Edmonton Public Transit - Page 465

Xelebes · #**9281** Posted **Nov 28, 2019, 7:08 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SHOFEAR

That Y/Y growth is misleading though. Adjust those numbers to reflect overall population growth and lets see what happens.

For giggles:

Spreadsheet and chart

Sources pulled from City of Edmonton website. Estimates mean I interpolated geometrically population numbers.

Note the slight increase over the last decade (from 2010 and on) after the big climb in ridership the decade before.

mintzilla · #**9282** Posted **Nov 29, 2019, 3:05 AM**

hard to get higher ridership when all the new neighborhoods where most people are moving are purposely built as anti transit oriented.

SHOFEAR · #**9283** Posted **Nov 29, 2019, 2:36 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by mintzilla

hard to get higher ridership when all the new neighborhoods where most people are moving are purposely built as anti transit oriented.

Care to explain what exactly it is that is being done on purpose to make neighborhoods anti transit?

Thanks Xelebes, neat stuff.

feepa · #**9284** Posted **Dec 2, 2019, 5:24 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by mintzilla

hard to get higher ridership when all the new neighborhoods where most people are moving are purposely built as anti transit oriented.

Sounds like you are still stuck in the 90's suburbs. Newer suburbs are built with transit in mind.

Xelebes · #**9285** Posted **Dec 2, 2019, 9:08 PM**

I'm actually looking at the map for Windermere, while I am hesitant to try to commute there yet, the pedestrian pathways to the bus stops are nice to see. The biggest issue is servicing these communities with enough frequency to make it not a big question mark.

Coldrsx · #**9286** Posted **Dec 12, 2019, 3:42 PM**

Let's move forward.

https://edmontonjournal.com/news/local-n...m-councillor-to-rescind-approved-funding

Harrison · #**9287** Posted **Dec 12, 2019, 8:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

Let's move forward.

https://edmontonjournal.com/news/local-n...m-councillor-to-rescind-approved-funding

Thank goodness.

itom 987 · #**9288** Posted **Dec 13, 2019, 1:44 AM**

Agreed, enough of this back peddling bullshit.

Black Star · #**9289** Posted **Dec 13, 2019, 2:47 AM**

I'm all for being fiscally responsible....but you don't stop mid stream.
Way to much commitment and planning has been done.

Airboy · #**9290** Posted **Dec 13, 2019, 5:47 PM**

Glad this is moving forward. If the work had proceeded back in the 80s the system may have been built out by now. However the interest rates were considerably higher back then.

canucklehead2 · #**9291** Posted **Dec 13, 2019, 6:19 PM**

"You buy cheap you buy twice" seems like THE motto when it comes to BRT especially in the context of Ottawa which is replacing their much vaunted system with rail due to demand... Glad to see them fully commit to this project even if I'm still entirely skeptical about its motives and certainly outcomes...

kcantor · #**9292** Posted **Dec 16, 2019, 7:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by canucklehead2

"You buy cheap you buy twice" seems like THE motto when it comes to BRT especially in the context of Ottawa which is replacing their much vaunted system with rail due to demand... Glad to see them fully commit to this project even if I'm still entirely skeptical about its motives and certainly outcomes...

i'm less sure about this one...

i'm not sure why you would think having to upgrade due to demand would necessarily be a bad thing. they implemented brt quickly and less expensively than it would have cost to implement lrt. then they built ridership/demand because end users had a viable option.

we continue to do it the other way... $hitty public transit for decades and then after everyone has financially committed to private transportation we somehow expect them to change that lifestyle.

we must be the only large city in the country whose public transportation system has less riders than in the past despite ongoing growth in population. it doesn't take a leap of faith to assume there's a message there about maybe not insisting we keep doing things the same way simply because that's how we've always done them. that's the very definition of something is it not?

Black Star · #**9293** Posted **Dec 17, 2019, 6:14 AM**

[mod edit]

Unfortunately spendmonton does have an out of control spending habit. The west tram is far from a great design and the course that it will follow will be disastrous for traffic back ups. But the financial commitments put forth by the city. province and Feds has to be utilized. imo

Black Star · #**9294** Posted **Dec 17, 2019, 6:43 PM**

[mod edit]

West LRT..Tram is gonna to be a bigger gong show than the SW or the Metro line.

Coldrsx · #**9295** Posted **Dec 17, 2019, 7:08 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Black Star

West LRT..Tram is gonna to be a bigger gong show than the SW or the Metro line.

Or it will enable people to use it instead of a vehicle for short trips, commuting, visiting, hospital visits, or for events in the Downtown or at WEM...

Harrison · #**9296** Posted **Dec 17, 2019, 8:17 PM**

I am just happy that the at-grade crossing of 178 St. was nixed to have the LRT elevated over it instead. The weird urban interchange proposal at 149 St. was also a massive bullet dodged.

Black Star · #**9297** Posted **Dec 17, 2019, 11:26 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

Or it will enable people to use it instead of a vehicle for short trips, commuting, visiting, hospital visits, or for events in the Downtown or at WEM...

Absolutely this will happen. And it’s a good thing.

But at what price to have other goods and service run through the city efficiently. The route of the line and limited under and elevated sections is a real concern.

SHOFEAR · #**9298** Posted **Dec 18, 2019, 2:25 PM**

Reality is the West LRT will transfer tens of thousands of bus riders to the train and add a marginal amount of new transit users...maybe a few more than marginal if the really screw up adjacent commuting routes. Best bang for the buck for the billions of dollars it will take...probably not.

Harrison · #**9299** Posted **Dec 18, 2019, 4:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SHOFEAR

Reality is the West LRT will transfer tens of thousands of bus riders to the train and add a marginal amount of new transit users...maybe a few more than marginal if the really screw up adjacent commuting routes. Best bang for the buck for the billions of dollars it will take...probably not.

What do you think the better alternative would have been (keeping in mind costs)? BRT? Shorter route but more grade separations? Different route altogether (i.e. U of A - WEM via new bridge and 87 Ave)?

It's tough to know for sure.

Mikemike · #**9300** Posted **Dec 18, 2019, 5:37 PM**

The 87 ave and new bridge route for sure, plus actual commitment to better service on regular bus runs.
I wouldn’t have an issue if with the planned route if they were running an express WEM-DT and a semi-express with roughly the proposed stops both with articulated buses every 4-5 minutes or better during rush and having capacity issues. They could have been doing that now with no capital cost besides some buses but they aren’t, not even close.