

  35. #235
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,696

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grish View Post
    /\ none of that answers the question"why does gorman stop get attention, design, planning and money while 95 ave, Kinsman, or the stop at 40 avenue and 111 street did not?"
    Are you being intentionally obtuse? The Gorman station and extention HAVE been designed and planned, and are "shovel ready." Unfortunately, no other LRT project currently is. You can whine all you'd like about that being the case, but it's a matter of fact.

    So the argument is either:

    a) Do Gorman, get Federal and Provincial funding to the tune of $200 million.
    b) Don't do Gorman, and don't get any of that funding.

    Period. Throwing in all these what-if's and why not's and we should have's is basically pulling the straw man card. Go right ahead if that's your perogative, just know that you're more or less playing with yourself.

  36. #236
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    /\are you trying to throw an insult as an alternative to answering the question:

    why does gorman stop get attention, design, planning and money while 95 ave, Kinsman, or the stop at 40 avenue and 111 street did not?

    so far the reaction has been a mediocre summary of the short term history of LRT planning provided in post number 190 and even worse summary of what is currently the reality in post number 192. I can read the actual press release that explains what the money is going to go for. Your scribble does not address the issue of why it was so important to put Gorman in the list of shovel-ready projects now. There had been many alternatives proposed from building a parkade to these three stops I have suggested recently. The questions that are raised represent legitimate concern for the best allocation of funds and priorities. Tacit suggestions of sabotage by playing dumb do not answer the questions. Thank you for coming out, raz. Make sure you come back when you have something helpful to add.

  37. #237

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grish View Post
    I can read the actual press release that explains what the money is going to go for. Your scribble does not address the issue of why it was so important to put Gorman in the list of shovel-ready projects now.
    Here is an excerpt from the press release ...
    -----
    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.
    -----
    Obviously we need to get to know someone that works on the inside. Until then it is all speculation. But I believe that Gorman was put on the list because it has the least uncertainty and resistance. Perhaps there is uncertainty to NLRT because the outcome of the muni could change the route? Perhaps there could be resistance to SLRT extension because residents beside 111 street south of 23 avenue don't want it?
    Last edited by deedub35; 06-05-2009 at 02:07 PM.

  38. #238
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Iqaluit, Nunavut
    Posts
    2,135

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by raz0469 View Post

    So the argument is either:

    a) Do Gorman, get Federal and Provincial funding to the tune of $200 million.
    b) Don't do Gorman, and don't get any of that funding.
    b) Please. Don't waste our money.

    And this is no way related to the overpasses on AHD or the 23rd Ave. Interchange. At least not yet.

    If we plan our developments better, we won't need a station at Gorman until we have a TOD finished at Stadium, Bellvedere and we fix what we have at Clareview. We may never need a station at Gorman. (Not to say that the LRT won't extend that way, we just won't need a station till Fort Saskatchewan.)

  39. #239

    Default

    theres ~700,000 people moving here in the next 30 years. They are not all going to fit in there Channing. Open your eyes. Face reality.

  40. #240
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    are you saying they will all go to live near Gorman? what does your post mean, medwards?

  41. #241
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Iqaluit, Nunavut
    Posts
    2,135

    Default

    We discussed that already, We have enough room to fit those 700,000 people in the City. Force them to fit in, plus you are right, there will be some expansion required, but Clareview is less than 3 Km's from AHD. That's easily within a bus feeder system distance.

  42. #242

    Default

    It means that there that within 30 years, we are going to be 1.7 Million people here.

    They are not all going to go to belevedere, Fort road TODs.

    Gorman will serve many of the industrial workers around fort sask, the alberta heartland and the eastern fringes of the city. but I guess those people shouldn't have the option of living close to their work, and have transit there.

    I guess Gorman can't be used as a staging point for buses going out to these plants.

  43. #243

    Default

    I give up. Clareview is FULL FULL FULL. You're clearly missing the point.

    I'm done rehashing the same points that your are deliberately ignoring.

    Gorman will happen.

  44. #244
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,696

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Channing View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by raz0469 View Post

    So the argument is either:

    a) Do Gorman, get Federal and Provincial funding to the tune of $200 million.
    b) Don't do Gorman, and don't get any of that funding.
    b) Please. Don't waste our money.

    And this is no way related to the overpasses on AHD or the 23rd Ave. Interchange. At least not yet.

    If we plan our developments better, we won't need a station at Gorman until we have a TOD finished at Stadium, Bellvedere and we fix what we have at Clareview. We may never need a station at Gorman. (Not to say that the LRT won't extend that way, we just won't need a station till Fort Saskatchewan.)
    That's fine, I can respect that if you choose B. The point I'm making is just that: we only have those two choices in this particular instance.

    Grish, you can gripe all you want about poor planning and I will probably agree with most of what you have to say. But in regards to Gorman and this particular funding, again, we have the two choices I listed. Do you agree with Channing that we should NOT take the funding at all, as we don't have any other eligible projects at this time?

  45. #245
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Iqaluit, Nunavut
    Posts
    2,135

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    I'm done rehashing the same points that your are deliberately ignoring.
    I feel the same way about you ignoring my points. That's why I've tried to let others say the same thing in different ways.

  46. #246
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    you're right. All those people will go to fill our downtown (replace parking lots with high rises), fill the Quarters (hellp 95 ave stop!), fill the land currently occupied by the downtown airport, fill Century Park and other new high density developments, fill future infill development along Stoney Plain Road, areas along 97 street, etc, etc, of and a few will also move into St. Albert, S. Park, Fort Sask, Devon, Spruce Grove etc, etc, etc... And if Clareview is FULL, FULL, FULL, then it is going to continue to be FULL, FULL, FULL with an addition of another stop "upstream". The question is why it is full and how do we deal with it. More parking needed? Why not build more parking or provide better public transit? Trains are over crowded? Have more cars. If that will not help, then a new stop bringing even more people will definitely not help.

  47. #247
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,696

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grish View Post
    you're right. All those people will go to fill our downtown (replace parking lots with high rises), fill the Quarters (hellp 95 ave stop!), fill the land currently occupied by the downtown airport, fill Century Park and other new high density developments, fill future infill development along Stoney Plain Road, areas along 97 street, etc, etc, of and a few will also move into St. Albert, S. Park, Fort Sask, Devon, Spruce Grove etc, etc, etc... And if Clareview is FULL, FULL, FULL, then it is going to continue to be FULL, FULL, FULL with an addition of another stop "upstream". The question is why it is full and how do we deal with it. More parking needed? Why not build more parking or provide better public transit? Trains are over crowded? Have more cars. If that will not help, then a new stop bringing even more people will definitely not help.
    Again though, what does any of that have to do with the funding that is available right now to do the Gorman line? As said funding will NOT be available for ther other things you mention due to them not being "shovel ready."

  48. #248
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    raz, there is always an option to go back and say to the government:

    I know you were funding this stop, but we now think that it is a better use of the money to build a stop at, say 95 ave, and improve access to park and ride. This will serve more of your constituents. What do you think, dear federal government?

    I doubt they would dare to pull the funding completely. The alternative is the status quo. Not trying is bad.

  49. #249
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    do I have to turn some sort of a switch before people realize that my argument has to do with listing Gorman as a priority over other shovel-ready projects? where is that secret button...? is this it?

  50. #250

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grish View Post
    do I have to turn some sort of a switch before people realize that my argument has to do with listing Gorman as a priority over other shovel-ready projects?
    Show me the links for these shovel ready projects.

  51. #251
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,696

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grish View Post
    do I have to turn some sort of a switch before people realize that my argument has to do with listing Gorman as a priority over other shovel-ready projects? where is that secret button...? is this it?
    You keep saying that there are other ones, but that is NOT the case. Shovel ready means that engineering and design are done, and all that is really required is tendering and awarding the projects (which takes a couple weeks), and then work can begin immediately. The very point of a stimulus package. All the other things you talk about ARE NOT SHOVEL READY.

  52. #252
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,895

    Default

    Hmmmm, so they other 3 station suggestions as opposed to Gorman are on the table with the city of Edmonton in the planning dept? Could someone please direct me to the city of edmonton link (not C2E link) that is showing a 95 ave station plan or the plan for the station between southgate and century park or the kinsmen station. I thought I had looked through every link on the LRT website.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  53. #253

    Default

    ^The point is that a whole ton of time has been wasted developing a sprawl line ahead of what are much better options that would have required less planning effort not more. The argument that this line must be built because it is shovel ready is totally bogus - there is no reason to throw good money after bad, when for minimal effort, good money could be thrown after OK.

  54. #254
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    the point is once again why the city chose to develop and design plans for Gorman when they could have developed and designed plans for other stops along the line. why?

  55. #255

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    ^The point is that a whole ton of time has been wasted developing a sprawl line ahead of what are much better options that would have required less planning effort not more. The argument that this line must be built because it is shovel ready is totally bogus - there is no reason to throw good money after bad, when for minimal effort, good money could be thrown after OK.
    I agree that the NAIT line would be a better investment but unfortunately they only just finalized the alignment and station locations. They have only just discussed what the stations will look like through those workshops. They still need to meet with the Edmonton Arts Council to discuss station art, go back to the Edmonton Design Review Committee with design revisions, and acquire property. While more important than Gorman, NAIT is far from shovel ready.

    http://www.edmonton.ca/transportatio...Spring2009.pdf
    Last edited by deedub35; 06-05-2009 at 03:18 PM.

  56. #256

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grish View Post
    the point is once again why the city chose to develop and design plans for Gorman when they could have developed and designed plans for other stops along the line. why?
    But this isn't the point Grish!

    You wanted to know why the city prioritized Gorman over other LRT projects. The city is working on these projects in order on their website - NLRT, WLRT, SELRT, NELRT, SLRT, NWLRT, YEGLRT, ELRT.

    http://www.edmonton.ca/lrt-projects.aspx

    These hypothetical stations are not current projects!

    The city chose NELRT because it is shovel ready. They could have chosen SLRT. Now that is a good question as to why it wasn't prioritized. All the other ones are still conceptual.

  57. #257
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Iqaluit, Nunavut
    Posts
    2,135

    Default

    Who we should be angry with then is the Federal government for requiring this to be shovel ready only, and for the local government for not being ready with any GOOD choices.

    I still say we don't take the money and build a line to nowhere though.

  58. #258

    Default

    ^In fairness, it is not the Federal or Provincial Governments fault, that Edmonton City has proven totally incompetent at putting together a multi year plan for funding. I was writing more than a year ago that they should quickly make some final decisions, put out to P3 and ask for government funding. There has been no sense of urgency or priority in City Hall (although per Kim's comments in the Sun article I linked, seems some Councilors understand how pointless this line is). Anyone with half a brain could see this coming, in terms of having something valuable ready to go at the drop of a hat.
    Last edited by moahunter; 06-05-2009 at 03:34 PM.

  59. #259

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Channing View Post
    Who we should be angry with then is the Federal government for requiring this to be shovel ready only, and for the local government for not being ready with any GOOD choices.
    The whole idea of this iniative is to spur the economy by getting things moving. You should be thanking the AB and CAN government.

    Don't forget the NIMBY's that are stalling the planning.

    I agree with being angry with the city somewhat. But with their delays I sense they are looking at the whole picture now - a system for the entire city - not piecemeal.

    Quote Originally Posted by Channing View Post
    I still say we don't take the money and build a line to nowhere though.
    This is where we will never agree.

  60. #260
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Ozerna, North Edmonton
    Posts
    8,961

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Channing View Post
    Who we should be angry with then is the Federal government for requiring this to be shovel ready only, and for the local government for not being ready with any GOOD choices.

    I still say we don't take the money and build a line to nowhere though.
    The Gorman station will be well used by the overflow of Clareview users and with new users in the area. The catchment area for Gorman is actually very large if you consider people that use it are from Clareview, Brintnell, Holik-Kenyon, McLoed Park, Cherrygrove, Ozerna, Schonsee, etc.

    I am sure everyone here rather see the NLRT get the money first but it is a moot point as this money is a "make work" project to stimulate the economy NOW. This money is not for 3 years down the line when the NLRT is finalized and ready to go. You wouldn't think the phrase "Shovel Ready" would be so difficult to comprehend.

  61. #261

    Default

    Not to forget I said I wouldn't be adding in more on this thread (cause that's exactly what I'm doing now) but part of the plan for Gorman is to have shuttle buses pick up and drop of workers from the all the surrounding industrial plants. Clareview doesn't have room to do this, and it is pretty far off where the Henday is anyways. Imagine how many cars will be taken off the road with this.

  62. #262
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Folsom, CA
    Posts
    501

    Default

    In terms of shovel ready, preliminary engineering is supposedly further advanced on the NAIT line than on NELRT. Per http://webdocs.edmonton.ca/occtopusd...2008TD9714.doc

    Northeast LRT: Preliminary engineering for this extension is scheduled to be completed by the fall of 2009.

    NLRT: Preliminary engineering is underway and is expected to be complete by June 2009.
    Based on available information, none of the proposed LRT routes have engineering drawings ready to go. Detailed engineering needs to be done for all of them.

    However, why the Gorman extension was chosen probably includes the following reasons:
    1. The price tag fits the bill literally, i.e. price tag for this extensions was estimated at 190M 2008 dollars. The SLRT extension to Heritage valley is estimated at 630M in 2008 dollars.
    2. Detailed engineering can probably be completed sooner NLRT, because the extension is relatively simple (plain station design, an available right of way with few obstructions such as roads and buildings, no NIMBYs)
    3. The next best candidate (NLRT) will take longer to complete (not within the time-frame of this funding) and requires a much higher level of funding


    Regardless of the above points, I agree with Channing and others that this is probably the lowest priority and least valuable LRT extension currently under study, for reasons already discussed in this thread.

    There is no such thing as "free money". These tax dollars have to be collected from someone, at some point. The attitude of "let's get as much of it as we can, because it maximizes our benefit" (i.e. otherwise other regions would grab this cash) appears to me an example of tragedy of the commons
    If every other region would spend their money on an extension like this, I would say that this stimulus money is a poor allocation tax dollars in terms of public benefit from investment. If other cities have better plans for their public transit infrastructure, I would say it would be better to allocate these dollars to more worthwhile projects in other regions.

    Ultimately, I suppose both the City of Edmonton and Federal Government are partly to blame for the poor allocation of tax dollars. The Federal Government should not have had the strict completion time requirements on their projects. Would it really matter in terms of economic stimulus if the project is not completed within the time frame? I think as long as the money is spent on construction during the the 2009-2011 window, the stimulus money is being used for what it is intended for, even if the project is not finished during that time-frame.
    As for the the city, Edmonton should have had the plans for other lines further advanced than their current state. For me, the delays and stalling on WLRT route planning are becoming exceedingly aggravating and I hope that by the end of 2009 we really do have solid plans in place for our overall network (as will be discussed during the June 2 hearing and May 13 information sessions)

  63. #263

    Default

    OMG.. Gorman is the only other approved extension.. It's the only thing that qualifies for the grant and meets the amount the grant will cover. It also feeds into the whole green image the gov't wants to hit on.

    further to this.. Edmonton is plannig for an influx of 400,000 people by 2043. Century TOD will house 5000 people. If that is the average for a TOD that means we need. 80 of these Massive projects built.

    Wrap yopur head around that.. 80! 80 Herritage mall sites. this is also assuming all sites hold 5000 which is a large numer. If the Average turns out to be closer to 3000, thats 133 sites.

    Get with it guys.. Look at google maps.. Housing is already knockin on Gorman's door and so is the Ring Road. This is a good thing!

    P.S. Plannign stages for the Greater Edmonton Area LRT have started to be discussed. This leg HAD to happen. Getting the line out to FOrt Sask is Just as important as the INternational, St Albert and Shr WD park, because it will promote the building of the refineries. It will also show Edmonton is commited to undertaking what is required to build and support large ecconomic projects.

    Not everything is about Edmonton Edmonton Edmonton. What is good for the regions is also good for the city.
    Last edited by edmonton daily photo; 06-05-2009 at 08:17 PM.

  64. #264
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deedub35 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by grish View Post
    the point is once again why the city chose to develop and design plans for Gorman when they could have developed and designed plans for other stops along the line. why?
    But this isn't the point Grish!

    You wanted to know why the city prioritized Gorman over other LRT projects.
    i did? which of my question led you to believe that?

  65. #265
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,895

    Default

    So why was Clareview station built, especially cause it was in an empty field way back when. It was probably built with the future in mind, that eventually the city would devellop around the station. Well isn't that what the Gorman site is doing? Except this time around the city has a vision on what they would like develloped around the station. One other point that has to be clarified. We all have been talking about the Gorman station and that it will cost approx 300M to build. Before this debate continues I would like to know how much will this proposed extension cost. Just in case we've forgotten the 300M is for the line extension, station upgrades and park n ride upgrades. Once we do the station upgrades and the park n rides how much money do we have left to work with? Now if Gorman is such a problem with some people, as we have seen in this thread, would the same amount of money be enough to instead complete tunnelling and open the first NLRT station at MacEwan?
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  66. #266

    Default

    Your earlier post ...
    Quote Originally Posted by grish View Post
    Your scribble does not address the issue of why it was so important to put Gorman in the list of shovel-ready projects now.

  67. #267
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    The thing to remember about Gorman is that while the immediate neighbourhood is an empty field, there are neighbourhoods directly east and west that are built up. They are typical low density suburbs, but they will use LRT, connecting via bus and P&R. They will provide some local traffic at the new station so that any TOD will have some services sooner than later. All the areas close enough to the station that they must be denser and more walkable are yet undeveloped.

    As long as the City doesn't pull a clairview and let just anything get built just becasue it's a slow year this should turn out OK.

    And I agree with everyone who says we should preserve prime farmland and reduce sprawl, but I think since the real damaging infrastructure (the Henday) is a sure thing it makes sense that the TUC should be the urban growth boundary in this sector.

  68. #268
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    [QUOTE=Edmonton PRT;189248]
    Quote Originally Posted by Glenco View Post

    Right, with your reasoning we need to make transit work with a massive car park. Parking lots are a waste of space and force nearby residents to walk further across these wastelands to get to transit. Pave over prime farmland with asphalt.

    [/LIST]
    First off it was not my reasoning it came from Ed Gibbons on CBC radio.
    Not every LRT station has to be a TOD. We are not serving the residents of Fruitville here we are trying to serve the industrial complex that will stretch over a vast area NE of here.
    The ultimate goal is to have a park and ride outside AHD when demand warrants it. This could be a major transportation hub.
    In the mean time Gorman can serve this function on a smaller scale. The intention is to have high density there as well. Maybe parking lot one side and residence on the other who knows?
    With Diversified making most of it's pick-ups at this point maybe some of the trades will want to live close to one of the LRT stations on the line. Oh I don't know maybe at Stadium or CP, that person can take the train to meet the bus, the spouse can take the train to work downtown or at one of the hospitals and the kids can go to college or the univ. on the LRT. That could work.
    Last edited by Glenco; 06-05-2009 at 11:50 PM.

  69. #269

    Default Train to nowhere

    Quote Originally Posted by raz0469 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by grish View Post
    do I have to turn some sort of a switch before people realize that my argument has to do with listing Gorman as a priority over other shovel-ready projects? where is that secret button...? is this it?
    You keep saying that there are other ones, but that is NOT the case. Shovel ready means that engineering and design are done, and all that is really required is tendering and awarding the projects (which takes a couple weeks), and then work can begin immediately. The very point of a stimulus package. All the other things you talk about ARE NOT SHOVEL READY.

    I hate the term Shovel Ready as it really means that we should drop any carefully laid out plans and panic build something, anything, just to get money. Doesn't matter if we won't use it for 10 years, it will make the developers and contractors happy.

    Spend
    Hurriedly
    On a
    Very
    Expensive
    LRT

    Route,
    Even-though
    Alternates
    Delayed
    Years


    Gorman is NOT shovel ready. A line on a map is not a plan. The engineering has not been done. The costing is only an estimate and even the Transportation Manager, Boutilier admits, "While the potential boost in ridership from opening Gorman station hasn't been studied".

    Why do we support a project that fits some Ottawa bureaucrats "funding formula" and is a political tool rather than funding for improved transit in the city's mature neighbourhoods.

    I attended the East Jasper Hearings and there were similar lines for a 95th street LRT station to provide transit improvements for the Quarters. This is a major city initiative to improve our downtown, build a TOD, increase density. I would fully support a station at 95th street but not Gorman

    Just because you are caught flat footed with the opportunity to get Federal monies, it is irresponsible to spend hundreds of millions on a very expensive line to nowhere when there are so many other needs in this city. With a huge infrastructure deficit, crumbling roads and sidewalks, outdated sewer lines, watermains that are past their design life; any of which would help the local economy in providing jobs.

    How many times have we heard of someone winning the lottery and end up blowing millions and end up broke. Just because it is a gift, you should still invest in your city wisely.

    Read about a similar project
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridge_to_Nowhere_(Alaska))
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  70. #270
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deedub35 View Post
    Your earlier post ...
    Quote Originally Posted by grish View Post
    Your scribble does not address the issue of why it was so important to put Gorman in the list of shovel-ready projects now.
    so, basically, you have not read a single word I have written, but feel compelled to argue with me anyways.

  71. #271

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grish View Post
    so, basically, you have not read a single word I have written, but feel compelled to argue with me anyways.
    so, basically, you have not read a single word I have written, but feel compelled to argue with me anyways.

    so where are the links to these other shovel ready projects you mentioned earlier?

    or are you trying to let it die because there aren't any?

  72. #272

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Gorman is NOT shovel ready. A line on a map is not a plan. The engineering has not been done.
    The NELRT document is more than a line on a map. Some engineering has been done to create this plan - it shows grading, track radii, etc. It doesn't have all the engineering done - showing caternary pole locations, signal placement, etc.

    http://www.edmonton.ca/transportatio...ensionplan.pdf

    The NLRT document is a line on a map.

    http://www.edmonton.ca/transportation/NLRT_Route.pdf

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Just because you are caught flat footed with the opportunity to get Federal monies, it is irresponsible to spend hundreds of millions on a very expensive line to nowhere when there are so many other needs in this city. With a huge infrastructure deficit, crumbling roads and sidewalks, outdated sewer lines, watermains that are past their design life; any of which would help the local economy in providing jobs.
    I don't think anyone here disagrees that money could be better spent on other projects. But do they qualify for funding? Government money is being offered for specific projects. They aren't giving money so that the city can do whatever it wants with it.

  73. #273
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    actually, I would like to see the engineering etc done on Gorman prior to it being included in the request for funding from the feds, not to mention engineering reports, sketches and projected costs for Gorman now as well as all the engineering, sketches etc for all the stop modififcations to 5 car capacity.

    My question has always been: Why did Gorman get priority over, say, an improvement of the park and ride facility at Clareview, or additional stops at 95 ave, Kinsmen, south between Southgate and Century Park?

    To the list of other shovel ready projects I would also like to add a new one--Ellesrlie. There is already a park and ride going there and it brings us closer to the airport, so why did Gorman get this "shovel ready" imaginary status and a request for federal funding while Ellerslie, which is actually being "shoveled" did not. (http://www.edmonton.ca/transportatio...nningstudy.pdf)
    Last edited by grish; 07-05-2009 at 08:55 AM.

  74. #274
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    looking at http://www.edmonton.ca/transportatio...ensionplan.pdf,

    the actual station does not appear on the plan. so, unless there are other documents available, saying that Gorman is already engineered and planned while a stop at, say 95 ave is not engineered or planned is gross misrepresentation of the reality.

    If stations can be built and modified without detailed, advance engineering, and both north east and south LRT lines have been planned out, I repeat my original question:

    What makes Gorman a priority over such projects as:

    1. Building a parkade at clareview
    2. Building a few stops along the existing LRT line (most notably one at 95 avenue)
    3. Extending LRT south bringing it closer to the airport

    I am looking for an explanation. Can someone please provide one that does not include words "hey, it's free money" or "shovel-ready"? Neither one of these empty statements actually answer the question.

  75. #275

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grish View Post
    My question has always been: Why did Gorman get priority over, say, an improvement of the park and ride facility at Clareview, or additional stops at 95 ave, Kinsmen, south between Southgate and Century Park?
    Because these are GWL (Grish Wish List) projects and not COE (City Of Edmonton) projects.

    Quote Originally Posted by grish View Post
    To the list of other shovel ready projects I would also like to add a new one--Ellesrlie. There is already a park and ride going there and it brings us closer to the airport, so why did Gorman get this "shovel ready" imaginary status and a request for federal funding while Ellerslie, which is actually being "shoveled" did not.
    I think this is being funded by this grant.

    Excerpt from ... Government News Release

    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

    http://alberta.ca/acn/200904/25830F7...EC42C048C.html

  76. #276
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    /\ that is park n ride, not LRT expansion.

    this:
    Because these are GWL (Grish Wish List) projects and not COE (City Of Edmonton) projects.
    does not answer the question why does CoE have Gorman as a priority over other projects. You are right, GWL is my wish list. If I search on here, I will find some support for 95 ave stop and maybe a few votes for the other two and several more for the parkade. At what point did CoE decide that Gorman was higher priority? Did they consult with other grishs' out there? This bring me to the question I have been asking:

    Why did Gorman get priority over, say, an improvement of the park and ride facility at Clareview, or additional stops at 95 ave, Kinsmen, south between Southgate and Century Park?

    Now that we have established what the question is, lets hear a proper answer.

  77. #277

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grish View Post
    the actual station does not appear on the plan. so, unless there are other documents available, saying that Gorman is already engineered and planned while a stop at, say 95 ave is not engineered or planned is gross misrepresentation of the reality.
    If we are looking at the same document ...

    http://www.edmonton.ca/transportatio...ensionplan.pdf

    There is a dark blue rectangle which indicates the location of the "proposed gorman station".

    I cannot say for sure but I imagine that the COE website does NOT have every document, diagram, or plan that the transportation department has linked for public viewing. I wish that they did because I love looking at stuff like that. We need to get to know someone on the inside.

    Quote Originally Posted by grish View Post
    If stations can be built and modified without detailed, advance engineering, and both north east and south LRT lines have been planned out, I repeat my original question:
    Come on grish, you of all people know that a statement like this is speculation at best.

    Quote Originally Posted by grish View Post
    I am looking for an explanation. Can someone please provide one that does not include words "hey, it's free money" or "shovel-ready"? Neither one of these empty statements actually answer the question.
    Is there really anyone on this forum or SSP that can truly give you a definitive answer???? Who on this forum or SSP works in the transportation department? As my wife asks me last night before she wants a piece of me - "get off those nerd forums and come to bed"!

  78. #278
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    I cannot say for sure but I imagine that the COE website does NOT have every document, diagram, or plan that the transportation department has linked for public viewing. I wish that they did because I love looking at stuff like that. We need to get to know someone on the inside.
    ("i cannot say for sure but I imagine" is a very obvious speculation. As long as we agree to speculate...)

    that's the problem. this is public facility and it does not require having details hidden from the public. In fact, I cannot remember any other project done by the city of which the plans were not available. If it is just a blue box, my speculation that no concrete plans are in place is more plausible than yours that they exist, but hidden.

  79. #279

    Default

    Are you reading things carefully?

    You asked ...
    Quote Originally Posted by grish
    To the list of other shovel ready projects I would also like to add a new one--Ellesrlie. There is already a park and ride going there and it brings us closer to the airport, so why did Gorman get this "shovel ready" imaginary status and a request for federal funding while Ellerslie, which is actually being "shoveled" did not.
    I replied ...
    Quote Originally Posted by deedub35
    I think this is being funded by this grant.
    These projects include:
    Heritage Valley Neighbourhood Park & Ride
    And you replied ...
    Quote Originally Posted by grish
    /\ that is park n ride, not LRT expansion.
    What's up here?!?!?!

    Quote Originally Posted by grish
    Why did Gorman get priority over, say, an improvement of the park and ride facility at Clareview, or additional stops at 95 ave, Kinsmen, south between Southgate and Century Park?
    Asked and answered.

    The LRT projects the city is working on are on the following link ...

    http://www.edmonton.ca/transportatio...-projects.aspx

  80. #280

    Default

    -How do you improve parking conditions at Clareview? Theres no more room. You can only go up. Going up will cost 40 to 60K per parking stall. Highly unreasonable.

    -When SLRT was proposed, there was hardly any details on the city website or the edmontonslrt.com website until well after the project started.

  81. #281

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grish
    If it is just a blue box, my speculation that no concrete plans are in place is more plausible than yours that they exist, but hidden.
    Regardless of which of our speculations are more plausible they are both not verified fact. Is there anything under FOIP where we can get these documents (if they exist)?

  82. #282
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Folsom, CA
    Posts
    501

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deedub35 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by grish
    If it is just a blue box, my speculation that no concrete plans are in place is more plausible than yours that they exist, but hidden.
    Regardless of which of our speculations are more plausible they are both not verified fact. Is there anything under FOIP where we can get these documents (if they exist)?
    The best information available is from Nov. 2008:

    In terms of shovel ready, preliminary engineering is supposedly further advanced on the NAIT line than on NELRT. Per http://webdocs.edmonton.ca/occtopusd...2008TD9714.doc

    Northeast LRT: Preliminary engineering for this extension is scheduled to be completed by the fall of 2009.

    NLRT: Preliminary engineering is underway and is expected to be complete by June 2009.
    Presumably NELRT engineering efforts will now be prioritized over NLRT due to availability of funding for NELRT and the short time line for this project.

  83. #283
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deedub35 View Post
    Are you reading things carefully?

    You asked ...
    Quote Originally Posted by grish
    To the list of other shovel ready projects I would also like to add a new one--Ellesrlie. There is already a park and ride going there and it brings us closer to the airport, so why did Gorman get this "shovel ready" imaginary status and a request for federal funding while Ellerslie, which is actually being "shoveled" did not.
    I replied ...
    Quote Originally Posted by deedub35
    I think this is being funded by this grant.
    These projects include:
    Heritage Valley Neighbourhood Park & Ride
    And you replied ...
    Quote Originally Posted by grish
    /\ that is park n ride, not LRT expansion.
    Should I really go through an explanation of the differences between an LRT line and a park and ride for an LRT line?

    The funds are available for a park n ride in the south. my question is then why not build the whole line that's already as designed and as "shovel ready" as Gorman?

    so, are you reading things carefully?

  84. #284

    Default

    THe Gorman Line.. Is currently the ONLY approved extension in the LRT masterplan. There are NO other lines to fund at this momment, and if somone rebuttles "hurry up and approve 87 ave route" I will scream. I will scream because you are thinking that your personal opinion is fact and is what is best for the city.

    To further this along 100 Millon is set aside for a whole list of projects.. What is the total cost of running this line? JUST this line. It will be the biggest bang for our buck.

    I personally don't agree with a stop between Century and Sothgate. I want to see the LRT move large distances with no stopping. I want it to be Rapid, not a milk run.

    this line is getting built.. be it now or later. Any building we can do NOW while labour/rescources are cheaper is a bonus.

    Everyone fails to reconize that this station is going to be steps away from the ring road. It is going to be a huge hub and the FIRST Ring road LRT connection point. Read the Mayors speech to the city, get your mind off the now and the status quo. Think Future, plan for that!. The here and now will look after itself, we are all currently getting around the city and to work. Stop reacting and be proactive. The Lrt will go to Nait, it will go to Millwoods, it will go to west Ed, but NONE of these lines are approved. These lines will cost BILLIONs of dollars. I wil not condone making rash and hurried choices for a pultry 100 million in federal money.

    Gorman is a smart choice in that it gets people working now and it can get started quickly. Stop looking at what you want to see and start looking at the list of approved and planned projects. Start looking at the the reality that Metro Edmonton is putting to gether a region LRT plan that will go outside our city boarders, start looking at the fact that we need to plan for a population increase of 70% in 30-40 years. ANY money spent on the LRT is money well spent.

    Stop being so nit picky and short sighted. I feel like i am in Calgary,
    Last edited by edmonton daily photo; 07-05-2009 at 10:17 AM.

  85. #285

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grish
    To the list of other shovel ready projects I would also like to add a new one--Ellesrlie. There is already a park and ride going there and it brings us closer to the airport, so why did Gorman get this "shovel ready" imaginary status and a request for federal funding while Ellerslie, which is actually being "shoveled" did not.
    Quote Originally Posted by grish
    Should I really go through an explanation of the differences between an LRT line and a park and ride for an LRT line?

    The funds are available for a park n ride in the south. my question is then why not build the whole line that's already as designed and as "shovel ready" as Gorman?

    so, are you reading things carefully?
    I have no problem reading. You have problems with clarity. I understand your meaning now. You are refering to SLRT. You should have wrote that and not Ellerslie. The only thing at Ellerslie is a park and ride lot. And I agree with your question ... why is this not funded?

    http://www.edmonton.ca/lrt-projects.aspx

  86. #286
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    /\ so, when people said "Gorman" did you think they were talking about just the stop without a set of rail tracks going there? please...

  87. #287

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grish
    /\ so, when people said "Gorman" did you think they were talking about just the stop without a set of rail tracks going there? please...
    Re-read your original post! When you make reference to Ellerslie being actually shoveled some people would think you are talking about the park and ride.

    Quote Originally Posted by grish
    To the list of other shovel ready projects I would also like to add a new one--Ellesrlie. There is already a park and ride going there and it brings us closer to the airport, so why did Gorman get this "shovel ready" imaginary status and a request for federal funding while Ellerslie, which is actually being "shoveled" did not.

  88. #288
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    so, does that mean we are talking about a park and ride in gorman and not the LRT track? right...

    besides, the link I have supplied with that post clearly shows an LRT planning for the LRT line. I don't see why you have to make such a big deal about misunderstanding my post and why you feel it so important to pass the blame. it's ok to make mistakes. lets move on.

  89. #289
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    THe Gorman Line.. Is currently the ONLY approved extension in the LRT masterplan. There are NO other lines to fund at this momment, and if somone rebuttles "hurry up and approve 87 ave route" I will scream. I will scream because you are thinking that your personal opinion is fact and is what is best for the city.

    To further this along 100 Millon is set aside for a whole list of projects.. What is the total cost of running this line? JUST this line. It will be the biggest bang for our buck.

    I personally don't agree with a stop between Century and Sothgate. I want to see the LRT move large distances with no stopping. I want it to be Rapid, not a milk run.

    this line is getting built.. be it now or later. Any building we can do NOW while labour/rescources are cheaper is a bonus.

    Everyone fails to reconize that this station is going to be steps away from the ring road. It is going to be a huge hub and the FIRST Ring road LRT connection point. Read the Mayors speech to the city, get your mind off the now and the status quo. Think Future, plan for that!. The here and now will look after itself, we are all currently getting around the city and to work. Stop reacting and be proactive. The Lrt will go to Nait, it will go to Millwoods, it will go to west Ed, but NONE of these lines are approved. These lines will cost BILLIONs of dollars. I wil not condone making rash and hurried choices for a pultry 100 million in federal money.

    Gorman is a smart choice in that it gets people working now and it can get started quickly. Stop looking at what you want to see and start looking at the list of approved and planned projects. Start looking at the the reality that Metro Edmonton is putting to gether a region LRT plan that will go outside our city boarders, start looking at the fact that we need to plan for a population increase of 70% in 30-40 years. ANY money spent on the LRT is money well spent.

    Stop being so nit picky and short sighted. I feel like i am in Calgary,
    so, why is the LRT to Gorman more important than LRT to Ellerslie as an example? Both are equally designed etc and equally shovel-ready.

  90. #290

    Default

    who says its more important? Nobody.

    Your missing key words: Shovel ready. Approved. Only.

    an extension to Heritage valley requires much more engineering and design. There will need to be multiple bridges (over the henday, over the blackmud creek...). Then there is slope design to get over the ravine...

    Gorman is flat land. The only really thing it has to encounter is a few roads.

  91. #291
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Folsom, CA
    Posts
    501

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    who says its more important? Nobody.

    Your missing key words: Shovel ready. Approved. Only.

    an extension to Heritage valley requires much more engineering and design. There will need to be multiple bridges (over the henday, over the blackmud creek...). Then there is slope design to get over the ravine...

    Gorman is flat land. The only really thing it has to encounter is a few roads.
    Indeed the main reason for approving Gorman and directing funding for this extension appears to be that it is easy to build on short notice and has just the right price tag.

  92. #292

    Default

    ^ plus, it's needed to relieve stress off of Clareview. It's needed as well, as Gorman will be developed for all the workers in the north east industrial areas of the Edmonton Region.

  93. #293

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grish View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    THe Gorman Line.. Is currently the ONLY approved extension in the LRT masterplan. There are NO other lines to fund at this momment, and if somone rebuttles "hurry up and approve 87 ave route" I will scream. I will scream because you are thinking that your personal opinion is fact and is what is best for the city.

    To further this along 100 Millon is set aside for a whole list of projects.. What is the total cost of running this line? JUST this line. It will be the biggest bang for our buck.

    I personally don't agree with a stop between Century and Sothgate. I want to see the LRT move large distances with no stopping. I want it to be Rapid, not a milk run.

    this line is getting built.. be it now or later. Any building we can do NOW while labour/rescources are cheaper is a bonus.

    Everyone fails to reconize that this station is going to be steps away from the ring road. It is going to be a huge hub and the FIRST Ring road LRT connection point. Read the Mayors speech to the city, get your mind off the now and the status quo. Think Future, plan for that!. The here and now will look after itself, we are all currently getting around the city and to work. Stop reacting and be proactive. The Lrt will go to Nait, it will go to Millwoods, it will go to west Ed, but NONE of these lines are approved. These lines will cost BILLIONs of dollars. I wil not condone making rash and hurried choices for a pultry 100 million in federal money.

    Gorman is a smart choice in that it gets people working now and it can get started quickly. Stop looking at what you want to see and start looking at the list of approved and planned projects. Start looking at the the reality that Metro Edmonton is putting to gether a region LRT plan that will go outside our city boarders, start looking at the fact that we need to plan for a population increase of 70% in 30-40 years. ANY money spent on the LRT is money well spent.

    Stop being so nit picky and short sighted. I feel like i am in Calgary,
    so, why is the LRT to Gorman more important than LRT to Ellerslie as an example? Both are equally designed etc and equally shovel-ready.
    Really it's shovel ready? It's not even been approved. It's still in study.

  94. #294

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Leendert View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    who says its more important? Nobody.

    Your missing key words: Shovel ready. Approved. Only.

    an extension to Heritage valley requires much more engineering and design. There will need to be multiple bridges (over the henday, over the blackmud creek...). Then there is slope design to get over the ravine...

    Gorman is flat land. The only really thing it has to encounter is a few roads.
    Indeed the main reason for approving Gorman and directing funding for this extension appears to be that it is easy to build on short notice and has just the right price tag.
    So who cares.. don't be so miopic. It's an neccesary peice to the puzzle. THere is a diffrence between what you personally want to see and what needs to be done.

  95. #295
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Iqaluit, Nunavut
    Posts
    2,135

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    -How do you improve parking conditions at Clareview? Theres no more room. You can only go up. Going up will cost 40 to 60K per parking stall. Highly unreasonable.
    Going up is the only sustainable solution (for parking, better if there is no need for parking)

  96. #296
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    The actual sustainable solution is to charge to manage demand. Parkng stalls should not cost twice as much as the cars that occupy them.

  97. #297
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    parking should also not be free...

  98. #298

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post

    Gorman is flat land. The only really thing it has to encounter is a few roads.
    Then why does it cost soo,ooo,ooo.oo much to build especially with an economic slowdown?

  99. #299

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    ^ plus, it's needed to relieve stress off of Clareview. It's needed as well, as Gorman will be developed for all the workers in the north east industrial areas of the Edmonton Region.
    Can you explain? In the mornings I see empty LRT cars going to the NE. Why are not workers taking LRT. If the Station goes to Gorman, will the workers use LRT? There is nothing there. If if goes to Fort Sask they may but most of the plants are spread out complexes that are miles away from any LRT route to the Fort.

    How would they get to their work especially on night shifts?

  100. #300
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post

    Gorman is flat land. The only really thing it has to encounter is a few roads.
    Then why does it cost soo,ooo,ooo.oo much to build especially with an economic slowdown?
    Agreed. even accounting for $68m worth of vehicles ($4m each and post SLRT vehicles/km) it's way more than it should cost to build a sub-base and lay rail. Maybe they decided they need ballast curbs in an active freight ROW.

Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 1234567 ... 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
  •