Edmonton Public Transit - Page 172

ue · #**3421** Posted **Sep 9, 2009, 12:23 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by lightrail

I still don't understand why Edmonton is abandoning the thought of expanding trains through the downtown tunnel. The original Bachtel report from 1962 (I believe) envisioned six lines all converging and running through a twin bore tunnel under downtown Edmonton. That tunnel can take a lot more traffic that the one train every 5 minutes on the current schedule.

The only reason I can see is the city wants to jump on the low floor band-wagon and can't be bother to spend the money to convert the existing system to low-floor.

I don't buy the arguement that the downtown tunnel can't handle the traffic - that makes no sense. And isn't it ironic that Edmonton started with a tunnel and is now considering building LRT on the surface, while Calgary started with LRT on the surface and is now planning to build a tunnel.

But Calgary's system is more high floor and less inviting I think, whereas the other cities have it low floor and stuff. I think low floor integrates more with the surroundings making it more successful. I prefer the low floor, anyways. But itis a great point. I still like the idea of Edmonton having 'subway' tunnels downtown though, not many cities our size can say that. I assume both will still be used well though.

feepa · #**3422** Posted **Sep 9, 2009, 1:19 AM**

spotted: Jesus, he was riding a low floor train! Low Floor will do what high floor can't!

mintzilla · #**3423** Posted **Sep 9, 2009, 1:21 AM**

if council decided that lowfloor had to go underground through downtown i would fully support that. I know it will be costly but we need to look past the cost and do what will be best 30-40 years in the future.

mcc16 · #**3424** Posted **Sep 9, 2009, 3:32 AM**

k, If edmonton is serious about being a transit oriented city, wouldn't it make more sense to have both the stony plain line and the 87th ave line. The 87th ave line could be high floor and tie into the current system so that a northsider could hop on the train at clareview and take it to the mall.

And then, sometime down the road, we could build the low floor stony plain route ...

CMD UW · #**3425** Posted **Sep 9, 2009, 4:33 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by lightrail

I still don't understand why Edmonton is abandoning the thought of expanding trains through the downtown tunnel. The original Bachtel report from 1962 (I believe) envisioned six lines all converging and running through a twin bore tunnel under downtown Edmonton. That tunnel can take a lot more traffic that the one train every 5 minutes on the current schedule.

The only reason I can see is the city wants to jump on the low floor band-wagon and can't be bother to spend the money to convert the existing system to low-floor.

I don't buy the arguement that the downtown tunnel can't handle the traffic - that makes no sense. And isn't it ironic that Edmonton started with a tunnel and is now considering building LRT on the surface, while Calgary started with LRT on the surface and is now planning to build a tunnel.

It only has capacity to accommodate one more line.

Whats ironic? Our current LRT runs underground, Calgary's doesn't. The West route will be on the surface with low floor trams, which integrate much better with the road and traffic than our current LRT trains do.

lightrail · #**3426** Posted **Sep 9, 2009, 8:04 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by CMD UW

It only has capacity to accommodate one more line.

Whats ironic? Our current LRT runs underground, Calgary's doesn't. The West route will be on the surface with low floor trams, which integrate much better with the road and traffic than our current LRT trains do.

I don't agree with the one more line for the tunnel. It could handle three at each end with trains every 6 minutes on each line (ev. 2 min in the tunnel). I just think Edmonton is not utilizing an expensive piece of infrastructure to its maximum advantage. A train every 5 minutes through the tunnel is not busy.

Anyway - look forward to seeing any expansion of the system, if if it is a separate system.

ue · #**3427** Posted **Sep 9, 2009, 9:26 PM**

Keep in mind many tracks don't even overlap and go to the same stops as another, so it doesn't have to feel completely different. There can be connections at Churchill, Health Sciences, (in the future) Clareview, 137 Ave, etc. Even the other dt stations like Central and Bay will only be a couple blocks away. Nice to get a couple blocks of fresh air in. Again, walkability.

feepa · #**3428** Posted **Sep 9, 2009, 10:18 PM**

walkability has nothing to do with making people walk a few extra blocks to catch their transfer, and also has nothing to do with building an awesome piece of infrastructure (the downtown LRT tunnel) and then under-utilizing it

CMD UW · #**3429** Posted **Sep 10, 2009, 3:01 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by lightrail

I don't agree with the one more line for the tunnel. It could handle three at each end with trains every 6 minutes on each line (ev. 2 min in the tunnel). I just think Edmonton is not utilizing an expensive piece of infrastructure to its maximum advantage. A train every 5 minutes through the tunnel is not busy.

Anyway - look forward to seeing any expansion of the system, if if it is a separate system.

Then perhaps you can tell the Transportation engineers who claim otherwise. I guess they must be missing something....next

frinkprof · #**3430** Posted **Sep 10, 2009, 2:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by feepa

walkability has nothing to do with making people walk a few extra blocks to catch their transfer, and also has nothing to do with building an awesome piece of infrastructure (the downtown LRT tunnel) and then under-utilizing it

I agree. Sorry edmontonenthusiast, but your last post reads like you're using the term "walkability" simply as a buzzword, as it has little meaning in this context. Also "a couple blocks of fresh air" has a whole other meaning in January when booting it to catch a transfer, especially when it can be made a whole lot easier than that.

Transit usability has a lot to do, almost everything really, with the ease of transferring. Any trip that requires a transfer is made exponentially faster, and easier if you make the transfer even minutely faster and/or easier.

CMD UW · #**3431** Posted **Sep 10, 2009, 6:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by frinkprof

I agree. Sorry edmontonenthusiast, but your last post reads like you're using the term "walkability" simply as a buzzword, as it has little meaning in this context. Also "a couple blocks of fresh air" has a whole other meaning in January when booting it to catch a transfer, especially when it can be made a whole lot easier than that.

Transit usability has a lot to do, almost everything really, with the ease of transferring. Any trip that requires a transfer is made exponentially faster, and easier if you make the transfer even minutely faster and/or easier.

You're absolutely right.

Coldrsx · #**3432** Posted **Sep 16, 2009, 2:54 PM**

Council passes transportation plan for 'walkable' city

BY GORDON KENT, EDMONTONJOURNAL.COMSEPTEMBER 16, 2009 6:39 AMCOMMENTS (10)

STORYPHOTOS ( 1 )

The LRT stops at the McKernan stop.
Photograph by: Ed Kaiser, Edmonton Journal
EDMONTON — City council has approved a transportation master plan that over the next 30 years aims to shift more people out of their cars and onto public transit, bicycles or their feet.

"We're no longer looking at just balancing (vehicle) needs, but how we can look into the future...and change the way we move around Edmonton so we can become that compact, efficient city that's outlined in the city vision," said Rhonda Toohey, general supervisor of strategic transportation planning.

The plan, introduced last fall to replace the previous 1999 plan, emphasizes that streets should be widened primarily to allow better movement of goods rather than commuters, with a focus on transporting people more efficiently in fewer vehicles, she said.

It also recognizes the entire transportation network is interconnected.

"We're looking at having more people on transit, more people walking and cycling, as their preferred transportation choices," she said.

"If you don't have a good sidewalk system, or the sidewalks are in poor repair...how do you get to your bus? It's the whole system we have to look at."

The long-term plans for transportation and municipal development, which likely won't be passed until next winter, have gone forward at the same time to ensure they jointly promote the best use of land, Toohey said.

The goals of the transportation plan include:

-Expanding the LRT network to all corners of Edmonton and possibly into the region.

-Building a citywide premium transit network with faster, more reliable service and direct connections to major destinations, as well as using technology such as bus priority and passenger information systems to make transit a competitive way of travelling.

-Working with other areas to ensure Edmonton has a safe, efficient network for moving goods and services that includes Anthony Henday Drive, the inner ring road, highway connectors to roads such as Yellowhead Trail, and good rail and air links.

-Making Edmonton more walkable and creating a bicycle-friendly city that features an integrated network of multi-use trails.

Last month, council's transportation and public works committee approved a plan to spend $58 million by 2017 on new sidewalks, adding multi-use trails, marking on-street bicycle routes, constructing curb ramps and other parts of the active transportation strategy.

[email protected]

© Copyright (c) The Edmonton Journal

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/edmo...on+plan+walkable+city/1997302/story.html

naidoo · #**3433** Posted **Sep 17, 2009, 6:34 AM**

Why do I keep reading the depressing, pointless and usually misinformed comments at the end of these Journal articles?

Coldrsx · #**3434** Posted **Sep 17, 2009, 2:24 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by naidoo

Why do I keep reading the depressing, pointless and usually misinformed comments at the end of these Journal articles?

happens everywhere

to keep in balance i read toronto, ottawa, calgary, and vancouver papers on occasion to be reminded that what we put up with here, they do as well.

Daveography · #**3435** Posted **Sep 17, 2009, 2:34 PM**

^ & ^^ Yup, I try to force myself not to read online news article comments anymore, but - like the proverbial trainwreck - I can't help but peek every once in a while and be horrified.

Coldrsx · #**3436** Posted **Sep 19, 2009, 4:24 AM**

Century Park LRT station to get park-and-ride lot

By Gordon Kent, edmontonjournal.comSeptember 18, 2009Comments (1)

EDMONTON — A temporary park-and-ride should be ready at Century Park when the LRT station opens next April under a proposed $1.5-million deal to build the new lot, Coun. Bryan Anderson said Friday.

The city wants to pay Century Park Land Development Ltd. to construct the gravel, fenced, lit facility on land at the station near 111th Street and 23rd Avenue primarily owned by the company, says a report.

A 1,200-stall, six-storey LRT parkade planned for Century Park was put on hold in 2007 because of the $60-million price tag, but the economic slowdown means property at the former Heritage Mall site can be used for surface parking because condo towers aren’t going up as quickly as expected.

The 1,230-space lot is proposed to come with a five-year lease followed by annual extensions. It will cost about $100,000 a year to operate.

Council’s transportation and public works committee will discuss the idea Tuesday.

Anderson, one of the architects of the scheme, said the developer benefits by having parking for commuters who might otherwise take up stalls provided for nearby shops and offices.

While he hopes the move encourages more residents in surrounding communities to ride the LRT, he cautioned that the site will disappear when the company needs the land.

“The plan is to be ready by the station opening,” Anderson said.

“The plus is you’re going to make it easier for adjacent neighbours to ride the LRT right away. The downside is you’re going to have to reconfigure their habits down the road somewhere.”

Planners looked at establishing a temporary lot in Heritage Valley at Ellerslie Road and 127th Street linked to the LRT by shuttle bus, before land for a permanent paved structure on the other side of Ellerslie Road became available last spring.

However, the permanent facility’s initial 700-1,100 stalls won’t open until 2011, a year after the LRT reaches Century Park.

The $15-million paved lot, two-thirds funded under federal and provincial stimulus programs, will serve a nearby LRT station when the line eventually extends further south, and can also handle special-event parking and southwest bus transfers, the report says.

[email protected]
© Copyright (c) The Edmonton Journal

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/Century+Park+station+park+ride/2009455/story.html

rk2000 · #**3437** Posted **Sep 20, 2009, 4:50 AM**

That's good news. The original plan that city had was pretty hoaky.

If you lived in south deep or southwest edmonton, you had to drive to ellerslie and 127, then take a shuttle, then take the LRT...that makes for one long commute with multiple transitions.

Hopefully in five year's time, we either have better bus routes in south to Heritage or an LRT station at the 127 & Ellerslie location they are aiming for.

0773|=\ · #**3438** Posted **Sep 20, 2009, 6:55 PM**

So the SE/WLRT route information sessions get undeway this week. I'm curious if there's the chance of any more information than can already be found on the city's website being presented at these sessions? Anyone thinking of going to them?

madsad · #**3439** Posted **Sep 22, 2009, 5:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by 0773|=\

So the SE/WLRT route information sessions get undeway this week. I'm curious if there's the chance of any more information than can already be found on the city's website being presented at these sessions? Anyone thinking of going to them?

More presentation materials have appeared on the LRT Projects website for the SE route. There is a fairly detailed plan of the preferred route option.

Jasper and one o nin · #**3440** Posted **Sep 22, 2009, 6:53 PM**

LRT to Mill Woods may be five years away Information meeting lays out possible route to southeast
Construction on the future southeast LRT line could begin within five years if funding comes through, Edmonton Transit officials said at a public information session Monday.

“We need committed funding from the provincial and federal government,” Adam Laughlin told about 100 people gathered at the Mill Woods Golf Course. “Without funding, it could be longer.”

Edmonton Transit estimates costs for the line will be $900 million to $1.2 billion. The southeast line is a part of ETS’s goal of expanding LRT service to all four quadrants of the city by 2040.

The city proposed starting the line at Churchill station and having it go through the river valley beside Louise McKinney Park and cross a new bridge. It will run past the Muttart Conservatory and Bonnie Doon Mall to Argyll Road, then south along 75th Street/66th Street to the Millwoods Transit Centre.

Travelling the entire line is expected to take 18 to 19 minutes with future daily ridership of 46,000 to 48,000.
Trains used will run at street level with dedicated rights-of-way.

Maryanne Trann, who has lived at 79th Avenue and 81st Street for 10 years, is worried about whether she’ll have to move to make way for the line.

“The construction period will be very unpleasant,” she said.

“But I’m also glad they’re doing it. It could really rejuvenate the neighbourhood.”

The meeting was the first of four public sessions; another will be held on Wednesday at 5 p.m. at Old-timers’ Cabin (9430 99th St).