Edmonton Public Transit - Page 280

Hallsy's Toupee · #**5581** Posted **Oct 19, 2012, 5:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by s211

I don't just care about tourism in Edmonton. I care about Edmonton, and in a world of depleting financial resources for governments, I question the expenditure of millions of dollars in this location. Frankly, it would be cheaper to give tourists taxi vouchers to visit this area than to put in station infrastructure here.

Yeah, typical "good enuff fer lil ol Edmonchuk" thinking

Albicaulis · #**5582** Posted **Oct 19, 2012, 5:05 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by tallisgood

It would be certifiably insane to build an LRT line that goes right past an important tourist destination AND DOESN'T STOP THERE!

The real cost in that area is the river crossing and tunnelling operations. The construction of a new station at Muttart is a drop in the buck in comparison. The line will be going through there anyway, will serve the Cloverdale community, and be easily accessible from Connors Road and 98th Avenue. Ideal location for a station.

Xelebes · #**5583** Posted **Oct 19, 2012, 5:51 PM**

Would a Cloverdale station be more appropriate?

s211 · #**5584** Posted **Oct 19, 2012, 6:08 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by tallisgood

It would be certifiably insane to build an LRT line that goes right past an important tourist destination AND DOESN'T STOP THERE!

I'm dying to know how many people actually visit the Muttart. I happen to like it a lot, but worthy of an LRT stop? How many people are going to bundle their granny onto the LRT for a trip to the Muttart? I just don't see it.

And the folk fest? For those few days of the year, a multi-million dollar LRT stop is justified?

At the end of the day, I just don't see the financial costs being worth it.

rapid_business · #**5585** Posted **Oct 19, 2012, 6:39 PM**

Again, think of it as a community stop like McKernan/Belgravia, and that all those other things mentioned are just supplementary.

Black Star · #**5586** Posted **Oct 19, 2012, 7:03 PM**

I think we have to look at what is there now....to what could be there in 2...5...or 10 years. Our population is not gonna be shrinking anytime soon. Even when the LRT south is built out we might have more of a population shift more to the core which will definitely IMO call for a stop at the Muttart.

All Aboard

Xelebes · #**5587** Posted **Oct 19, 2012, 7:08 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by rapid_business

Again, think of it as a community stop like McKernan/Belgravia, and that all those other things mentioned are just supplementary.

Again, how about a Cloverdale Station?

rapid_business · #**5588** Posted **Oct 19, 2012, 7:22 PM**

Is it not the same thing? It IS, for all intensive purposes, a Cloverdale Station. Siting of the station is due to slope and geographical barriers.

tallisgood · #**5589** Posted **Oct 19, 2012, 7:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SHOFEAR

It would be the only chance for a stop in the river valley. It gives us a great starting point for developing recreational infrastructure.

One of the difficulties in providing services in the valley is there are hundreds of entry points. There are few areas that are busy enough to support businesses are services. An LRT stop would create that.

Excellent point.

Coldrsx · #**5590** Posted **Oct 20, 2012, 6:00 PM**

^excatly and ^^ bingo.

EdmTrekker · #**5591** Posted **Oct 20, 2012, 9:09 PM**

IMO the station should be right at the river crossing...that way it feeds into Louise McKinney park as well as the Muttart area. As it stands (and I am looking at the location of the stop right now from my front window) not one person will use it except for Folk Fest. There is ZERO foot traffic in this area all day long. It is difficult to cross all those traffic lanes to get to the river valley or cross the new bridge. Why not make it part of the bridge??

Coldrsx · #**5592** Posted **Oct 20, 2012, 9:17 PM**

Bridge would be cool, but expensive.

s4.audios · #**5593** Posted **Oct 20, 2012, 9:46 PM**

A stop on the bridge would be so cool!! And unique; I'd pay an extra buck for a stop like that.

Hallsy's Toupee · #**5594** Posted **Oct 21, 2012, 1:22 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by EdmTrekker

IMO the station should be right at the river crossing...that way it feeds into Louise McKinney park as well as the Muttart area. As it stands (and I am looking at the location of the stop right now from my front window) not one person will use it except for Folk Fest. There is ZERO foot traffic in this area all day long. It is difficult to cross all those traffic lanes to get to the river valley or cross the new bridge. Why not make it part of the bridge??

Are you going to suggest that idea to the city?

Black Star · #**5595** Posted **Oct 21, 2012, 5:29 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by EdmTrekker

IMO the station should be right at the river crossing...that way it feeds into Louise McKinney park as well as the Muttart area. As it stands (and I am looking at the location of the stop right now from my front window) not one person will use it except for Folk Fest. There is ZERO foot traffic in this area all day long. It is difficult to cross all those traffic lanes to get to the river valley or cross the new bridge. Why not make it part of the bridge??

Actually thats a rock star idea.......

Pass this one along to the city....

ue · #**5596** Posted **Oct 21, 2012, 5:47 AM**

Wow, people are actually complaining about a Muttart/Cloverdale stop? I question the necessity of some stations, but a Muttart Station? One of Edmonton's main attractions, a river boat, good drop off point to check out the river valley trails, Folk Fest, and a somewhat dense residential community. Not to mention, with a station being there, there's more opportunity for even further development of the area. Things such as river valley infrastructure, more festivals, more condos and townhouses.

How is this any different than a Calgary Zoo stop? Or how about Churchill? Why was that station necessary, what with it being so close to Central? Aside from some city workers, its main draws are mere tourist traps (that also are used by locals, like the Muttart) - AGA, Winspear, Citadel, and Churchill.

EdmTrekker · #**5597** Posted **Oct 21, 2012, 9:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

Bridge would be cool, but expensive.

It is worth exploring...

EdmTrekker · #**5598** Posted **Oct 21, 2012, 9:08 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hallsy's Toupee

Are you going to suggest that idea to the city?

I only thought of the idea after Shofear's post about access to the river valley. It made perfect sense...but needed to link both sides. I thought about some old years ago that were floated for a new high level bridge...with some commercial development on the bridge. Obviously it would be much less expansive on a LRT/pedestrian route only. The platform could easily be accommodated on the bridge deck and serve both sides of the river...a meeting point.

basilbrush · #**5599** Posted **Oct 22, 2012, 6:26 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ciudad_del_norte

^ I can't speak for those that made the video but I think showing details like that are beyond the scope of what the video is to portray. A lot of those details require a fair bit of modelling and design and I think the video is intended more to have a friendly way to demonstrate the route in general. It isn't really new info, but it reminds people of the project and keeps them interested. A lot of people that are going to watch the video just aren't interested in chanelization and access configuration.

You're probably mostly correct on this - particularly on the point of keeping people interested. Does this well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ciudad_del_norte

Also, I lived down by Century Park when that section opened and although there are a few places that can be annoying I don't buy into the drama of how horrible it is.

Agreed on the Century Park area. 51 ave was much worse and the transportation department admitted they were completely caught off guard by the situation. Demonstrating they were still in the usual reactive - rather than proactive mind-set. It is more or less "fixed" now, but as you can see i am looking for evidence that this mind-set has changed. I'd rather not just be - hopeful.

The SE LRT introduces many more points of road/track interaction. Not just at key intersections. There are several instances where the track traverses the road from a centre position to east side or to west side etc..

basilbrush · #**5600** Posted **Oct 22, 2012, 6:29 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by EdmTrekker

I only thought of the idea after Shofear's post about access to the river valley. It made perfect sense...but needed to link both sides. I thought about some old years ago that were floated for a new high level bridge...with some commercial development on the bridge. Obviously it would be much less expansive on a LRT/pedestrian route only. The platform could easily be accommodated on the bridge deck and serve both sides of the river...a meeting point.

It would likely add some significant costs to the new bridge. Despite that, I think it would be the perfect solution to serve both sides of the river. Better than the current Muttart station plan anyway.

Great Idea!