Edmonton Public Transit

[Harrison]

Now would be the time to construct any improvements to the Metro Line before the "boom" starts up again.

[Hallsy's Toupee]

Although it's hard to disagree with the Metro being a fiasco, I'm concerned that national media outlets such as NP seem to favor local writers who like to slam or embarrass their home city in front of a countrywide readership. (see: Colby Cosh).

[mcc16]

exactly

[Spliff]

Originally Posted by Hallsy's Toupee

Although it's hard to disagree with the Metro being a fiasco, I'm concerned that national media outlets such as NP seem to favor local writers who like to slam or embarrass their home city in front of a countrywide readership. (see: Colby Cosh).

I don't think he is slamming Edmonton, he is just bringing awareness to a huge problem that exists in Canada, which is the disregard for the efficient use of tax monies by public officials.

Canada, which is already beaucratically bloated and has wayyy to much government for a country of 35 000 000 people, naturally, over taxes its citizens. The new tax happy Liberal federal government is about to engage in a tax funded spending orgy on public transit. The writer was simply pointing out the before they do this, they should look into the Metro Line boondoggle, because it is a classic example of how public officials take tax monies for granted which results is financial waste, lack of efficiency, little to no accountability and mediocre infrastructure.

I didn't feel the writer was embarrassing or slamming Edmonton. Not at all. I thought it was a great piece, and I hope Edmonton's elected official read it and learn from it.

[EdmTrekker]

Originally Posted by Hallsy's Toupee

Although it's hard to disagree with the Metro being a fiasco, I'm concerned that national media outlets such as NP seem to favor local writers who like to slam or embarrass their home city in front of a countrywide readership. (see: Colby Cosh).

Too late. And the next fiasco has been approved by City Council once the LRT crosses Argyle Road on the dinky slow moving surface track cars running at a snails pace. This is shaping up to be quite the cluster fuck.

[Daveography]

Originally Posted by EdmTrekker

Too late. And the next fiasco has been approved by City Council once the LRT crosses Argyle Road on the dinky slow moving surface track cars running at a snails pace. This is shaping up to be quite the cluster —.

Valley Line is elevated over Argyll Road. It's where the one elevated station is located.

[Makenosmallplans]

Originally Posted by Spliff

I don't think he is slamming Edmonton, he is just bringing awareness to a huge problem that exists in Canada, which is the disregard for the efficient use of tax monies by public officials.

Canada, which is already beaucratically bloated and has wayyy to much government for a country of 35 000 000 people, naturally, over taxes its citizens. The new tax happy Liberal federal government is about to engage in a tax funded spending — on public transit. The writer was simply pointing out the before they do this, they should look into the Metro Line boondoggle, because it is a classic example of how public officials take tax monies for granted which results is financial waste, lack of efficiency, little to no accountability and mediocre infrastructure.

I didn't feel the writer was embarrassing or slamming Edmonton. Not at all. I thought it was a great piece, and I hope Edmonton's elected official read it and learn from it.

I heard the writer on the CBC this morning and found I had a good deal of agreement with what he was saying. Not sure it was Edmonton slamming so much as calling out a botched project and at the same time noting how damaging this is to transit supporters.

Unlike Spliff though, i think it is somewhat independent of whether such projects are run by private sector or government - notably most northern European countries are taxed at far higher rates than we are and have excellent trains and public services - its a matter of execution and accountability. We need a professional civil service and a proper mix of public/private involvement.

[McBoo]

Originally Posted by Hallsy's Toupee

Although it's hard to disagree with the Metro being a fiasco, I'm concerned that national media outlets such as NP seem to favor local writers who like to slam or embarrass their home city in front of a countrywide readership. (see: Colby Cosh).

The National Post won't print any story about Edmonton unless it's negative. Ironically (perhaps) the "Alberta" editorial for the Post all comes through Calgary.

That said - the Valley line disaster will be the at-grade cross-over at Whyte Avenue. Total effing cluster-fork that will prove - yet again - that City transportation planners were all schooled at the Kremlin.

And then, after that disaster, the transportation big brains will give us an at-grade crossing on 104 ave and 109 street.

Brilliant.

[technomad]

Originally Posted by McBoo

The National Post won't print any story about Edmonton unless it's negative. Ironically (perhaps) the "Alberta" editorial for the Post all comes through Calgary.

That said - the Valley line disaster will be the at-grade cross-over at Whyte Avenue. Total effing cluster-fork that will prove - yet again - that City transportation planners were all schooled at the Kremlin.

And then, after that disaster, the transportation big brains will give us an at-grade crossing on 104 ave and 109 street.

Brilliant.

the moscow metro strongly disagrees with this statement

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=137740

compare any of those stations to grandin or university and weep.. at least bay and corona's scifi look have aged fairly well

[adam-machiavelli]

These Metro line and Valley line critics all forget one thing -Edmonton made a conscious and good decision to plan and build its LRT system for now on around people and not cars. Not all design must revolve around convenience for drivers. The less convenient it is to drive in this city, the happier I, and many many other people in this city will be.

I don't believe this National Post critic is a real transit advocate. If he was, he'd understand that point. He's just another car-obsessed North American desperately trying to defend an unsustainable lifestyle.

[youngregina]

Originally Posted by adam-machiavelli

These Metro line and Valley line critics all forget one thing -Edmonton made a conscious and good decision to plan and build its LRT system for now on around people and not cars. Not all design must revolve around convenience for drivers. The less convenient it is to drive in this city, the happier I, and many many other people in this city will be.

I don't believe this National Post critic is a real transit advocate. If he was, he'd understand that point. He's just another car-obsessed North American desperately trying to defend an unsustainable lifestyle.

I agree with designing around people for sure, but to make something that inconveniences a great deal of people at a great economic cost makes little sense. This line could have integrated with its surroundings in a more friendly way, and instead could have been a shining example of success - a train that actually competes with cars on its own merits would have a great many people change their minds about transit in a positive way. The way this rolled out just pissed people off, and not only drivers, but the people in the city who try and push for these projects to happen.

So in regards to convenience, it should be easy for every mode of transportation to move effectively through the city. This 'boondoggle' made it less so for not only drivers, but for passengers of the train as well. That's a big no no.

[adam-machiavelli]

There's no such thing as a project that benefits everyone. Planning 101 states that whenever a planning decision is made, there will always be winners and losers. The most important decision is whether your winners are those you intended to be the winners. In this case, I think the City has, mostly, achieved this goal.

If you want to blame anyone for cheaping out on the project, don't blame the City or the prime contractor. Blame the provincial and federal governments who are increasingly only funding projects that claim to allegedly be achievable with smaller and smaller budgets.

[Makenosmallplans]

Originally Posted by adam-machiavelli

There's no such thing as a project that benefits everyone. Planning 101 states that whenever a planning decision is made, there will always be winners and losers. The most important decision is whether your winners are those you intended to be the winners. In this case, I think the City has, mostly, achieved this goal.

If you want to blame anyone for cheaping out on the project, don't blame the City or the prime contractor. Blame the provincial and federal governments who are increasingly only funding projects that claim to allegedly be achievable with smaller and smaller budgets.

and let's remember that hindsight is 20/20. the other constraint was cost and in order to get the Metro deal through without the pothole crowd howling was to keep the cost out of the stratosphere so decisions for at-grade crossings got made - same as Universtiy Ave and 51 ave. of course, as soon as the line opens and there are traffic delays due to the crossings the pothole crowd immediately blames the administration for poor planning. I fully get the plight of the bureaucrat trying to please politicians and the flighty public at large. Still....

[Hallsy's Toupee]

10 Tired Traffic Myths That Didn't Get a Rest in 2015
http://www.citylab.com/commute/2015/12/10-tired-traffic-myths-that-didnt-get-a-rest-in-2015/422274/

[Spliff]

Originally Posted by Makenosmallplans

and let's remember that hindsight is 20/20. the other constraint was cost and in order to get the Metro deal through without the pothole crowd howling was to keep the cost out of the stratosphere so decisions for at-grade crossings got made - same as Universtiy Ave and 51 ave. of course, as soon as the line opens and there are traffic delays due to the crossings the pothole crowd immediately blames the administration for poor planning. I fully get the plight of the bureaucrat trying to please politicians and the flighty public at large. Still....

They had over 600 million go build a 3.3 km section of LRT - you'd think thats enough money to do it right. 600 MILLION!

Where is the design initiative? Where is the thinking outside the box to try to come up with cost-effective solutions that could have solved the traffic blockage? Did any of the engineers involved with the project even go to Europe, or Asia to see how other governments design their mass transit?

It's got mediocre written all over it. With the amount of tax monies these people have to work with, I think we all expected better design and more efficient product.

[ciudad_del_norte]

The article barely mentions the signalling issue, which, although there are some design aspects of the line that are a pain (the convoluted ped crossing from the station to kingsway mall), the train is still moving at half the speed it would otherwise be. A lot of the issues would be mitigated if the train was moving at full speed. It would reach intersections, and cross them more quickly. It would also be much more efficient for transit users.

If somebody wants to complain about the design of the line, whatever, but critique that on it's own merits and account for the type of operation it was designed for. I think there are legit critiques to be found, but most of them aren't nearly as sensationalist as this article makes them out to me. Instead the article purposely confuses design/operational issues and implies that they are all design for the sake of making things sound more interesting. I bet if the line had opened on time and at full operation we wouldn't see this kind of reaction. Yes, people would be annoyed about the changes still, but it would likely be some grumbling and a general collective moving forward.

[Makenosmallplans]

Originally Posted by Spliff

They had over 600 million go build a 3.3 km section of LRT - you'd think thats enough money to do it right. 600 MILLION!

Where is the design initiative? Where is the thinking outside the box to try to come up with cost-effective solutions that could have solved the traffic blockage? Did any of the engineers involved with the project even go to Europe, or Asia to see how other governments design their mass transit?

It's got mediocre written all over it. With the amount of tax monies these people have to work with, I think we all expected better design and more efficient product.

You are not wrong.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by Spliff

They had over 600 million go build a 3.3 km section of LRT - you'd think thats enough money to do it right. 600 MILLION!

Where is the design initiative? Where is the thinking outside the box to try to come up with cost-effective solutions that could have solved the traffic blockage? Did any of the engineers involved with the project even go to Europe, or Asia to see how other governments design their mass transit?

It's got mediocre written all over it. With the amount of tax monies these people have to work with, I think we all expected better design and more efficient product.

Given that the original approved project budget was $755 million, there seems to have been plenty of money available to make positive changes to the line. The changes in scope (the relocation to be c loser to NAIT) made the project worse than better. But as others have said, it was important to get the project onto the airport precinct for political reasons.

[GreenSPACE]

Before Metro Line and Ice District there was this:



101 Street Underpass - https://lostyeg.wordpress.com/2014/06/16/101-street-underpass/

[Coldrsx]

Never seen that, fantastic.