Page 84 of 85 FirstFirst ... 3474808182838485 LastLast
Results 8,301 to 8,400 of 8495

Thread: Metro Line - North LRT | Churchill to NAIT | Under Construction

  1. #8301

    Default Don't buy the hype...

    So I rode it today...

    Trip time is more or less the same as it was with the previous slower speeds.


    Yes, when moving, it is moving faster.

    Yes, the train gets through all intersections quicker than it did.



    but:

    2 minutes pause at MacEwan Station Northbound.

    1 minute pause at K/RAH Southbound.

    1 extra minute pause at NAIT before departing Southbound.


    Virtually all the time the speed saves is now spent sitting at a platform instead.


    Of course it makes sense, they need to resync both the Capital Line schedule and the traffic signals before they can escape the old schedule. But for now, much ado about not much.
    Let's make Edmonton better.

  2. #8302
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    7,331

    Default

    Here we go, again.
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  3. #8303
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    10,410

    Default

    I'm guessing that there won't be much in the way of wholesale changes until the end of April. It looks like, though, that the LRT trains will be waiting more at the NAIT Station.
    "Talk minus action equals zero." - Joe Keithley, D. O. A.

  4. #8304

    Default

    ^ that would be my guess too. Schedule change waits for semester break.


    But it is still a big software engineering milepost, it's just not the finish post.

    Definite progress, this was needed before other things could happen.
    Let's make Edmonton better.

  5. #8305
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,384

    Default

    ^ It doesn't need to be a system-wide schedule change though. Arriving and departing trains were overlapping at NAIT station before the speedup, so the metro line could be run with one fewer trains and maintain the same schedule on the portion shared with the capital line.

  6. #8306

    Default

    I am lookin out my hotEl window in Brooklyn NY at the Queens Plaza. There are multiple elevated subway trains with 12 car consists running every minute from one direction or another and you can often see three trains at the same time. Unseen there are underground subway trains also going on different route. Much of this was built 100 years ago.


    It is embarrassing to think about the problems that the CoE has had with the dinky Metro line.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  7. #8307

    Default

    ^ yeah, as agreed umpteen times.

    And again, the people responsible are all gone. Stolte, Boutillier, Farbrother, Wandzura.

    Let's make Edmonton better.

  8. #8308

    Default

    Not all are gone. Thales is still working on the system that they declared fully operational a year ago.

  9. #8309

    Default

    ^ I suppose. Very curious what we get out of the post-mortem on their exact role. The Trolleybus guy in me probably wants to pin most of it on Stolte/Boutillier, but I should wait and see.
    Let's make Edmonton better.

  10. #8310

    Default

    There was a real conspiracy to get rid of the trolley bus network by ETS because it was a direct threat to their more expensive streetcar plans. The fraudulent hybrid diesel bus vs trolley bus competition was a used to destroy the excellent 127km of network that was saddled with an ancient fleet of GM trolleys. Stolte stated that the real end goal was "think streetcars". As you recall, they took down the wire and poles faster than any project in COE history.
    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 25-02-2017 at 09:43 AM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  11. #8311

    Default

    I'm glad the trolleys are gone, but I am mad that ETS still hasn't re-mapped some of these old trolley routes to serve riders better (#3 and #5 immediately come to mind).


    This stupid Metro LRT line was supposed be up and running almost 3 years ago. Pathetic that the city and ETS are still experimenting with it.
    Last edited by MrOilers; 25-02-2017 at 10:05 AM.

  12. #8312
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,166

    Default

    ^ Especially the #3. I used to rely on that line back when it was a trolley and then after the conversion. The end point is in the middle of wilderness and there are several locations that would be nice to get to (like the SaveOn foods just a few blocks away). And there's the Stadium station it could hook up with.

  13. #8313

    Default

    Well the entire route map is about to be revolutionised, and battery buses look possible, so we might all be happy, but back to the Metro Line...
    Let's make Edmonton better.

  14. #8314

    Default

    The trolley system was run into the ground by ETS for 20 years. They did not buy any new low floor accessible buses like Vancouver had and instead ran GM buses from the early 1980's. The did not upgrade their canterary either with 15 degree vs 30 degree corners to prevent dewiring.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  15. #8315

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EveB View Post
    ^ Especially the #3. I used to rely on that line back when it was a trolley and then after the conversion. The end point is in the middle of wilderness and there are several locations that would be nice to get to (like the SaveOn foods just a few blocks away). And there's the Stadium station it could hook up with.
    That's exactly what I suggested to ETS a few years ago. Turn South on 82 st, loop around to Stadium station then back south. Never heard back from them
    Last edited by kkozoriz; 26-02-2017 at 05:26 PM.

  16. #8316

    Default

    Think they slowed this line down again. I've taken it a few times this week from U of A to downtown and it feels like it used to. It was definitely going faster for a while there, but I wonder if they ran into problems. There is reduced service coming up on Sunday I believe, or maybe the weekend after, for maintenance on the line and I thought it mentions Metro specifically. Regardless, maybe not all the kinks are out yet.

  17. #8317

    Default

    ^ considering the speed increase didn't affect the schedule at all, I'd say it's immaterial, basically, but might save some energy at least reverting to the slower speeds.

    Good that they proved they could safely do it, but until they're ready to adjust the schedule? Meh.
    Let's make Edmonton better.

  18. #8318
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    South Beverly Heights in a small house with a large lot!!
    Posts
    1,922

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JayBee View Post
    ^ considering the speed increase didn't affect the schedule at all, I'd say it's immaterial, basically, but might save some energy at least reverting to the slower speeds.

    Good that they proved they could safely do it, but until they're ready to adjust the schedule? Meh.
    Then we built the line to do 50 why? Designed for it and money..alot of it spent and a line NOT being used as intended. Oh wait...LRT in Edmonton........
    Make the RIGHT choice before you take your last breath......

  19. #8319

    Default

    ^ I think you're missing what's going on:

    After the recent speed increase, the train was still not getting people anywhere faster, because the trains were just sitting at the platforms, waiting for the traffic lights.

    Not until the traffic lights get readjusted will they need the speed.

    Probably a schedule readjustment coming sometime during the NAIT summer semester (May-August), but at that point they will need the increased speed.
    Let's make Edmonton better.

  20. #8320
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,384

    Default

    Most of the line wasn't built to do 50 km/h. It is 25 km/h from MacEwan station to 106 Av, 40 km/h from 106 to 107 Av and 35 km/h from 107 Av to Kingsway. I think the 111 Av to 114 Av section is the only 50 km/h zone. The problems on this line started with the choice of a route with too many sharp curves.
    Last edited by Titanium48; 16-03-2017 at 04:50 PM. Reason: 106 and 107 Avenues, not Streets

  21. #8321

    Default

    ^ regardless the specific speeds (and regardless the streets versus the avenues (lol)) what it needs is to be able to run at higher frequencies, and the speeds it's designed for will do that.
    Let's make Edmonton better.

  22. #8322

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cnr67 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by JayBee View Post
    ^ considering the speed increase didn't affect the schedule at all, I'd say it's immaterial, basically, but might save some energy at least reverting to the slower speeds.

    Good that they proved they could safely do it, but until they're ready to adjust the schedule? Meh.
    Then we built the line to do 50 why? Designed for it and money..alot of it spent and a line NOT being used as intended. Oh wait...LRT in Edmonton........
    I thought we had this line built at a super low price. Oh wait...LRT in Edmonton$$$$$$
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  23. #8323
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    7,331

    Default

    I'm struggling to stay on top of all this, so does that mean coe/ets (whatever) has stopped using the line of sight signaling process they were currently using before the recent speed increase changes? Or are they still using the los signaling process?
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  24. #8324

    Default

    No idea. This is just an anecdotal observation I made over the past week and a half.

  25. #8325
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    7,331

    Default

    ^Thanks

    Quote Originally Posted by Titanium48 View Post
    Most of the line wasn't built to do 50 km/h. It is 25 km/h from MacEwan station to 106 St, 40 km/h from 106 to 107 St and 35 km/h from 107 St to Kingsway. I think the 111 Av to 114 Av section is the only 50 km/h zone. The problems on this line started with the choice of a route with too many sharp curves.

    That much was obvious from the beginning, even on collector roads imo top speed should be at 50 km/h. Since lrt's don't share that thinking between collector roads and local roads. Its a different animal.Besides LRT's are not part of the city's Vision Zero initiative anyway.
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  26. #8326

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by envaneo View Post
    I'm struggling to stay on top of all this, so does that mean coe/ets (whatever) has stopped using the line of sight signaling process they were currently using before the recent speed increase changes? Or are they still using the los signaling process?
    They have stopped using "line of sight" and are using "real signalling" now. The real signalling works.

    The schedule has not yet changed, though.

    The schedule is what time the train leaves the stations.

    The speed is now possible to go up to the planned levels, but because the schedule has not changed (yet), the train was just going faster but then waiting longer at the stations.

    Moodib's observation probably means they just reverted to the old speeds, with shorter pauses at the stations (as before) but still the schedule has not changed.

    The important thing for most of us is the schedule. We don't know when the schedule will be revised. This summer seems like a reasonable guess, but so is this September, as the ridership dips over the summer thus the frequency increase is less important in summer.
    Let's make Edmonton better.

  27. #8327

    Default

    Biggest issue with this project there was maybe 20% engineering done, there were no drawing etc. ( I worked on this project as a sub ) So to get that action money's , they put shovels in the ground when not ready. They pour all the cement in and forget , hey ! we need utility's , we need drainage , duh ! so you got guys for 2 years strait chipping out concrete by hand trying rigg systems together and nothing fits, no organization....but, touch a city tree that a million $ fine . I blame the feds, I blame Harper, Ambrose, Don con, Scamdel...because really how could we be so dumb...put it a year off, do it right .

  28. #8328
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,384

    Default

    ^^ Changing the schedule would be a cost savings, as the overlap at NAIT could be eliminated and the route covered with one less train. It should be done ASAP.

  29. #8329

    Default

    As someone not caught up in the waves of orange hysteria in town I was curious about how the Metro Line was being utilized during the festivities & came across this blog post. Comedy gold, in true Edmonton fashion, as it turns out the station is very, very ill prepared by design to be located adjacent an arena. Braaaaaavooooo.

    https://www.timquerengesser.com/blog...p7jvrtcwzaqf7k

    “At no time should a steady flow of more than 100 customers be allowed to enter the west concourse [of the MacEwan station],” reads an ETS standard operating procedure briefing that was included in the FOIP documents I obtained.
    “[Transit peace officers] will stop the crowd flow if the concourse fills or if more than 100 customers are attempting to use that path to concourse in one continuous crowd, and will not start allowing customers through until the concourse has cleared.”
    We need to get the pool started on how long until we have to rebuild MacEwan Station. I don't think it'll last longer than the "temporary" NAIT station.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  30. #8330
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    9,806

    Default

    It'll be a problem if and when the line goes further north to Castledowns/St. Albert. As of right now, it's not a problem at all, since it makes little sense for just about anyone at Roger's to use it as opposed to the Capital line stations.

  31. #8331

    Default

    ^^ is "west concourse" the upper level for access that probably couldn't fit more than 100 people, or the whole west part of the platform? It's kinda pathetic either way, but if it's just the upper bit then it's not a big deal - the station will still be able to load/unload a whole train in reasonable time.
    There can only be one.

  32. #8332

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    As of right now, it's not a problem at all, since it makes little sense for just about anyone at Roger's to use it as opposed to the Capital line stations.
    Huh? It makes sense for anyone that doesn't want to walk outside in cold temperatures. It was used quite heavily on saturday by patrons. Many, myself included, didn't want to walk 3 blocks in that weather. (especially given how poorly timed the downtown intersections are for walking)

  33. #8333
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,415

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    ^^ is "west concourse" the upper level for access that probably couldn't fit more than 100 people, or the whole west part of the platform? It's kinda pathetic either way, but if it's just the upper bit then it's not a big deal - the station will still be able to load/unload a whole train in reasonable time.
    The MacEwan concourse is just a corridor for people to access the platform below, not a place for people to congregate. The platform itself is long enough to accommodate five car trains even though only three car trains currently operate on the Metro Line due to the short platform at the temporary NAIT Station..

    There are many legitimate criticisms of the Metro Line, but I see nothing wrong with the design of the MacEwan Station platform or concourse.

  34. #8334
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,297

    Default

    Took the LRT from Central to NAIT for the very first time. There was a delay at Churchill as it waited for a SB Capital LRT train to stop and disembark passengers, some of whom caught my train. It moved pretty quick for most of it, but it slows down to 25 km/hr between the RAH and NAIT stations for some reason.
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  35. #8335
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    7,331

    Default

    There was mechanical error of some kind yesterday, causing some confusion with contingency buses.
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  36. #8336
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    44,243
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  37. #8337
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Where ever the pilot takes me
    Posts
    2,051

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    One word, "oversight".
    Did my dog just fall into a pothole???

  38. #8338

    Default

    A few more words: "Rogers Place was not envisioned at the time of Metro station planning."
    I feel in no way entitled to your opinion...

  39. #8339
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Where ever the pilot takes me
    Posts
    2,051

    Default

    Word #2, "contingency".
    Did my dog just fall into a pothole???

  40. #8340

    Default

    Word #3: "overdesign"
    I feel in no way entitled to your opinion...

  41. #8341
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Meadows
    Posts
    1,975

    Default

    Contacted my Councilor's office today asking if they had any updates since February related to a frequency boost - nope. Sounds like the lines of communication are as great as they always were.
    $2.00 $2.25 $2.50 $2.75 $2.85 $3.00 $3.20 $3.25

  42. #8342

    Default

    Word #4: "Cluster-Fruk"
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  43. #8343

  44. #8344

    Default

    Word #5: Shovel-ready

    Remember that one!? What a knee slapper!

    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 03-08-2017 at 08:33 PM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  45. #8345
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    4,213

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Spudly View Post
    A few more words: "Rogers Place was not envisioned at the time of Metro station planning."
    Very cleaverly worded. I remember going to an open house at MU just after the arena deal was announced and I asked the rep if they were going to redesign the station to accommodate. He looked at me as though I were f*cking stupid. I even apologized for asking such a question.
    “Canada is the only country in the world that knows how to live without an identity,”-Marshall McLuhan

  46. #8346

    Default

    Yeah, such a stupid question. Everybody knows that Oiler fans only drive pickups.

    Sort of like asking; "Why not elevate it like Vancouver"

    Standard answer, "Because it costs 300% more than at grade"

    Citizen response, "Why? Vancouver builds an elevated automated high frequency line for the same price as this slow streetcar."

    COE Transit Planner response, "SECURITY!, escort this troublemaker out of the building!"
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  47. #8347

  48. #8348
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,297

    Default

    Deadlines? We don't need no stinking deadlines!
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  49. #8349

    Default

    So far every "target date" has been meaningless. I don't believe this one either.

  50. #8350

    Default

    Even when they say it's done it'll still suck, so it won't matter.
    "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" - Blaise Pascal

  51. #8351
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    1,020

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chmilz View Post
    Even when they say it's done it'll still suck, so it won't matter.
    Why do you say that? If it's a fully automated system by the end of December with overhauled signalling software and higher frequency traffic, it'll be what it was supposed to be. I say that as one of the most outspoken people about this debacle. I just want the bloody thing to function properly.
    There was no need to change that plaque. We are the City of Champions.

  52. #8352

    Default

    A train operating on a terribly-routed stubby extension that permanently lowers the service on the primary lines doesn't suck just because it's not fully automated & as such will continue to suck indefinitely upon the completion of the years of extra work to get them to the barely-passable state it'll be in at that time.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  53. #8353

    Default

    Permanently? Once the software is fixed (if it ever is), then service on the main line will return to regular frequency of trains every 5 min at the appropriate times. I fail to see how that's permanent.
    "Be kind whenever possible. It is always possible." - Dalai Lama

  54. #8354
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    1,020

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    A train operating on a terribly-routed stubby extension that permanently lowers the service on the primary lines doesn't suck just because it's not fully automated & as such will continue to suck indefinitely upon the completion of the years of extra work to get them to the barely-passable state it'll be in at that time.
    The frequency reduction on the capital line is a result of these very issues. Once resolved, it should go back to normal.

    I'm a wait and see kinda guy, new people at the helm of all of this so gonna give them a chance to build their rep.
    There was no need to change that plaque. We are the City of Champions.

  55. #8355

    Default

    I'll retract that statement, contingent on the same caveat you're employing. If we get what we were promised, it'll not make other lines worse. That still doesn't bring the line outta the "suck" category for me, as it's still a terribly-routed stub line to nowhere, replete with stations ill-positioned &/or ill-suited.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  56. #8356
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    1,020

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    I'll retract that statement, contingent on the same caveat you're employing. If we get what we were promised, it'll not make other lines worse. That still doesn't bring the line outta the "suck" category for me, as it's still a terribly-routed stub line to nowhere, replete with stations ill-positioned &/or ill-suited.

    I remember being called an ***** in University for saying I have concerns about ground level LRT intersecting arterial roadways beside a hospital. They told me to leave the design work to engineers.

    Well; my engineering program starts in two weeks. So I suppose my concerns are officially legitimate.

    Edit: [email protected] is censored? lmao
    Last edited by Stevey_G; 15-08-2017 at 07:17 PM.
    There was no need to change that plaque. We are the City of Champions.

  57. #8357

    Default

    Basic physics dictates that when you put barriers in front of things in motion, they stop. Running ground level trains across high volume arterial roadways is a sickness that needs to be cured in our planning departments.
    "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" - Blaise Pascal

  58. #8358
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    edmonton
    Posts
    4,288

    Default

    ^ Indeed. Imagine if that had been the prevailing thought in 19th century London.
    Nisi Dominus Frustra

  59. #8359
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    184

    Default

    It's just baffling. With such failures how can they not re look at how we are doing things with our system build-out?

  60. #8360

    Default

    Imagine our current LRT planners were around to see the original LRT line built. There would be no tunnel. Street level everything.

    I'm glad our planners back in the 60s and 70s had a bit of foresight. The current batch seems to want to check off everything but creating a fast, efficient transportation system that compliments each other. Now we are creating modes of transportation that will battle each other...

  61. #8361

    Default

    Transit stopped being about the efficient movement of people in the city & more a blunt tool used for urban planning & trying to control/direct growth in Edmonton a long time ago. So from the administration's perspective they're meeting their goals, it's just they've got a matryoshka doll of terrible mandates & policies that prevent them from actually being effective when it comes to providing good transit.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  62. #8362

    Default

    The problem is how our administration and council only ever considers the cheapest option.

    For some reason, road user costs and time lost isn't a big factor when it comes to designing our LRT.

    The response has always been, if you're commuting alongside the LRT, you should be taking it instead.
    [Heck...they said just that recently from this EJ article: "Those that are using 83 Street for commuting, we would encourage them to jump on the LRT,” said Laughlin" ]
    But if the planners took a step back and realize how tunnel-visioned that response is, they'd begin to design a bit better system.

    The same fallacy that upgrading roads to improve congestion applies here. You remove cars from a road, other cars will fill it - just because you have some people hopping onto your LRT, it doesn't necessarily equate to a under capacity road. In the meantime, you're affecting thousands of commuters, affecting commercial trade, etc. with our shortsighted design approach.

    The cars removed from the road from "LRT converts" will hardly offset the greenhouse gasses wasted by vehicles sitting idle. Nor does having a 5-car LRT run with 10% capacity help our carbon footprint. I doubt a cost has been placed on that.

    Administration and council keeps pushing for "cheap" but in the long term, it costs everyone more - and i can almost bet you, these factors are NOT properly quantified in their studies: simply looking at "average delay time" doesn't tell you nothing unless you're willing to extrapolate the numbers.

    The unwillingness to grade separate key intersections on the Valley line due to cost is just mind-numbing. Of course Council has washed their hands when they commissioned the biased review on how much to elevate the line between Avonmore and Connors, and it concluded it was too expensive to issue a change order now. The real question was why wasn't it designed for 5 years ago.

    And of course the standard response is: "Adam Laughlin, the city’s head of infrastructure, said he believes that problem will be managed through careful signal timing" - just like how they had creative timing on 114st, 111st and kingsway avenue. I guess they're optimistic the that red light wait times will be 5 minutes instead of 8 minutes I've seen at the listed locations.


    And as I've said before, on the other hand, our neighbours to the south are championing a gold-plated solution. $5bln - 20 kilometre line which will probably balloon to $6-7bln given the ambitious magnitude of the design. That design is equally questionable, but it sure highlights a tale of two cities.

  63. #8363
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    7,331

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    Transit stopped being about the efficient movement of people in the city & more a blunt tool used for urban planning & trying to control/direct growth in Edmonton a long time ago. So from the administration's perspective they're meeting their goals, it's just they've got a matryoshka doll of terrible mandates & policies that prevent them from actually being effective when it comes to providing good transit.
    Wrong. Transit stopped being transit when it became a business instead of a service. For instance I can remember in the 90's riding the lrt underground for free. There were no lrt Police. I can appreciate that times have changed and today I'm grateful we have lrt police on the trains and I can appreciate that the "service" needs to be fiscally responsible etc etc......
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  64. #8364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by envaneo View Post
    Wrong. Transit stopped being transit when it became a business instead of a service. For instance I can remember in the 90's riding the lrt underground for free. There were no lrt Police. I can appreciate that times have changed and today I'm grateful we have lrt police on the trains and I can appreciate that the "service" needs to be fiscally responsible etc etc......
    Except we've got some of the highest fares along with lowest fare recovery ratio of any major city in Canada. ETS isn't run as a business whatsoever.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  65. #8365
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    7,331

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by envaneo View Post
    Wrong. Transit stopped being transit when it became a business instead of a service. For instance I can remember in the 90's riding the lrt underground for free. There were no lrt Police. I can appreciate that times have changed and today I'm grateful we have lrt police on the trains and I can appreciate that the "service" needs to be fiscally responsible etc etc......
    Except we've got some of the highest fares along with lowest fare recovery ratio of any major city in Canada. ETS isn't run as a business whatsoever.
    Agreed and has the City of Edmonton figured out what option they want to go with yet at RAH?

    I'm relieved I don't need to work on the South side anymore.
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  66. #8366
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    44,243

    Default

    LRT report information session for media 
    August 17, 2017

    Media are invited to an information session about a Council report on Valley Line Southeast Intersection Performance, which is being released today. Adam Laughlin, Deputy City Manager of Integrated Infrastructure Services, and Guy Boston, Branch Manager of LRT Delivery, will speak about the report.

    Date: Thursday, August 17, 2017
    Time: 3 p.m. - 3:30 p.m.
    Location: Media Room, 2nd Floor City Hall

    There will be a 10-minute presentation and then 20 minutes for general questions.

    Media are advised that no interviews or statements will be given prior to or after the session. The next opportunity for interviews or statements will occur after the discussion at Executive Committee on Tuesday, August 22.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  67. #8367

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by B.ike View Post
    The problem is how our administration and council only ever considers the cheapest option.

    For some reason, road user costs and time lost isn't a big factor when it comes to designing our LRT.

    The response has always been, if you're commuting alongside the LRT, you should be taking it instead.
    [Heck...they said just that recently from this EJ article: "Those that are using 83 Street for commuting, we would encourage them to jump on the LRT,” said Laughlin" ]
    But if the planners took a step back and realize how tunnel-visioned that response is, they'd begin to design a bit better system.

    The same fallacy that upgrading roads to improve congestion applies here. You remove cars from a road, other cars will fill it - just because you have some people hopping onto your LRT, it doesn't necessarily equate to a under capacity road. In the meantime, you're affecting thousands of commuters, affecting commercial trade, etc. with our shortsighted design approach.

    The cars removed from the road from "LRT converts" will hardly offset the greenhouse gasses wasted by vehicles sitting idle. Nor does having a 5-car LRT run with 10% capacity help our carbon footprint. I doubt a cost has been placed on that.

    Administration and council keeps pushing for "cheap" but in the long term, it costs everyone more - and i can almost bet you, these factors are NOT properly quantified in their studies: simply looking at "average delay time" doesn't tell you nothing unless you're willing to extrapolate the numbers.

    The unwillingness to grade separate key intersections on the Valley line due to cost is just mind-numbing. Of course Council has washed their hands when they commissioned the biased review on how much to elevate the line between Avonmore and Connors, and it concluded it was too expensive to issue a change order now. The real question was why wasn't it designed for 5 years ago.

    And of course the standard response is: "Adam Laughlin, the city’s head of infrastructure, said he believes that problem will be managed through careful signal timing" - just like how they had creative timing on 114st, 111st and kingsway avenue. I guess they're optimistic the that red light wait times will be 5 minutes instead of 8 minutes I've seen at the listed locations.


    And as I've said before, on the other hand, our neighbours to the south are championing a gold-plated solution. $5bln - 20 kilometre line which will probably balloon to $6-7bln given the ambitious magnitude of the design. That design is equally questionable, but it sure highlights a tale of two cities.
    There's a rather apparent soft oppression regarding LRT as well - the model dictates where you can go. Just like you quoted, any user of 83 St obviously is going wherever the trains is, right? Deviating from that route is brutally expensive in time, which is the resource that should be the absolute priority over all others. That our LRT is not generally faster, and often makes every other option slower by its addition, proves that our implementation is generally harmful, instead of a net benefit. But it could be with some pointedly obvious design changes that planners seem to intentionally avoid.
    "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" - Blaise Pascal

  68. #8368
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,415

    Default

    Had to drive to work this morning to pick something up before going someplace else.

    Don't usually drive to work so made the mistake of choosing a route requiring a left turn on 107 Avenue to go south on 105 Street.

    The left turn light on 107 Avenue no longer allows for a turn when there is a green light for east-west movement. There were two cars ahead of me waiting to turn left.

    So this is the sequence of green lights.

    EB to WB
    NB to WB
    Barriers come down for SB train
    EB to WB
    NB to WB (first car ahead of me turns left illegally during this phase)
    Barriers come down for NB train
    EB to WB (second car ahead of me turns left illegally when EB light turns orange)
    NB to WB
    And finally, WB to SB allowing me to legally turn left.

    Total waiting time to make a left turn from 107 Avenue onto 105 Street was 6 and a half minutes.

    Perhaps some of this could be fixed by better signalling. For instance, there is very little traffic going north on 105 Street to turn left during the morning rush hour (almost inviting left turning drivers to run a red light).

    Right now the NAIT trains only run on a 15 minute peak period frequency. I shudder to think how dysfunctional this intersection will become with the eventual five minute frequencies.

  69. #8369

    Default

    There's almost never significant traffic on 105st in either direction especially now with the NB closure at 105, but those in charge of signalling haven't made any adjustments.

    Really they're applying a signalling philosophy suitable for major arterials in the suburbs (separate phases to eliminate conflicts as much as possible) to locations where it doesn't make sense, and they're doing it badly.
    There can only be one.

  70. #8370
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,415

    Default

    ^Prior to the LRT going through, a left turn on a WB green light onto 105 Street from 107 Avenue was allowed. I presume the reason it's no longer allowed is so that cars waiting to turn left don't get trapped between the barriers when a train comes through.

    I don't have a problem with the separate left turning phase which is likely required for safety reasons. But the City should consider reducing the NB to WB green light phase (either by shortening it or allowing for it every second signalling cycle) especially so long as the traffic blockage north of 104 Avenue severely restricts the amount NB traffic on 105 Street.

  71. #8371
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    7,331

    Default

    107 Ave is busy almost all the time anyway. I used to work at Direct Buy in the industrial park area. The 178th street intersection is nuts.
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  72. #8372
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    9,806

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    ^Prior to the LRT going through, a left turn on a WB green light onto 105 Street from 107 Avenue was allowed. I presume the reason it's no longer allowed is so that cars waiting to turn left don't get trapped between the barriers when a train comes through.

    I don't have a problem with the separate left turning phase which is likely required for safety reasons. But the City should consider reducing the NB to WB green light phase (either by shortening it or allowing for it every second signalling cycle) especially so long as the traffic blockage north of 104 Avenue severely restricts the amount NB traffic on 105 Street.
    You mean the CoE should take in to account that 105 Street Northbound has been pretty much closed for 2 years, and will be for another 2 in their light sequencing? But that would require forethought and planning!

  73. #8373
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,384

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by B.ike View Post

    And of course the standard response is: "Adam Laughlin, the city’s head of infrastructure, said he believes that problem will be managed through careful signal timing" - just like how they had creative timing on 114st, 111st and kingsway avenue. I guess they're optimistic the that red light wait times will be 5 minutes instead of 8 minutes I've seen at the listed locations.
    Theoretically, the problem can largely be dealt with through light timing. Traffic lights need to allow flow in the direction of the tracks for a significant fraction of the time. Problems occur when lights block drivers from crossing the tracks even when the train isn't using them, and entire intersections sit empty for significant periods of time. It shouldn't take more than 30-40 seconds of traffic stoppage to allow a train to pass, and cross traffic should be allowed immediately after. With current timings, 5 minute frequency on the metro line (resulting in a train crossing kingsway / 111 every 2.5 minutes on average) would be a total disaster. With optimized timings, things would be no worse than they are today.

  74. #8374
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    I don't even know anymore :/
    Posts
    913

    Default

    ^ The issue is that the city has not once shown us that they can do this. I've seen it in other cities, it can be done, but it doesn't mean it will. Especially with human drivers, it makes it a lot more tricky than if it was automated.

  75. #8375
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    I don't even know anymore :/
    Posts
    913

    Default

    ^ The issue is that the city has not once shown us that they can do this. I've seen it in other cities, it can be done, but it doesn't mean it will.

  76. #8376
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    7,331

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by seamusmcduffs View Post
    ^ The issue is that the city has not once shown us that they can do this. I've seen it in other cities, it can be done, but it doesn't mean it will. Especially with human drivers, it makes it a lot more tricky than if it was automated.
    Huh?

    I might be missing something here but for example, there's no problem when the train leaves Belvedere station. I've been in a car waiting for the 30-40 seconds for said train to clear so traffic can resume. At 66th street no problem. All the way down the Capital line from Clareview to Century Park, there are no signaling issues.
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  77. #8377

    Default

    On the southern leg, I've frequently had to wait several light cycles to get straight through or turn left from 34th avenue, or 51st avenue, and even some of the smaller crossing have this issue. It's only when the trains are running 5 minute frequencies, but that's also the same time the roads are the busiest.

    Most people have just learned to avoid 111th street entirely, and find alternate routes, but that's not always possible.

  78. #8378

    Default

    It's rather pathetic, actually. on the old NE line where they there's no coordination at all between traffic signals and the LRT everything works just fine, while on the south leg they've got fancy programs that are supposed to make it all better an it's worse - although you can't blame the signals for the whole problem when the train's location beside/in the median of the street is a huge part of the problem.
    There can only be one.

  79. #8379

    Default

    most of the issues could be solved by a quick cut and cover tunnel under major roadway... Something I've been a big proponents of since C2E existed. I've been told "it costs too much" "Your just anti transit - pro car" all because I want a well functioning LRT system that is efficient and doesn't cause too much conflict for other modes of transportation. I'm not calling to bury the whole line, or turn this into the TTC subway. Just a few cut and cover tunnels under key/busy intersections would go such a long way...

    but as with anything in this city, we always try to take the cheapest way of doing things, only to find out later it doesn't work well, and then end up spending much more to go back and fix those mistakes, then it would have cost to just DO IT RIGHT IN THE FIRST PLACE.

  80. #8380
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    1,378

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    most of the issues could be solved by a quick cut and cover tunnel under major roadway... Something I've been a big proponents of since C2E existed. I've been told "it costs too much" "Your just anti transit - pro car" all because I want a well functioning LRT system that is efficient and doesn't cause too much conflict for other modes of transportation. I'm not calling to bury the whole line, or turn this into the TTC subway. Just a few cut and cover tunnels under key/busy intersections would go such a long way...

    but as with anything in this city, we always try to take the cheapest way of doing things, only to find out later it doesn't work well, and then end up spending much more to go back and fix those mistakes, then it would have cost to just DO IT RIGHT IN THE FIRST PLACE.
    100% agree with you. In fact, your (also my) opinion seems to be like a great compromise between what the city wants (all surface) and what a lot of Edmontonians want (all grade separated). I'm totally okay with a majority of the system running surface level, as long as there is grade separation at major intersections.

  81. #8381

    Default

    That's all I want. Grade separation at a few major intersections. The amount of stupidpeople that have responded that "We don't want a high floor LRT" or "you only care about cars" "transit should be first priority screw everything/anyone else" "Why don't you just stay out in the suburbs" "WE can't afford to tunnel the whole thing" "Edmonton's not made out of money". I just want a transit system that works. One that provides a competitive option to driving a car everywhere. One that people will go "hey, taking transit is a better idea to get downtown, then my single occupancy vehicle" right now, we are building a transit system that the only people that will use it are those that are already forced to use it financially. If we ever hope to have a significant mode shift, the way we are building LRT will never achieve that.

    But hey, I only care about cars... right. Where is Mark Gitzel (Edmonton Daily Photo)? I really want to rub his slimey little face in a big mount of sheepshit right now. He disappeared right as a I had my first "I told you so" moment here. Moahunter, feel free to dig in anytime.

    Making stupidmistakes that cost us more in the long run is not the answer either. How much more money is it going to take to fix the NAIT line to what it should've been in the first place, is going to cost 100's of millions of dollars over and above what it would've originally cost to "DO IT RIGHT THE FIRST TIME"
    Last edited by Medwards; 01-09-2017 at 03:16 PM.

  82. #8382
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    1,378

    Default

    And again, there is no need to tunnel or "skytrain" the whole thing. Easily 90% could be surface, it would only be like 10% that needs to be grade separated. That would still cheaper than grade separated the entire way.

  83. #8383

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    It's rather pathetic, actually. on the old NE line where they there's no coordination at all between traffic signals and the LRT everything works just fine, while on the south leg they've got fancy programs that are supposed to make it all better an it's worse - although you can't blame the signals for the whole problem when the train's location beside/in the median of the street is a huge part of the problem.
    NE LRT doesn't cross at intersections so you only temporarily affect two directions of travel.

    Whereas everything else we've built since then has been designed to go through intersections at grade which means you affect 2 through movements, and 4 turning movements. Oh not to mention, the right of way is now massive, so whenever a pedestrian wants to cross, they are given 45 seconds to cross. Which during rush hour will tie up green time from the other minor movements. With the right conditions, a left turn on a road perpendicular to 111 St could take 7 minutes.

    They had the foresight to see that Belgravia was an issue but didn't have the foresight to see that University Avenue, 51 avenue and 34 avenue would become clusterfucks during rush hour.


    Honestly, as a tax payer I hate to see any more money being pi$$ed onto this line, but the Kingsway and princess elizabeth crossings should be fixed. Heck even 107 avenue, should have been cut and covered in the first place. That was a small portion that wouldn't have been expensive. Not to mention disruptions during construction are less pronounced as well. Instead of trying to accommodate traffic over a year while you meander vehicles through a construction zone, just shut it down for two months, put the road back up and construct the LRT line separated from traffic...

    And best part, while the millwoods line is behind us with the same mistakes, we already see that the initial design for the west leg calls for an at-grade crossing at 87 avenue and 178 st.

  84. #8384
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    10,410

    Default

    The LRT seems to go slow on 105 Street, along with traffic. I think the turning arrows could be cut at the 106 Avenue lights. Also, the lights at 106 Street/Kingsway/111 have not changed their signalling in two years. Long lights are a killer in Edmonton.
    "Talk minus action equals zero." - Joe Keithley, D. O. A.

  85. #8385
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    edmonton
    Posts
    4,288

    Default

    Thank goodness the Capital Line south extension is slated to go under 23rd ave. They'd better do the same at Ellerslie Road when the time comes. I recently hammered that point in the online survey.
    Nisi Dominus Frustra

  86. #8386

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    most of the issues could be solved by a quick cut and cover tunnel under major roadway... Something I've been a big proponents of since C2E existed. I've been told "it costs too much" "Your just anti transit - pro car" all because I want a well functioning LRT system that is efficient and doesn't cause too much conflict for other modes of transportation. I'm not calling to bury the whole line, or turn this into the TTC subway. Just a few cut and cover tunnels under key/busy intersections would go such a long way...

    but as with anything in this city, we always try to take the cheapest way of doing things, only to find out later it doesn't work well, and then end up spending much more to go back and fix those mistakes, then it would have cost to just DO IT RIGHT IN THE FIRST PLACE.
    stop it, you're making too much sense.

  87. #8387
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Ozerna, North Edmonton
    Posts
    8,961

    Default

    Greyhound confirms deal with Edmonton Transit to shuttle passengers to Kingsway
    630CHED
    By Scott Johnston

    On Thursday, Peter Hamel, the regional vice-president of Western Canada for Greyhound confirmed to 630 CHED that a plan is in place for getting passengers to the Kingsway LRT station from the Via train station.

    “The passengers will come in, the buses will be unloaded at the Via station. Those passengers requiring transportation or connecting to any of the city infrastructure will be transported free of charge from the Via to the Kingsway. At the same time we’ll have a pick up for any passengers that are there. The buses will then return to the Via and drop those people off for departure.”
    http://globalnews.ca/news/3723608/ed...ransit-centre/

  88. #8388
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    7,331

    Default

    Routes not with standing but why can't some Greyhound passengers be just dropped off at Kingsway on the way?
    Last edited by envaneo; 08-09-2017 at 03:13 AM.
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  89. #8389
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    10,410
    "Talk minus action equals zero." - Joe Keithley, D. O. A.

  90. #8390
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    9,806

    Default

    It just never ends. I would hope that anyone involved in any significant capacity in the decision to try to retain the old Capital line mechanical signalling system and integrate it with a brand new digital one has been given their walking papers. Penny wise and pound foolish.

  91. #8391

    Default

    Just awful. The saddest thing is, they can probably keep this game going forever.

  92. #8392

    Default

    They should just change it to a transfer at Churchill station. I wonder if that can be done with the existing track.

  93. #8393
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,166

    Default

    It could be done with the existing track given that they've been doing something like that during their various weekend track maintenance projects. (Not always, but sometimes).

  94. #8394
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    10,410

    Default

    I wonder if there's a push to get the LRT signalling fixed by Election Day.
    "Talk minus action equals zero." - Joe Keithley, D. O. A.

  95. #8395

    Default

    I just read a page in an 'Avenue' magazine that says that the MacEwan Station platform can only hold 100 people at a time, which is WAY too small to be used by crowds from the arena right next to it. In fact, they try to discourage people from using the station next door, and encourage them to instead go to another station 3 blocks away!

    How the hell can someone design a train station next to an arena that can't accommodate arena crowds? How come EVERYTHING about this LRT line was done wrong?

  96. #8396
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    9,806

    Default

    Because the station and line were designed and under construction before the arena location had even been determined. It could have been at Jasper/106th, or the Quarters. Heck, it wasn't even determined whether an arena was going to be built downtown at all, as opposed to renovating the Coliseum. The big panic for the Metro line was getting the available Federal funding for it, and coordinating it's tunneling with the construction of the Epcor Tower, if memory serves.

    It's unfortunate that it turned out the way it did in relation to the arena, but I'm not sure there was any way of avoiding how it turned out other than having a crystal ball.

  97. #8397
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    10,410

    Default

    Turn off the escalator on the east side (next to the elevator) of MacEwan Station and the crowd flow should be easier after the game.
    "Talk minus action equals zero." - Joe Keithley, D. O. A.

  98. #8398

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    Because the station and line were designed and under construction before the arena location had even been determined.
    I don't buy it. The Belvedere and Health Sciences LRT stations were built smaller initially, but were constructed so they could be made expandable (which they eventually did in both cases). Why the hell didn't anyone think to do the same with the MacEwan station?

    Did they think the big gravel around it would never see any development or that MacEwan wouldn't expand East and North?

  99. #8399

    Default

    That's fine if you don't buy it. Macewan station was also built to extend to 5 cars long in terms of platform, however that's not the problem the problem is that the platform is very narrow, and that aspect can't be fixed without a complete station re-do. The size of the platform wouldn't be a concern if Macewan or the area filled in with anything else but an arena. The arena and its events puts demand on the station that anything else wouldn't even come close to.
    Last edited by Medwards; 18-09-2017 at 03:30 PM.

  100. #8400
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    7,331

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    Because the station and line were designed and under construction before the arena location had even been determined.
    I don't buy it. The Belvedere and Health Sciences LRT stations were built smaller initially, but were constructed so they could be made expandable (which they eventually did in both cases). Why the hell didn't anyone think to do the same with the MacEwan station?

    Did they think the big gravel around it would never see any development or that MacEwan wouldn't expand East and North?
    Belvedere is considerably longer then Health Sciences and MacEwan, different circumstances. The original Belvedere station looked similar to Coliseum station before it was rebuilt to what it is now.
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

Page 84 of 85 FirstFirst ... 3474808182838485 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
  •