Edmonton Construction 9 (2008-08) - Page 275

Coldrsx · #**5481** Posted **May 21, 2009, 5:39 PM**

"then I'd like to see something like a water taxi that could take people from LMP to tourist sites like Ft Edm, RAM, Leg., etc., much like they have in Amsterdam, though that's a long ways into the future"

a long long ways off

CMD UW · #**5482** Posted **May 21, 2009, 6:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by IKAN104

I've been having some issues uploading files to shaw, so I'm temporarily storing these on my company's web server. If you guys want copies grab 'em cause they won't be here long.

NAIT

Can anyone guess where the permanent LRT station will be located?

Coldrsx · #**5483** Posted **May 21, 2009, 6:27 PM**

^UG in that SWC with clock and bordered by the pedways.

CMD UW · #**5484** Posted **May 21, 2009, 6:31 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

^UG in that SWC with clock and bordered by the pedways.

Assumption - IF underground....

IKAN104 · #**5485** Posted **May 21, 2009, 6:35 PM**

I don't see why that station would go underground. However, that grassy strip does look like a logical path for the LRT line to follow on its way to 97th street.

Daveography · #**5486** Posted **May 21, 2009, 6:44 PM**

^ Assuming that's where it's going...last I heard, it will swing NW from around NAIT.

CMD UW · #**5487** Posted **May 21, 2009, 7:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by RTA

^ Assuming that's where it's going...last I heard, it will swing NW from around NAIT.

Truth is, NAIT wants it through their campus versus 'diverting' around....

Coldrsx · #**5488** Posted **May 21, 2009, 7:33 PM**

great little flick about new urbanism

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGJt_YXIoJI

IKAN104 · #**5489** Posted **May 21, 2009, 7:36 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by RTA

^ Assuming that's where it's going...last I heard, it will swing NW from around NAIT.

Given that straight north (97th street) would service more of Edmonton's residents than north west, that is the more likely route.

rapid_business · #**5490** Posted **May 21, 2009, 7:53 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by IKAN104

Given that straight north (97th street) would service more of Edmonton's residents than north west, that is the more likely route.

Not necessarily. Most initial plans and discussions are pointing towards St. Albert as the terminus, with the CC Airport lands being the next logical place for a stop or two.... and then onward.

CMD UW · #**5491** Posted **May 21, 2009, 8:11 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by IKAN104

Given that straight north (97th street) would service more of Edmonton's residents than north west, that is the more likely route.

No, it will not go up 97 Street.

Put it this way, the fate of the CCA will essentially determine which route the NW the LRT will go from NAIT.

ue · #**5492** Posted **May 21, 2009, 9:50 PM**

thanks ikan for the photos.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

great little flick about new urbanism

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGJt_YXIoJI

haha

that was an awesome video. some parts were funny (***CUL-DE-SACS***) but it was all true.

i've always been a big fan of new urbanism, of course i still prefer the traditionalism of old neighbourhoods but new urbanism is amazing. i've always been a big fan of "prospect new town" in north metro denver, in longmont. search it on wikipedia if you want. it looks really cool. there are tons more examples, windermere not being one of them. i hope maybe sometime we could implent a real new urbanism in edmonton. now that's what we should extend lrt to, not gorman or lewis estates.

IKAN104 · #**5493** Posted **May 21, 2009, 9:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by CMD UW

No, it will not go up 97 Street.

Put it this way, the fate of the CCA will essentially determine which route the NW the LRT will go from NAIT.

Two things will put this question to rest and it's not the CCA (because we already know the fate of that).

1. Which route has the greatest ridership potential?
2. Which route will benefit Edmontonians?

The answers to both questions is 97th Street.

I don't however discount a branch off this line towards St.Albert many years in the future. Or a very short branch in the short term to benefit Expo.

Coldrsx · #**5494** Posted **May 21, 2009, 10:08 PM**

^I actually like the idea of taking 2 lanes out of 97st from 118ave-city limits and running LRT up there... but i think the more immediate priority is to get it headed NW to serve that quadrant of the city and eventually tie in St.Albert.

CMD UW · #**5495** Posted **May 21, 2009, 10:27 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by IKAN104

Two things will put this question to rest and it's not the CCA (because we already know the fate of that).

1. Which route has the greatest ridership potential?
2. Which route will benefit Edmontonians?

The answers to both questions is 97th Street.

I don't however discount a branch off this line towards St.Albert many years in the future. Or a very short branch in the short term to benefit Expo.

Eventually, the LRT will go 'beyond' serving just Edmontonians and municipalities will pay their share of the costs through a regional agreement.

Depends on where riders are going? 97 Street doesn't necessarily mean it will bring the greatest or highest ridership.

EdmTrekker · #**5496** Posted **May 21, 2009, 10:44 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by IKAN104

Two things will put this question to rest and it's not the CCA (because we already know the fate of that).

1. Which route has the greatest ridership potential?
2. Which route will benefit Edmontonians?

The answers to both questions is 97th Street.

I don't however discount a branch off this line towards St.Albert many years in the future. Or a very short branch in the short term to benefit Expo.

I agree with your assessment. Bus system will feed from the East and West to that line. There is not sufficient ridership from St. Albert to guarantee operating revenues (or pay for the capital cost). Same holds true for Sherwood Park. There is not 5000 commuters in each of those burbs a day heading to downtown Edmonton or the University to generate the revenues needed.

CMD UW · #**5497** Posted **May 21, 2009, 11:19 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by EdmTrekker

I agree with your assessment. Bus system will feed from the East and West to that line. There is not sufficient ridership from St. Albert to guarantee operating revenues (or pay for the capital cost). Same holds true for Sherwood Park. There is not 5000 commuters in each of those burbs a day heading to downtown Edmonton or the University to generate the revenues needed.

Transit is not a massive revenue generator regardless and relies on subsidies. Period.

feepa · #**5498** Posted **May 21, 2009, 11:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by EdmTrekker

I agree with your assessment. Bus system will feed from the East and West to that line. There is not sufficient ridership from St. Albert to guarantee operating revenues (or pay for the capital cost). Same holds true for Sherwood Park. There is not 5000 commuters in each of those burbs a day heading to downtown Edmonton or the University to generate the revenues needed.

Strathcona County Transit provided 2.25 million rides in 2008.
(I'd imagine most of those would be commuters to the uofa/downtown?)

225 days, 2.25 million riders = 10,000 riders a day... Numbers are close.. I'm not advocating Sherwood Park gets LRT anytime soon, just that the county has a pretty good amount of transit riders already.

ue · #**5499** Posted **May 21, 2009, 11:44 PM**

But one doesn't know if they're Downtown or UofA. Yes it's a large number, doesn't mean its going downtown. And I'm sure most aren't. I'd assume most would be working on the Eastern edges of the city, where it meets Strathcona County at Refinery Row, the industrial areas around that, a good portion of them going downtown as well, but not most. That's my speculation.

ExcaliburKid · #**5500** Posted **May 21, 2009, 11:48 PM**

As a resident of the Park, I'd say easily 80% of the ridership is students heading to U of A and people who work downtown. I rarely ever see buses running in Sh. Pk. outside of peak hours. We dont have a very good transit system