Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 678910
Results 901 to 952 of 952

Thread: Metro Line | NAIT to St Albert | Conceptual Discussion

  1. #901
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    9,058

    Default

    ^ Does that include the bus pass itself?
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  2. #902
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,937

    Default

    Well this is good to see considering that it is going to be for St.Albert but essentially will be a part of a greater Edmonton region transit system.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  3. #903

    Default

    I was hoping that the LRT would go to downtown St. Albert.
    Edmonton first, everything else second.

  4. #904
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,937

    Default

    I think that is the eventual plan for LRT into St. Albert but unfortunately I don't think they feel they should bother planning that until they are way more certain that Edmonton will built the LRT that way.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  5. #905

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ThomasH View Post
    I was hoping that the LRT would go to downtown St. Albert.
    That's the eventual plan. Hopefully the province will come through with a regular, continuous funding plan for mass transit.

    St. Albert council approves alignment for LRT in city

    Preliminary stations proposed for along the St. Albert LRT route


    Along St. Albert Trail, near Hebert Road
    Along St. Albert Trail, near Downtown/St. Anne Street/Sturgeon Road
    Along St. Albert Trail, near St. Albert Centre
    Along St. Albert Trail, near the Hospital
    Along St. Albert Trail, near Neil Ross Road


    http://www.metronews.ca/news/edmonto...t-in-city.html

  6. #906
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    9,058

    Default

    It'd be great if the proposed SA line goes to the current transit centre there and maybe up to Mournville not far away.
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  7. #907
    First One is Always Free
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    St Albert but work in Edmonton
    Posts
    27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmcowboy11 View Post
    I think that is the eventual plan for LRT into St. Albert but unfortunately I don't think they feel they should bother planning that until they are way more certain that Edmonton will built the LRT that way.
    City of St Albert has a corridor protected in its last iteration of its transit master plan that was worked on the last year or so. This does require a few things to happen first... Ray Gibbon Drive needs to be twinned and completed to take some stress off of St Albert Trail before lane closures occur for LRT development. I'm relatively young and I'm skeptical if the LRT will be built into St Albert in my lifetime.

    I live in St Albert and commute to Downtown Edmonton. I'm glad that step one is going forward with the new Park N Ride facility going under construction this year. At the time I leave after dropping off the kids at day care, the current park n ride is out of spaces.

  8. #908

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by envaneo View Post
    It'd be great if the proposed SA line goes to the current transit centre there and maybe up to Mournville not far away.
    morinville? Really? You think that's a good expenditure of our transit resources? It's only 21+ km from 'downtown' morinville to St Albert Transit center. It has a population of under 10,000 people. Not really an ideal candidate for LRT service any time soon. Even if every single resident used LRT every work day, it still doesn't make sense. Keep in mind that over 80,000 people use the LRT between Clareview and the uofa...

    A peak hours only bus service might be viable once the Edmonton Metro Region starts taking over transit for the region.

  9. #909

    Default

    Might as well extend the line past Morinville to the thriving cities and TOD's in Legal, Busby, Barrhead and North Haverbrook
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  10. #910

    Default

    Yes, the the SLRT can have a spur line off it to serve calmar and thorsby, and might as well continue on to Rocky Mountain House and Nordegg, maybe even Saskatchewan Crossing, with future service to Golden.

  11. #911

    Default

    Lets turn our LRT into Commuter rail or a street car, all at the same time, forgetting the proper purpose of LRT... and the great service the existing line has provided for 40 years nearly incident and problem free until we decided to expand it cheaply into expensive corridors.

  12. #912

    Default

    Totally agree that we need a bullet train to Calmar, Thorsby and of course, Carrot Creek. Just think about taking a 300 km/hr train from downtown Edmonton to enjoy the nightlife.

    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 28-03-2018 at 11:19 AM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  13. #913

    Default

    Just look at all that redevelopment potential

  14. #914
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    9,058

    Default

    I've been to Mournville once back in the early 1990's. It seemed shorter to me for some reason LOL!
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  15. #915

    Default

    Interesting article mentioning outdated controls in NY

    Meet the Brit in charge of fixing NYC's subway - BBC News

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-43561378
    Last edited by KC; 08-04-2018 at 06:17 PM.

  16. #916

    Default

    Indeed Andy Byford ^ used to be the TTC CEO, he's now running the MTA. He was in charge of a pretty large attitude and cultural shift at the TTC which is currently upgrading Line 1 to full ATC.

  17. #917

    Default

    Updated (2017) LRT Design Guidelines are now posted on the City of Edmonton website:
    - https://www.edmonton.ca/documents/Ro...Guidelines.pdf

    The last update to the Design Guidelines was completed in 2011, referred to as the 2011 edition. This update reflects design issues and variances that were addressed during the construction phase of the NLRT extension to NAIT.

  18. #918
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,388

    Default

    The city has a survey about the Northwest LRT, of course I chose to go with bridges or tunnels on all the major intersections rather than level crossings. Yes it costs more, but it eliminates the conflicts with cars, pedestrians, increases safety, the trains can run quicker too. The cost is well worth it in the long term
    https://www.edmontoninsightcommunity...e&fromdetect=1

  19. #919
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    31,204

    Default

    I agree for the most part, although with the Campbell terminal I requested at-grade over elevated.
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  20. #920
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    46,845

    Default

    After the west LRT portion of the Valley-Line, expect this to be the next line u/c. That said, there likely will be 1 or 2 stops constructed in a phase 1 to connect the former airport lands and potentially to get across the CN tracks.


    https://twitter.com/JThompsonCTV/sta...07057419739137
    @JThompsonCTV
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  21. #921

    Default

    I hope they figure out a good spot for the Batchford Station. As well as well programmed and adjacent zoning. For the desnsity to be on site I thought a station between NAIT and "North" was planned?
    Live and love... your neighbourhood.

  22. #922
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    9,058

    Default

    ^ ^ Most likely the headliner topic at today's Metro Line NW LRT extension information Session

    I had a great conversation about Hanger 11 the other night. This fellow is investigating a follow up story about how the CIA was in a covert operation at the Muni during the Second World War. Something about selling bombers to Thailand? I can't recall the guy's name. Paul, Peter something? Anyone know what I'm referring to? Did I even hear that right? All I had was a cup of coffee.
    Last edited by envaneo; 13-09-2018 at 01:23 PM.
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  23. #923
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    31,204
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  24. #924

    Default

    ^
    Love it! And it could never have existed with the Muni there. Maybe we could mount some old fighter jets or bush planes at the top of each tower, as a Blatchford Field remembrance?

  25. #925

    Default

    Looks like the Vancouver SkyBridge. Which is a nice landmark. Good to see movement.
    Live and love... your neighbourhood.

  26. #926
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    9,058

    Default

    Similar in design to the Valley line bridge over the river.

    Great video at the bottom of the page in the link above. Illustrates the entire system from Blatchford to Campbell road. We better get funding for this asap.
    Last edited by envaneo; 13-09-2018 at 04:13 PM.
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  27. #927

    Default

    Little perplexed how they're not grade separating 153rd and Castle Downs Road....then again, this line is light years better than the SLRT leg. We're learning....

  28. #928
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    100

    Default

    I really hope that Council prioritizes this right after Valley Line West. This seems like a much better value proposition than the extension to Heritage Valley.

  29. #929
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    9,058

    Default

    ^ Or Centre line even if its just along Whyte Ave.
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  30. #930

    Default

    I think you'll find that the extension to Heritage Valley will be done in the same phase as the extension beyond NAIT.... these routes are already approved, and have the planning done.

    Centre LRT is a long ways out, and not approved at all yet.

  31. #931

    Default

    ^
    And after the system redesign hopefully eliminates bus convoys, maybe the bus service will be regular enough to eliminate the need for Centre LRT.

  32. #932
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    9,058

    Default

    Both lines are more important then Centre. Getting the Province to give up its land For Heritage Valley might be a bit of a snag unless its already been approved. I agree that the Walker bridge over the Yellowhead is something the City of Edmonton could do immediately once the issues with Thales has been ironed out.
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  33. #933

    Default

    It's already approved. There is no land to give up. https://www.edmonton.ca/documents/PD...slie_NEW_2.pdf

  34. #934
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    edmonton
    Posts
    4,570

    Default

    Earthworks are well under way on the Ellerslie park and ride site. Some serious tonka toys carving and shifting that whole area on the NW corner of Ellerslie Rd. and 127 St.

    Also, earthwork on the 135 St. interchange is progressing.
    Nisi Dominus Frustra

  35. #935

    Default

    Some thoughts:

    This line is learning from previous extensions with the strategic tunneling under major intersections, although the turn from Castle Downs to 153 Ave looks like a disaster in the making.

    It seems a pity that the route through Blatchford don't allow for an interchange to the via rail station, hopefully there at least is bus service in the future.

    I've mentioned this in the Yellowhead thread, but I really think a road interchange should be built in conjunction with the Walker bridge, to a connector road between 107 and 121 streets (close Yellowhead access to those two instead).

    Use the opportunity to fix the existing at-grade disasters at Kingsway and Nait. I'd rather they pay a bit more and fix it all at once.

  36. #936

    Default

    My major gripe with this is that I feel they should be using this opportunity to raise the LRT by kingsway/nait, have the train turn westbound to have a raised station in the kinsway parking lot, and then turn north again and continue northbound. It is a key opportunity to actually integrate a transit center/LRT station well with the mall. And if I recall correctly, Kingsway wasn't opposed to this anymore.

  37. #937

    Default

    Kingsway was opposed when we first built the line and now that it's done and paid for they changed their mind?
    Last edited by Vincent; 14-09-2018 at 06:02 PM.

  38. #938
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    6,955

    Default

    Why does one line have to wait for another line to be built. Can’t lines be built simultaneously or is there a shortage of contractors.

  39. #939

    Default

    Maybe if we could get the province to pay for all our LRT lines like what happened in Vancouver.

  40. #940
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,227

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by danimori View Post
    My major gripe with this is that I feel they should be using this opportunity to raise the LRT by kingsway/nait, have the train turn westbound to have a raised station in the kinsway parking lot, and then turn north again and continue northbound. It is a key opportunity to actually integrate a transit center/LRT station well with the mall. And if I recall correctly, Kingsway wasn't opposed to this anymore.
    This would solve a major issue I have with practically all of the LRT stations in Edmonton. None of them stop at a reasonable distance to shopping or they are designed to be obstacle paths (see Southgate) if one or both of the elevators are down if you can't do stairs. In fact, at Southgate if you really don't do stairs (I can do a few), there is an amazing detour you have to navigate with your wheelchair or baby carriage.

    If the Kingsway mall were to have something useful replacing the old Sears location (a Walmart would be ideal), it would be really handy. In Calgary, there were several stops where I could buy groceries next to the station and stay at street level.

  41. #941
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    9,058

    Default

    Oh I forgot about the 4 options at Glenrose/Kingsway. Are they still on the table?
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  42. #942
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,632

    Default

    Looking at the Display Boards, Administration is recommending grade separations at 137 Avenue and 127 Street. This represents modest progress. Why wouldn't there also be a grade separation at 142 Street since the LRT will have to tunnel under or elevate over the existing rail line at this location?

    Moreover, why keep the LRT at grade through Blatchford? There is an opportunity to build a cut and cover tunnel through Blatchford which can be done at the same time as installation of underground utilities.

    Finally, to save money, eliminate the "stops" at 145 Avenue and 137 Street where (unlike 132 Avenue) there is no possibility of integrating with ETS bus routes. The number of nearby residents likely to walk to an LRT stop is just too small to justify the cost of the stations. More stops also means slower travel times.

  43. #943

    Default

    145 Ave and 137 Street would be "community stations" similar to Belgravia. Small, relatively cheap, and aimed at walkers. I think those kinds of stations are important. Wouldn't it be so frustrating to see LRT drive right by your house but you still have to get in your car to get to the nearest station?

  44. #944
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,632

    Default

    ^Light rail transit should be designed to move large numbers of people at fast speeds over long distances, not function like a local bus making frequent stops.

  45. #945

    Default

    I was disappointed to see that they aren't recommending grade separation at 142 St. 153 Ave to 142 St has become an important route for commuters and has removed a lot of traffic from 127 St. The line will have to go under the CN track anyway, they might as well keep it going under 142 St.

    Spoiler alert, selfish comment follows (ha-ha) East McCauley, I have to agree with Vincent regarding 137 St station. I'd be irritated if it got axed. Would mean a 15-20 minute walk to 127 St station for me. If I have to have the line behind my house and the effect that it has on traffic, I at least want to be able to have a community station that I can easily walk to.

  46. #946
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,632

    Default

    ^Our community league has for years been pushing to add a McCauley Station located between Stadium and Churchill Stations on the Capital Line. I am opposed to this for the same reasons. The volume of foot traffic from a surrounding low density residential area is not sufficient to warrant the infrastructure involved in adding a station. These low passenger volume stops also increase travel times and defeat the purpose of investing in what should be high speed rail based transit connecting major transit nodes.

  47. #947

    Default

    So people who live in higher density mature neighbourhoods close to downtown should not have easy access to mass transit in favor of people who choose to buy huge homes with 4 cars in the driveway, in golf communities outside of the AHD ring road that want the COE to spend a billion dollars on a lime they will use less on average than the formerly mentioned?

    Have I got this right?
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  48. #948
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,632

    Default

    ^No. You have got this wrong.

    The area where the McCauley Station is proposed to be located east of 95 Street is mostly low density residential and city utility yards. Should that change, the need for a station could be reconsidered. In the meantime, McCauley due to its central location has some of the best transit bus service in the city.

    If you are referencing the proposed Lewis Estates Station on the West LRT line, this is a major transit node that serves all of the rapidly growing neighbourhoods west of AHD. Even though I disagree with the system design for West LRT, there is no question that this station should be part of the overall LRT network.

  49. #949
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    9,058

    Default

    I ride the Capital line pretty much daily from Clareview to Central station and having a stop at McCauley, would slow Capital line down more then it already is. I'm not sure how long the Central District yard has been in its present location but when I was living in the area about 1979, I recall it being there. Is that where a proposed lrt stop would be?

    Speaking of Stadium station, there's lots of activity there lately. I'm not sure what's going on with the barricades there running up to the Legion and along the old Muttart/Brookfield development site was. Could be a service section of track?
    I hope the City of Edmonton realizes there's a pipeline buried about a foot away from track 1 even crossing 95th street by the bottle depot, beyond?
    Last edited by envaneo; 16-09-2018 at 03:48 PM.
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  50. #950

    Default

    They're doing the infratucture alignments etc, so I would imagine they're prepping for the road to cross the track to commonwealth (stadium Rd).
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  51. #951
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    9,058

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ctzn-Ed View Post
    They're doing the infratucture alignments etc, so I would imagine they're prepping for the road to cross the track to commonwealth (stadium Rd).
    Thanks. Is it to connect Stadium road to 84th Street? I thought COE was abandoning that TOD there.

    https://www.edmonton.ca/documents/St...playBoards.pdf
    Last edited by envaneo; 16-09-2018 at 04:25 PM.
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  52. #952

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cumberland View Post
    I was disappointed to see that they aren't recommending grade separation at 142 St. 153 Ave to 142 St has become an important route for commuters and has removed a lot of traffic from 127 St. The line will have to go under the CN track anyway, they might as well keep it going under 142 St.
    Considering that the tracks are only 200m away from 142nd street, I would think they would continue the line underneath 142nd street...wouldn't make sense not to really...

    Also bit disappointing 153rd ave and castle downs road was recommended to be at grade. That one location should have been pushed below that intersection.

    This line comes so close of being "good" but couple of odd choices here and there which I seriously hope they iron out and reconsider.

Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 678910

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •