Page 2 of 30 FirstFirst 12345612 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 200 of 2961

Thread: South LRT | Health Sciences to Century Park | Completed

  1. #101

    Default

    I love the sound of the potential of the NLRT starting in '09! Music to my ears. (even if it doesn't have weight... it still sounds nice)
    Shameless Urbanophile

  2. #102
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,688

    Default Slrt

    Now I know there are a number of threads on here about SLRT, WLRT, NLRT, etc... but I thought I would start a new thread that a bit more specific. Before I start, I'm not advocating to forget about the WLRT and NLRT lines to work on other projects. All I want thoughts on a seperate LRT line that could be built in south Edmonton.

    I was out on my sunday drive this last weekend and just so happened to travel along the future SLRT line from Health Sciences all the way to the future century park. When I got to century park I thought to myself, "How could LRT ridership be increased when it gets to century park. As I drove west on 23rd I thought how about an east/west line that would just be on the south side but would use century park station as a hub to get people downtown.

    When I get a map I'll draw it out but for now here is my proposal for a south Edmonton LRT line. These are the stations going from West to East.

    - Windermere
    - Mcgrath (23rd & rabbit hill road)
    - Saddleback
    - Century Park
    - South Edmonton Common
    - Go Center
    - McEwan/Millwoods Rec Center
    - Millwoods town Center/Grey Nuns Hospital

    This LRT line would service lots of people to lots of important locations and would help bring many more people to the main LRT line. Additionally another few stops could be added to that line or a new line added to South SEC and the future NAIT Klein Campus. As a matter of fact that other line could be the LRT line that heads to Nisku, Edm International Airport and Leduc.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  3. #103

    Default

    I dont see a line running west from Century Park.

    I do see (and theres plans already) for it to run east along 23 ave.



    But I dont see it running further east the where this picture demonstrates. Cost to benefit ratio is just not there.

  4. #104
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,688

    Default

    Well the city has some plans on the board as you illustrated but considereing that plan was approved in 2004 I don't think it properly takes into account Windermere which probably wasnt even an idea at the time and the area of Mcgrath that I mentioned was no where near as develloped then as it is now.

    As for it running further east, at this point in time I don't see it either as long as it makes it to the whole town center area and grey nuns. I think there is definitely enough people to come from Millwoods to warrant a line that way. As I said as well I believe that an LRT stop somehow to get to the Nait campus would be wise. If a line goes out that way, heading to the airport shouldn't be as difficult anymore.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  5. #105

    Default

    If the planned densities are sufficient I like the idea of a line into McGrath and Windemere - but I'm pretty sure they are not. Plus, given the relatively short distances involved a good (i.e. frequent) feeder bus service should suffice for that area.

  6. #106
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Edmonton - Blue Quill
    Posts
    3,057

    Default

    I would think if the LRT was to extend to Mill Woods the line would
    have to be a part of the 23rd Avenue / Gateway Boulvard interchange project. As for heading west to McGrath, a bridge would have to be made near Smith Crossing.

  7. #107

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmcowboy11
    Well the city has some plans on the board as you illustrated but considereing that plan was approved in 2004 I don't think it properly takes into account Windermere which probably wasnt even an idea at the time and the area of Mcgrath that I mentioned was no where near as develloped then as it is now.

    As for it running further east, at this point in time I don't see it either as long as it makes it to the whole town center area and grey nuns. I think there is definitely enough people to come from Millwoods to warrant a line that way. As I said as well I believe that an LRT stop somehow to get to the Nait campus would be wise. If a line goes out that way, heading to the airport shouldn't be as difficult anymore.
    Communities get planned much more in advance then 2-3 years. Trust me.

    I see the LRT making it to a relocated millwoods town center transit center, perhaps on the west side of the town center mall, but why does it need to go to the hospital?

    I think the current plans, as indicated in the map above, once completed, will be sufficent to serve the areas they serve. If we get a NLRT, and a WLRT, I could then see the next step would be to build the line from the SLRT towards millwoods.

    In the current location of the proposed new NAIT campus, I dont see an LRT running to it. The SLRT should continue heading South South West then head south, and back to east to go directly in to the airport, but who knows when that will ever happen. By going south from here, you are serving the medium density communities with are being developed south of AHD along 111st.

  8. #108

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mick
    If the planned densities are sufficient I like the idea of a line into McGrath and Windemere - but I'm pretty sure they are not. Plus, given the relatively short distances involved a good (i.e. frequent) feeder bus service should suffice for that area.
    Or BRT.
    Shameless Urbanophile

  9. #109
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    13,432
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    At best BRT
    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.

  10. #110
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    682

    Default

    At least High Speed Rail.

  11. #111
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    13,432
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Touché
    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.

  12. #112
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    682

    Default Council ignores pleas for LRT station; report to seek safer

    Council ignores pleas for LRT station; report to seek safer crossing for students
    Susan Ruttan, The Edmonton Journal
    Published: Wednesday, February 07, 2007
    EDMONTON - Councillors derailed calls for an Ainlay-St. Laurent station on the 111th Street LRT extension, in committee Tuesday.

    The transportation committee recommended council approve the south LRT plan as far as Century Park station on 23rd Avenue, but without an extra stop at 43rd Avenue that would cost $10 million to $15 million.

    It rejected the pleas of the Catholic school board and most southwest Edmonton communities for a station to serve the thousands of teenagers who attend Harry Ainlay and Louis St. Laurent high schools.


    View Larger Image
    Don Grimble, a member of the Southwest Area Council, addresses the transportation and public works committee about the south LRT extension on Tuesday at City Hall.
    Nor did it approve what both school boards and various community groups also asked for, a $5-million pedestrian overpass at 43rd Avenue for students who get off the bus on 111th Street and cross the busy street to get to the two high schools.

    Instead, the committee has asked for a report on ways to make students safer at the intersection, including a possible overpass or underpass.

    Bobbie Pichette, chair of the Louis St. Laurent parent council, expressed disappointment after the vote.

    "I think that it's a premature decision," she said. "I think it's a decision based on money. ... They haven't reassured parents and they haven't reassured schools."

    City staff are waiting for a consultants' safety study of the intersection. They also plan to get an international group, the American Public Safety Association, to examine the safety of pedestrian crossings throughout the LRT system.

    City administrators opposed both the overpass and the extra LRT station. They estimated a 43rd Avenue stop would get about 1,200 riders at peak hours, compared with 4,500 at the Southgate station and 3,000 at Century Park.

    The committee heard from a series of people arguing that students are already at risk crossing busy 111th Street, and will be more so if they must cross LRT tracks as well.

    "It will only be a matter of time before a serious accident occurs," said Sandra Crawford, president of the Southwest Area Council.

    Residents of Royal Gardens, the neighbourhood around the high schools, opposed the proposed station.

    Royal Gardens president Esther Link said the station would be busy only when students were coming to and from school. She said residents fear the station would become a "heated hangout" for teenagers during slow hours.

    Approval of the LRT plan by council next week will keep the $595-million project on track for completion in late 2009.

    Earlier Tuesday, some councillors expressed frustration the LRT won't be coming to their communities any time soon.

    If LRT extension goes only where the population is booming, said Coun. Ron Hayter, "we will never see it in the older areas of the city. It will always be going to the south."

  13. #113
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    City Of Champions
    Posts
    3,854

    Default

    good.

  14. #114
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    13,432
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    This is getting silly. Students already walk to Southgate and other spots. Car or not, they need to understand that their 120# body doesn't stand a chance agianst a 2000# Chevette, let alone a SUV or heaven forbid a train.

    Hey parents, wrap your kids in bubble pack, put them in a box full of styrofoam peanuts, hire armed guards to watch them 24X7, and then they might be safe some of the time.

    -OR-

    teach them to use their brains.
    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.

  15. #115
    First One is Always Free
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    51

    Default

    City council has made the right decision. The walk from the station at Southgate to the schools is not that much of a hurdle for students. And think about it - during week-ends, evenings and summer holidays the station will hardly be used! It would be a waste of resources to add another station. And, another station just makes the commute that much slower for riders.

    An over-pass may be a good solution - let's see what the experts at City Hall come up with (there are some pretty clever people working in the transportation department).

  16. #116

    Default

    The walk from Southgate to Harry Ainley and Loius St. Laurent cannot be that onerous as a lot of the students already walk the distance to and fro for lunch, breaks etc.

    This area (Duggan, Malmo, Petrolia etc.) has always been busy with students and the City over the years has made a lot of improvements to the egress. Back in the day when I was going to the U of A I passed through this area every day and in those days there was no fence, no lights etc. I saw several car versus pedestrian accidents but guess what 9/10 of them were pedestrian fault.

    An overpass would be great here but nothing will ever rid Edmonton of idiots be they drivers or pedestrians.

  17. #117

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RichardS
    Hey parents, wrap your kids in bubble pack, put them in a box full of styrofoam peanuts, hire armed guards to watch them 24X7, and then they might be safe some of the time.
    I call dibs on this new business opportunity.

  18. #118

    Default

    ^ Now how did I just know that you were going to call dibbs on this?

  19. #119

    Default Re: Council ignores pleas for LRT station; report to seek sa

    Theres definitely no need for another station here. Good on City Council for not caving on this one. If another station was to be built here, why not just have one continuous station from here to kingdom come.

    There is also hardly a need for a overhead crossing. My god, this is stupid. How many students would actually use this if built? Being that I still somewhat remember my high school days some 15 years ago, most of the mentality of students would be to take the path of least resistance, which is not up a flight or two of stairs and back down again to just cross a road.

    People in the SW need to wake up and smell reality. Cost is not even an issue in this at all.

  20. #120

    Default

    the pedestrian measures they have at the health science station are more than adequate for crossings. If they have the movable gates extending through the whole intersection, which they should probably do for left turn protection anyway, I see no problem. Will someone eventually hop the gate? You'd hope not but some teenager will do it eventually, overhead crossing or no overhead

  21. #121
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Edmonton - Blue Quill
    Posts
    3,057

    Default

    It doesn't seem to be a hardship for students who walk to Southgate over the noon hour

  22. #122
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    44,976

    Default

    thank you city....finally a good choice.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  23. #123

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by djgirl
    ^ Now how did I just know that you were going to call dibbs on this?
    Dang... am I that predictable?

  24. #124

    Default

    It's nice to see city council take a stand on what is best for the city as a whole. Good job council!

  25. #125
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,530

    Default Re: Council ignores pleas for LRT station; report to seek sa

    Quote Originally Posted by feepa
    There is also hardly a need for a overhead crossing. My god, this is stupid. How many students would actually use this if built? Being that I still somewhat remember my high school days some 15 years ago, most of the mentality of students would be to take the path of least resistance, which is not up a flight or two of stairs and back down again to just cross a road.
    Why didn't they go for an underpass, such as what's being built at the Belgravia LRT station? That seems more reasonable.

  26. #126
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    City Of Champions
    Posts
    3,854

    Default

    The kids don't use the crosswalk and lights now, why on earth would anybody think they would go up or down a flight of stairs to go over/under the track?

    Yeah, some kid will most likely get smoked by a train in the next 25 years...but IMO we shouldn't have to design our cities for the .05% of the population that is too dumb to realize that YOU+FRONT OF LRT=BAD IDEA. Chalk it up to Darwin and move on.

  27. #127

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by murman
    Quote Originally Posted by djgirl
    ^ Now how did I just know that you were going to call dibbs on this?
    Dang... am I that predictable?
    Sometimes...

  28. #128
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,688

    Default

    As most everyone else has stated, good for the city to have some backbone and not cave to the interest groups.

    As for an overpass, sure why not. But if they do that then they should completely eliminate any pedestrian crossing at street level around there. If not then forget about the overpass and lets use the money to start work on either the NLRT route to Nait or the WLRT to WEM.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  29. #129
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    edmonton
    Posts
    373

    Default

    Hard to believe the time (and doubtless cost) for Council dealing with this issue.

    Why there would be any need for a station at Ainlay is beyond me when it's a 2 block walk to Southgate.

    I think the kids are old enough to cope.

    It's this kind of meddling by groups such as those in the SW that ends up preventing this city from moving forward

  30. #130
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,688

    Default

    Hey I have an idea. Sure we can have a station at Ainlay but the school student council and the school parents advisory commitee from there and from Louis St. Laurent school have to shoulder the full bill for the station. If they can do that, then they can have the station. If they can't do that then then should shut up and let the city do it's job.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  31. #131
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    edmonton
    Posts
    373

    Default

    ^^ best idea yet

  32. #132
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    City Of Champions
    Posts
    3,854

    Default

    The problem though is that it is not just about money. Adding a station will make the route take more time. It is resonable to say it would discourage more users than adding such a station will encourage.

  33. #133
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    edmonton
    Posts
    373

    Default

    Absolutely - Ainley station would've been completely counter-productive. The buses may as well be left by themselves with stops every 400 yards and the LRT abandoned!

    Crawford, Southgate, Heritage = efficiency

  34. #134
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,688

    Default

    Can you imagine too, speaking of wasting time, if there was a Ainley station you'd see students get on there and get off at Southgate to catch their bus. It would be one of the most expensive shuttle services around.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  35. #135

    Default

    Don't forget the pool and fitness centre ... we can't possibly expect people to walk on their way to exercise now can we?

  36. #136
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    226

    Default

    More LRT woes

    Sun, February 11, 2007
    By Kerry Diotte

    Edmonton's LRT was mired in controversy last week. A group of parents was hoping that the Light Rail Transit expansion in south Edmonton would include an LRT station near Harry Ainley high school at 111 Street at 43 Avenue.

    They were shot down by a council committee.

    The parents argued it would make sense to have a station at at 111 Street and 43 Avenue with 3,200 kids attending two high schools in the area.

    They were pushing for a station at 111 Street at 43 Avenue.

    As it is now there'll be LRT stations at Southgate Centre and Century Park, but they're 3.3 kilometres apart.

    The council committee balked at the notion. It would have added up to $20 million to the planned $595-million south LRT extension. Controversy? LRT?

    There's a surprise. The LRT has been controversial since it was begun in the mid-1970s, making Edmonton the smallest city in North America with such a system. It's been fraught with high costs, low ridership and poor planning.

    It's 7.5 km from the current Health Sciences station near the University of Alberta to Century Park, and the city expects to complete that whole leg of the system by 2009 with a good chunk of it opening in 2008.

    After the south leg of the LRT is completed, our entire single-leg, 20.4-km system from Clareview to Century Place will have cost well over $1 billion.

    Calgary has long left us in the dust with its light rail C-Train. Calgarians enjoy a three-leg, 36-station above-ground LRT that was built for about $650 million and covers more than 40 km.

    Figures show it's blowing us away in terms of passengers, too. By 2005 it provided 220,000 daily rides, five times as many as our sad-sack system's 41,500 rides.

    The parents' fight for a station is just one of many concerns we should still have about the LRT.

    It's 3.3 km between the planned stations at Southgate and Century Park - a long way. Wouldn't it be appropriate to have one or two stations in between those two?

    And where are the park and ride sites so people can drop off their cars and actually use LRT?

    There's a park and ride at Commonwealth Stadium now and there won't be another in the south until you hit Century Park at 23 Avenue.

    The problem is the city didn't plan ahead and buy up land for cheap park and ride parking lots.

    The big concern has to be money.

    In a province where construction costs are going through the roof, can we really expect to complete the south leg of the LRT for $595 million?

    Sure, the city's already locked in costs on about $300 million of that, but not for the rest.

    Last week it was revealed that the costs of rebuilding Edmonton's Art Gallery of Alberta had skyrocketed from an earlier estimated $57 million to $88 million.

    Current estimates for the south LRT construction have built in annual inflationary costs of 8%. But final costs for the whole south leg will be higher, mark my words.

    Alberta Infrastructure figures show that department expects the costs of road work to increase 20% from 2006 to 2007.

    LRT and controversy? It never seems to stop.

    E-mail [email protected] or respond to his blog at: blog.canoe.ca/diotte

  37. #137

    Default

    Gotta love the Sun. It fits the birdcage perfectly.

    Anyhoo, of course we don't need a station there. Healthy High School kids can walk (and do) as far as Southgate.

    Imagine what they will tell their grandchildren when they are complaining about how long it takes to be "beamed" to school by the crew of Star Trek: "When I was your age, I had to walk across a playing field and then a bridge to get to the LRT. And it was up hill both ways. All because City Council wanted to have an efficient system that actually gets built at some point."

  38. #138
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    City Of Champions
    Posts
    3,854

    Default

    It's 3.3 km between the planned stations at Southgate and Century Park - a long way. Wouldn't it be appropriate to have one or two stations in between those two?

    And where are the park and ride sites so people can drop off their cars and actually use LRT?

    Considering your rag would be the first one to blast the city if they suggested plowing a large section of that area for TOD's and a parkade you have ZERO credibility.

  39. #139
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,530

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by E-Town Crusader
    Calgary has long left us in the dust with its light rail C-Train. Calgarians enjoy a three-leg, 36-station above-ground LRT that was built for about $650 million and covers more than 40 km.

    Figures show it's blowing us away in terms of passengers, too. By 2005 it provided 220,000 daily rides, five times as many as our sad-sack system's 41,500 rides.
    And how many people live in Clareview and Belvedere neighborhoods vs the entire city?

  40. #140

    Default

    Lets see how much the cost of Calgary's system jumps when they get around to building a tunnel through downtown, which they will require for the planned extensions over the next ten years. In hindsight I think we probably should have kept ours above ground but there were reasons to go under and hopefully in 10-15years we'll be catching up with Calgary b/c the rest of our legs will be mostly above grade. Sure, I'd go for another station between Southgate and Century Park, though not 400m down the road at Ainlay, if they re-zone the area around it for high density residential i.e. not gonna happen in that area.

  41. #141
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    6 degrees north of you
    Posts
    784

    Default

    There's no reasonable place to plunk a station down between
    Southgate and Century Park. Century Park/Heritage already
    has plenty of medium and high-density residential development,
    with more coming. And there's shopping all around too.
    It makes perfect sense to have the station there, and it'll
    probably at least double peak-hour ridership on the train.
    Edmonton's LRT being underground in the downtown area
    has saved us a lot of accidents. Think about what they say
    about Edmonton drivers, then imagine those same drivers
    contending with LRT trains along Jasper Ave or something.
    Then, cost-wise, we'd have to have at least double the fleet
    of trains just to cover for the ones that are in the bodyshop every
    day.
    I must admit, though, that Clareview seemed like a strange place
    to extend the LRT to, when they extended it there. Now
    that it's built up quite a bit around Clareview Station, it's not
    so bad. But for years, it was like the station was in the middle
    of nowhere.
    And yeah, have the parents of these students contribute 50%
    of the cost, and 100% of the manpower for security of the
    station, and maybe (though not likely), some people will agree
    to it.

  42. #142
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,688

    Default

    Naaa I won't ever agree to it.

    If there is going to be a new station stopping at a school somewhere in town I want to see that station be at MacEwan downton or Nait.

    Or if there is going to be another station on the SLRT line it should be at Ellerslie road, or at south Edmonton Common.

    Yes the LRT system in Edmonton hasn't been the greatest by any means, but if council is smart, we will see an LRT system within the next 10 years that will be far supperior to what it is now and low ridership wont be an issue. Of course ridership is lower right now. A majority of Edmontonians have no reason to ride the LRT cause it doesn't go to anywhere near where they may be living and/or working. Get all the new legs out asap and look at how many more people will ride the train.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  43. #143
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    I think the city should create a rough design for a station just south of the schools as a proposed stop for much, much later when the community surrounding the station goes higher density.

    This will do two things:
    1. shut those parents up who don't want high density in that neighbourhood

    2. create a future opportunity for a T.O.D. there

  44. #144
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,530

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grish
    I think the city should create a rough design for a station just south of the schools as a proposed stop for much, much later when the community surrounding the station goes higher density.

    This will do two things:
    1. shut those parents up who don't want high density in that neighbourhood

    2. create a future opportunity for a T.O.D. there
    Still too close to Southgate. Enough with the extra stops already!

  45. #145
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Edmonton - Blue Quill
    Posts
    3,057

    Default

    When I lived in Manhattan I used the subway often, and one aspect of it that I really liked was the express trains.

    You take an express train which gets you a long way quickly, and then get off at the nearest stop to where you want to go, and then take a local to your ultimate destination.

    VERY fast and VERY efficient.

    The LRT should be planned that way. LRT is the express, and busses are the locals.

  46. #146

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 24karat
    When I lived in Manhattan I used the subway often, and one aspect of it that I really liked was the express trains.

    You take an express train which gets you a long way quickly, and then get off at the nearest stop to where you want to go, and then take a local to your ultimate destination.

    VERY fast and VERY efficient.

    The LRT should be planned that way. LRT is the express, and busses are the locals.

    EXACTLY!!!

    Even the bus system should be structured more like that.

  47. #147
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    44,976

    Default LRT bound for Century Park

    LRT bound for Century Park (8:15 p.m.)
    Inflation expected to drive cost far beyond $595M
    Gordon Kent, edmontonjournal.com
    Published: Tuesday, February 13, 2007

    The stage was set Tuesday to complete the LRT system as far as Century Park after councillors strongly endorsed a concept plan for the line.

    But with Alberta construction inflation running rampant in some sectors, the actual cost of the $595-million project still isn’t clear.

    “I would be utterly surprised if we came in under $595 million total,” said city manager Al Maurer, who will bring in an updated figure later this year.
    Email to a friendEmail to a friendPrinter friendlyPrinter friendly
    Font:

    * *
    * *
    * *
    * *

    On one hand, the city saved $25 million by eliminating a park-and-ride garage originally planned for Southgate station, but on the other hand, inflation is higher than the figure assumed when the budget was established in 2005, transit projects manager Wayne Mandryk said.

    An extra $1.3 million will also be spent burying utility lines from Belgravia Road to 54th Avenue.

    Mayor Stephen Mandel said a more accurate cost estimate for the LRT would give councillors a better idea of whether they can afford to make changes.

    “It’s going to be built … but it would be helpful for if we want to add bells and whistles, and do different things.”

    A council committee has already rejected pleas from the Catholic school board and most southwest Edmonton communities for a station to serve the thousands of teenagers who attend Harry Ainlay and Louis St. Laurent high schools near 43rd Avenue and 111th Street.

    It also turned down a $5-million pedestrian overpass across 111th Street, although it did ask for a report on ways to improve traffic safety at the intersection.

    In order to extend service to Century Park in 2010 as scheduled, the concept plan needed approval so work could go ahead on such major undertakings as the construction of an LRT bridge over Whitemud Drive, Mandryk said.

    Only Coun. Janice Melnychuk voted against the concept, saying it isn’t part of an overall plan for moving people around Edmonton and doesn’t make provision for a possible future station at 40th Avenue when the area is more intensely developed.

    “We’re just so concerned about building this line right now that we just aren’t doing this appropriately.”
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  48. #148
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    44,976

    Default

    "Only Coun. Janice Melnychuk voted against the concept, saying it isn’t part of an overall plan for moving people around Edmonton"


    O


    M



    G
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  49. #149
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    682

    Default

    ^She probably eats all her lunches alone in the corner anyways.

  50. #150

    Default

    ^ She does.

    Now do we miss/mourn Tooker?

  51. #151
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    13,432
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    No, on the missing point anyway. Mourn, OK.

    JM, you HAVE the LRT in your ward....now I feel like pulling an Angry Deb...
    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.

  52. #152

    Default

    ^ I like angry "Deb," she is like all flight attendants want to be/do if they could. And hey, I have often wanted to do an angry "Deb" myself on flights...

    It is easy for Janice as the LRT does run through her ward already but hey Edmonton is more than one ward (six to be exact!) and how about some PROACTIVE thinking.

  53. #153

    Default

    What is JM talking about? LRT to the Southwest is on the current transportation masterplan as a priority and on most of the old LRT studies I've seen. Plus, how hard would it be to add a stop at 40ave in 20 years if the density ever warrants it?

  54. #154
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,530

    Default

    "angry Deb?" Is that the Nicoderm stewardess?

  55. #155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey
    "angry Deb?" Is that the Nicoderm stewardess?
    You got it (give SDM a prize!). (And they are not called stewardesses they are called Flight Attendants... ) :P

  56. #156
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,688

    Default

    40th ave station? hmmmmmm, I guess it could happen at some point in time if the whole community really really wants one. Prime example of that is the next LRT station to open on the SLRT line. That station doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense but it's going in. I say as long as there is a bunch of space around the 40th ave or 34th ave or where ever then a station could be built there eventually. For now lets get to century park quickly and get the ridership number up.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  57. #157
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Edmonton - Blue Quill
    Posts
    3,057

    Default

    Bring it on!! Century Park is walking distance from my house.

    Has there been any talk about park and ride there? I wouldn't need it, but others will.

  58. #158
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,530

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 24karat
    Bring it on!! Century Park is walking distance from my house.

    Has there been any talk about park and ride there? I wouldn't need it, but others will.
    Yes, there will be park'n'ride at Century Park

  59. #159

    Default

    Janice ...

    They have been planning to take the LRT to Heritage for at least 16 years. Since a time when there still WAS a heritage mall. It is a central part of the transportation master plan that is 8 years old. It has been planned to death. We don't need more bells and whistles, we don't need more strategies. We need trains.

    Build it already!

  60. #160
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    509

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CSR
    EXACTLY!!!

    Even the bus system should be structured more like that.
    Don't we have express buses already?

  61. #161

    Default SLRT very expensive

    The LRT's new south line is a very expensive train, but there are no stops planned between Southgate and Century Place -- a distance of 25 blocks. Local residents will have to take a slow bus to catch a fast train. That's nonsense.

  62. #162
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,688

    Default

    Not nonsense, makes lots of sense. I think if a station is built along the route between Century Park and Southgate it will be a larger waste of money than an actual benefit. The LRT line is going to places that are pretty busy already for bus routes. Now with LRT the riders of the busses will move to the trains. As for the area between SP and Sg I don't see that many bus stops and even though we are going right through residential areas what guarentee do we have that those residents will all use the train. At least Century Park and Southgate are areas that have or will have more critical mass for riders collected in their respective areas. And with one route additon and change ETS can bring the critical mass up even more. The route I speak of would be a bus leaving from Millwoods towncenter running straight down 34th ave all the way to 111th st. and the going to the future Century Park bus terminal and LRT station.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  63. #163

    Default Re: SLRT very expensive

    Quote Originally Posted by djgirl
    The LRT's new south line is a very expensive train, but there are no stops planned between Southgate and Century Place -- a distance of 25 blocks. Local residents will have to take a slow bus to catch a fast train. That's nonsense.
    so your saying we should slow the train by adding more stops every 10 blocks in low density neighborhood? Whats next? Putting the "Stop request" cord in all trains so you can request each bus stop along the route? (like on the bus...)

  64. #164
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    City Of Champions
    Posts
    3,854

    Default

    The LRT's new south line is a very expensive train, but there are no stops planned between Southgate and Century Place -- a distance of 25 blocks. Local residents will have to take a slow bus to catch a fast train. That's nonsense.
    But in that 25 blocks you have nothing but low density households with two cars. They can easily drive to the P&R facilities.

    Sure there are some people who live their who depend on public transit and it might fustrate them to have to take a 15 minute bus ride when there is a ligh rail line 100m from there residence...but too bad. They take public transit now....and wll do so tomorrow.

    The LRT is NOT about about transferring current bus users to LRT users. It's about attracting as many new riders as you can. Otherwise we spend a billion dollars on the SLRT and have nothing to show for it besides students getting to the university 20 minutes faster. Succesful transit systems have to attractive to commuters that have a choice. Encouraging tens thousands of downtown office workers and students who drive daily to hop on a train for their commute will not be accomplished by placing LRT stations every 500 ft so the 15 people within walking distance who do not have access to a car don't have to take a bus.

    High density around 34 ave won't happen for generations. When the population warrents it, as shocking as it may seem, a station can always be built at that time.

  65. #165
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    25 blocks is a long way between stops, but the majority is right on this one. There is no density, and not even a frequent cross-town bus to stop for. Every 1km or so is ideal where there is density, but where there isn't, why stop?

    One reason that the bus that those poor 34th avers would have to take is so slow is because there are so many stops. Most busses I've taken in this town have stops every two short blocks. thats usually less than 200m.

  66. #166
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,688

    Default

    The next area close 3 possible areas near century park that have or will have a higher density for passenger usage are the following.

    - South Edmonton Common
    - Millwoods Town Center
    - NAIT South Ralph Klein Campus (Future)

    If the schools and the rec center want to front all the money for a pedestrian overpass or underpass then go right ahead but honestly I think the route as it is right now is more than adequate.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  67. #167
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,688

    Default South Campus LRT Station

    There are plenty and plenty of threads talking about the SLRT line but from what I can find there is actually very little talking about the South Campus station that will be built at Foote Field and Saville Centre. Supposedly there will be some sort of bus terminal there, will it be a major hub or just a stop for a couple routes? Also too where exactly is the station going to be situated. I know there isn't going to be park and ride there, that's fine. What is the look of the station going to be like. I found a possible picture of the station and it appears to be a completly open platform with little to no shelters. Is this going to be the case, because if so I think we already are going to have a big problem due to the fact that many people are complaning about our current stations like Coliseum and Stadium which are pretty cold and windy in the winters with their full roof. Also the Health Sciences station where there is just a roof and some glass walls that provide limited shelter, especially in more extreme weathers. The newest station at 76 ave will at least have the underpass that might provide some shelter. What will south campus have?
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  68. #168

  69. #169
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,688

    Default

    Thanks for the link. Actually that is the picture I was referring to and as you can see the station is going to have very little shelter.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  70. #170
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    44,976

    Default

    IMO any new station should have wind breaks at a very minimum...and although enclosed would be nice, as long as they are heated from above and wind blocked im happy.


    plus, id be happier with trains every 5 and outside stations than 15 and inside.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  71. #171
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,688

    Default

    I'm hoping that design is just a preliminary design. Can you imagine standing out at that station in January with the snow blowing and wind howling at you.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  72. #172

    Default

    Does anyone know whether the structure in the middle is a shelter? I know they have a shelter at the Belgravia station, so I imagine they'll have one here too.

  73. #173

    Default SLRT Master Thread. Renders, Photos, Discussion.

    Edmonton LRT Construction



    South LRT (SLRT)
    The extension will occur over three phases.
    Phase 1: Health Science Station Opened January 2006
    Phase 2: Health Sciences Station to South Campus Station opens by the end of 2008
    Phase 3: South Campus Station to Century Park opens by the end of 2009[/size]



    Health Science Station - Opened Jan 2006



    Belgravia/Mckernan (76 Ave) Station - Late 2008?



    Neil Crawford Station (UofA South Campus) - Late 2008



    Southgate Station - Late 2009



    Whitemud LRT Bridge



    Century Park Station - Late 2009


    West LRT (WLRT)

    3 Different possible routes exist


    [img]http://img136.imageshack.us/img136/883/wlrt2jb9.jpg[img]



    North LRT(NLRT)
    [/size]


    South East BRT
    http://www.edmonton.ca/RoadsTraffic/...%20options.pdf
    http://www.edmonton.ca/RoadsTraffic/...%20options.pdf[/size]

  74. #174
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    I am surprized there isn't a station shown at royal alex. if you don't put a station at one of city's largest hospitals, where would you put one? The Kingsway station is too far from main entrance which is across from Victoria School sports field.

    move Kingsway's station south and move Nait's station to the Northern Edge of Kingsway (Intersection of Princess Elizabeth and 106 Street) to serve both Nait and Kingsway.

  75. #175
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles; Athens
    Posts
    4,399

    Default

    A block and a half away? Oooo...

    You could argue that a station should be near any of the three major centres there. It seems logical that they'd build atop an already established transit node.

  76. #176
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    44,976

    Default

    not to mention that the plan for the alex will have a large expansion onto that pie parking lot directly beside and more than willing to skybridge to the LRT:>
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  77. #177

    Default

    Excellent thread Feepa!

  78. #178
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MylesC
    A block and a half away? Oooo...

    You could argue that a station should be near any of the three major centres there. It seems logical that they'd build atop an already established transit node.
    may I remind you that hosptals often have sick people going in and out of them. I have heard that some people going into hospitals have mobility problems. A block and a half for them may be a little bit too far.

    what I propose is the same number of stops moved a bit south. bus terminal can be placed at Kingsway/NAIT new stop.

  79. #179
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles; Athens
    Posts
    4,399

    Default

    And as Ian mentioned, there may be expansion plans that we're unaware of that will help get an indoor route all the way.

    The fact is that if we want to get this build a decision needs to be made about where to put stops and stops can't be every block.

    How many people use the LRT to go to the UofA that have severe mobility problems? Is it much different than this case?

  80. #180
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    6 degrees north of you
    Posts
    784

    Default

    People from the Royal Alex Hospital find their way to the
    buses now, and take a bus to Kingsway or Downtown or
    wherever. They seem quite happy with doing it too.
    I think the Kingsway Station should be where Kingsway
    Transit Centre is now, because it's established there,
    and then NAIT can have its own station once they figure
    out if it'll be on 106 St, or on Princess Elizabeth Ave.
    I think it'll be on P.E. Ave, and to picture all those buses
    from Kingsway detouring up to that station boggles ones
    mind. They'd have to tear down buildings to make room for it.

  81. #181
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    you guys seem to forget that these are people who go in and out of hospitals. they often do that for a reason. climb onto a bus, then get off the bus, then go to LRT is doable, but if a person has reduced mobility, it is not ideal.

    as for future expansion to the hospital. If and when it happens, the expansion will be on the other side (from Kingsway) of a majour intersection. So, you would either make the patients cross this intersection or put an overhead walkway. That would be costly.

    Also, it makes the most sense to have people enter hospital in the middle of it as they would have to walk the least amount to get to their destination.

  82. #182
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    City Of Champions
    Posts
    3,854

    Default

    A station at the Royal Alex makes as much sense as a station at Hairy Ainley.

    So what if you accomodate a couple hundred extra people. You end up slowing down commutes and turning off thousands of people. If there is the traffic to justify it then so be it. But if we are going to build a stop every two blocks so somebody doesn't have to walk the length of a building or a student doesn't have to walk across a field to get to southgate then we might as well give up and focus on buses. Buses stop every block, LRT stops in high traffic areas to provide quick transit from other high traffic areas.

  83. #183
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    44,976

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grish
    you guys seem to forget that these are people who go in and out of hospitals. they often do that for a reason. climb onto a bus, then get off the bus, then go to LRT is doable, but if a person has reduced mobility, it is not ideal.

    as for future expansion to the hospital. If and when it happens, the expansion will be on the other side (from Kingsway) of a majour intersection. So, you would either make the patients cross this intersection or put an overhead walkway. That would be costly.

    Also, it makes the most sense to have people enter hospital in the middle of it as they would have to walk the least amount to get to their destination.
    greg...im 99% sure they will have a skybridge included in the final plans as it just makes sense...kinda like how the UofA health sciences has plans for one to be incorporated into the MAYO north.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  84. #184
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LindseyT
    So what if you accomodate a couple hundred extra people.
    If that is what the ridership is going to be with ever stop of the train--H-YES! A couple of hundred people going to the hospital and a few more going to other places is very good for ridership. I bet you will have a couple of hundred in the morning alone. Royal Alex is a major hospital. Together with the proposed additions it will be huge. Thousands of people work and are treated there. Lets service it well.

    As for slowing down etc, I am suggesting replacing two stations (one on the south edn of Kingsway and one on the north end of Kingsway at NAIT) with two stations (One at Royal Alex/ Centre For Education/ Victoria School and the other at the North End of Kingsway at NAIT. How exactly would this slow things down? it is still two stops placed better.

    Ian, even with the walk way, people would have to walk almost two block distance to get to the main hospital.

  85. #185
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    we also shouldn't forget that the rail line will connect University, MacEwan, and NAIT. Particularly University and MacEwan (Robbins health centre). All these places train medical professionals that do their practical experience at UAH and at Royal Alex. Let's provide an efficient way to move them and their instructors between these cites. That is a few hundred people consistently through the year.

    Placing a stop right at the hospital is the only logical thing to do.

  86. #186
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,530

    Default Re: SLRT Renderings, and Other LRT information

    Quote Originally Posted by feepa
    Century Park Station - Late 2009
    Uhm...I thought the ugly-*** above-grade parkade was moving underground?

  87. #187

    Default Re: SLRT Renderings, and Other LRT information

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey
    Uhm...I thought the ugly-*** above-grade parkade was moving underground?
    I think the developer is still trying to "encourage" the city to do so.

  88. #188

    Default Re: SLRT Renderings, and Other LRT information

    Quote Originally Posted by feepa
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey
    Uhm...I thought the ugly-*** above-grade parkade was moving underground?
    I think the developer is still trying to "encourage" the city to do so.
    And, not unexpectedly, the quack at the city was basically quoted as saying "I guess we'll think of it, I suppose". Where's that "swift kick to the heinie (sic?)" emoticon?

  89. #189
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles; Athens
    Posts
    4,399

    Default

    Ok, let's *please* not mass quote large pictures for the sake of readers. It can quickly become an annoying mess to scroll down a page full of the same large picture over and over again. I've removed them since I think one, two max, copies of the pic is good

  90. #190
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,426

    Default

    It looks like one of the proposed wLRT alignments follows Fox drive and Whitemud across the Quesnel bridge. It adds a couple of km but would avoid the NIMBY issues in Laurier heights and would simplify the river crossing. The bridge is being widened soon anyways isn't it? Provisions for an LRT crossing could be included at the same time and the rest of the line could follow shortly after completion of the sLRT.

  91. #191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Titanium48
    It looks like one of the proposed wLRT alignments follows Fox drive and Whitemud across the Quesnel bridge. It adds a couple of km but would avoid the NIMBY issues in Laurier heights and would simplify the river crossing. The bridge is being widened soon anyways isn't it? Provisions for an LRT crossing could be included at the same time and the rest of the line could follow shortly after completion of the sLRT.
    Avoids one nimby area, and crosses into another...

  92. #192
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    7,385

    Default

    Just to clarify, I don't think the developer is asking for the entire parkade to be placed underground, just a portion with the top being developed as a green roof.

    Access to parking is key to a successful park n' ride. A parkade is NOT always a bad thing. In fact, the lack of park n' rides along the Skytrain line is a major criticism.

  93. #193
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,426

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by feepa
    Avoids one nimby area, and crosses into another...
    Who's going to complain about an LRT line next to a freeway? It's not like it would make more noise or look any worse than the traffic already on 71 Av / Belgravia Rd / Fox drive or Whitemud.

  94. #194
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    44,976

    Default

    id like to see the numbers again for time and $, but i still think 87ave is by far the best route for time, TOD potential, zoo, 149st, mead, WEM/HOS, TOD in lewis.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  95. #195

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Titanium48
    Quote Originally Posted by feepa
    Avoids one nimby area, and crosses into another...
    Who's going to complain about an LRT line next to a freeway? It's not like it would make more noise or look any worse than the traffic already on 71 Av / Belgravia Rd / Fox drive or Whitemud.
    I'm going to guess that the same people who opposed the LRT going down 114 st, which are the same people who opposed a bus ramp / exit ramp for the neil crawford center/foote field

  96. #196

    Default

    They opposed cars leaving/passing through Neil Crawford been allowed to use the bus ramp/exit. They were fine with a bus only, bus ramp. Actually, LRT over that ramp should take care of the car concern nicely.

    I prefer an 87ave route too, only with the 107ave (even more TOD potential), preferably 102ave, option into downtown rather than the new river crossing, cut and cover option to the university.

  97. #197
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,892

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mick
    They opposed cars leaving/passing through Neil Crawford been allowed to use the bus ramp/exit. They were fine with a bus only, bus ramp. Actually, LRT over that ramp should take care of the car concern nicely.

    I prefer an 87ave route too, only with the 107ave (even more TOD potential), preferably 102ave, option into downtown rather than the new river crossing, cut and cover option to the university.
    And if they could convince the province to do the right thing and turn that land and the buildings on it back to University from whence it came originally and move those staff back downtown where many of them came from originally (and still belong), both the traffic in and out and the peakiness of that traffic coinciding with rush hour could be diminished drastically.

  98. #198
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    13,432
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Stop it Ken, you're making sense...
    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.

  99. #199
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    1,185

    Default

    City of Edmonton - SLRT-31 61 Avenue / 111 Street Roadways and LRT Grading

    Solicitation Number: 908219

    Closing Date: April 25, 2007 2:00 PM

    Work includes, but not limited to:

    1.) Modifications to the intersections of 60th Avenue and 113th Street, 11th Street and 57th Avenue, 11th Street and 54th Avenue, 111th Street and 51st Avenue and 11th Street and Southgate Access Roads
    2.) Construction of detour road for 11th Street grade separation (grade separation by others)
    3.) Installation and modification of drainage facilities to accommodate future LRT track, dry pond and roadway modifications to 61st Avenue, 111th Street, and intersections
    4.) Utility relocations to accommodate the proposed construction
    5.) Roadway modifications to 61st Avenue and 111th Street
    6.) Grading and sub-ballasting of the LRT right-of-way
    7.) Removal of temporary Southgate Transit Centre
    8.) Temporary fencing for tree protection. Screen fencing along private property
    9.) Communication and electrical duct banks, vaults, conduits, bonding and grounding along LRT right-of-way
    10.) Installation of multi-use trail, with lighting, west of 11th Street
    11.) Installation of overhead Catenary pole and LRT signal equipment foundations
    12.) Swing gates and barrier fencing at track crossings including their bases
    13.) Retaining/barrier wall and ballast curbs along future right-of-way
    14.) Construction of dry pond east of 111th Street
    15.) Coordination with other contractors working on adjacent LRT construction sites

    Pre-bid site meeting April 12, 2007 1:00 PM at 11337 61 Avenue (south of the School for the Deaf)

  100. #200
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St. Albert
    Posts
    1,987

    Default

    I know I have p*ssed off some people here with my constant complaint as to LRT cost but there is a reason for it.
    The city is planning about 30 km more LRT in the next 20 years. If it is built like this project there will be no money left for anything else.
    Here is a little math:
    SLRT - $495million for 8km. =$60 million/km.
    Construction Inflation - 20%
    Anticipated length of LRT expansions - 30km

    At 20% costs double every four years.
    The city anticipates work to start on the NLRT in 2011-2012 so cost per km will more than double to $120m/km. plus there will be significant costs involved in taking the LRT out of downtown. This line appears to be about 10 km long.
    If we assume all the contracts for this are fixed price, signed in 2011 and the downtown exit project costs the same as the above ground portion, the costs for this project total $1.2 billion.
    The city anticipates WLRT to go between 2010 and 2020 so lets use 2015 as a starting point.
    Now costs are $240m/km. Again assume fixed price contracts all signed in 2015, and costing the exit out of the university (remember the $120million tunnel at Health Sciences) as well as a river crossing at the same rate.
    Using these parameters we can anticipate a cost of $2.4 billion for WLRT.
    If we anticipate one more major line to follow, probably Millwoods, following this pattern starting right after the last line is done, costs for it will have doubled again. So 10 km will cost us another $4.8 billion.
    The grand total for LRT at this rate will be $8.4 Billion over 13 years.
    It is the city's own figures for inflation I have used. I am also assuming that construction will be constant and one project will start when the previous one is completed. I also tried to be conservative using the same costs for the tunnelling and bridge work as is being spent on the at grade portion now. I think that this compensates a little for the rough distances and the astronomical inflation.
    I love Edmonton and would like to see an extensive LRT system but it is obvious that with costs like these not even Alberta can afford it.
    That is why I complain about the spending. Edmonton deserves a full LRT system but the way it is being built now will bankrupt the City.

Page 2 of 30 FirstFirst 12345612 ... 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
  •