Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 401 to 435 of 435

Thread: Gunter: Edmonton LRT plan is a fast track to congestion

  1. #401

    Default

    They've actually already starting to move some of the Utilities in prep of this... as of last fall.

  2. #402
    First One is Always Free
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    District of Alberta
    Posts
    79

    Default Re: Edmonton LRT plan is a fast track to congestion

    Express buses, on lanes available to alternative vehicles, in an expanded road system, result in less congestion and better achieve public transit objectives at a lower cost than surface LRT, with comparable added lanes. Unlike surface LRT, and unlike BRT or "bus-rapid transit", express buses do not use fully dedicated separate right of way bus-only lanes or public-transit-only lanes. Express buses share the space with other vehicles.

    When surface LRT track space is not taken up by an LRT train, that space is not available for alternative vehicles moving in the same direction as the LRT train. However, when a road lane is not taken up by an express bus, that space is available for alternative vehicle transport, such as non-express buses, cars, trucks, vans, motorbikes, and bicycles.

    During peak congestion times, any particular point on average on a surface LRT track is providing valuable space to moving people only in LRT trains only when the LRT train is passing above that particular point (except only at road intersections). During peak times this could typically be less than 15 to 30 seconds every six minutes.

    During peak congestion times, any particular point on average on an asphalt road is providing valuable space to moving people in express buses, non-express buses, cars, trucks, vans, motorbikes, and bicycles nearly all the time.

    Also, unlike fixed LRT track, express bus routes are versatile and flexible and can be adjusted and modified to meet demand. People have many different start and end destination points which can change over time.

    Alternative traffic crossing LRT track is slowed down somewhat from time to time without compensation. When new surface LRT is built, pedestrians, bicycle riders, and motor vehicle operators lose their rights, their right of way, without compensation.

    A single point of failure can unexpectedly disable a large portion of an LRT system at a very inconvenient time and for an extended period of time, resulting in a relatively large incident, whereas a single point of failure on a bus disables only one bus and a new bus can be immediately called in to replace the disabled bus, thus resulting in a relatively minor incident.

    Typically, surface LRT is often designed with several passenger stops along the way whereas express buses have few or no passenger stops between the start and destination end points. Also, express buses can have wireless signaling to force traffic stop red lights to change to green.

    In many cases, users of LRT pay for about half the cost of LRT when they use LRT. The rest of the money comes from a gasoline tax or other taxes and/or the local government and/or other entities incur significant debt.

    In addition, just the building of LRT is very disruptive to existing traffic flows and communities.

    Express bus lanes (already presently used throughout the existing transit system) that allow sharing of road space with vehicles other than buses, can move as many people as fast and as frequent, as any surface LRT line at a fraction of the cost of surface LRT.

  3. #403

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dpwozney View Post
    In many cases, users of LRT pay for about half the cost of LRT when they use LRT. The rest of the money comes from a gasoline tax or other taxes and/or the local government and/or other entities incur significant debt.
    Correction

    In many cases, users of LRT pay for about half the operating cost of LRT when they use LRT. 100% of the billions of dollars in capital costs and the other half the operating costs comes from a gasoline tax or other taxes and/or the local government and/or other entities incur significant debt.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  4. #404

    Default

    you can say the same thing about road users too...

  5. #405

    Default

    Except that people have to purchase out of their pockets; cars, insurance, registration and gas. All of which are taxed and stimulate the economy.

    Transit users just buy a monthly bus pass.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  6. #406

    Default

    yes, but for transit users to use transit, it requires purchases of transit vehicles, insurance, registration and diesel, all of which are taxed and stimulate the economy. and unlike roads, it also creates permanent jobs (transit drivers, mechanics, and all the administration staff that you love.)

  7. #407

    Default

    Yes, but that was already addressed by my previous statements that purchases of transit vehicles, insurance, registration and diesel are done on the taxpayer dime.

    As you well know, I have been advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit for decades. As you also know, much of the mass transit plans that were economical decades ago are not economical today and the cost/benefit ratios have skyrocketed many times faster than consumer inflation. As an example, in 1974 when Edmonton had less than a half million people, we built a 6.9km line (1.6 km underground) with 3 ground level stations and two massive underground stations for $65M ($250M today) or $36M/km vs $130M/km for a streetcar line.

    I support ideas like you do, for more express line and smart transit ideas.


    I support public transit but let's be clear eyed and not let transit myths continue.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  8. #408

    Default

    well, I may agree with you on some points... I dont think road users pay for their share either, and is heavily supported via taxpayer dimes as well. Let's just take a look at the cost of the Henday. I think the total cost of the Henday was around 9 Billion dollars? At 78 km in length, thats 114M per km.... or if you want to include both directions, $57M per km.
    (My figures might be a bit off - both the point is still there)

  9. #409

    Default

    Can you envision what traffic and commerce would be today without the AHD? Or maybe no WMD and no YH as well...

    portions of the AHD have up to 125,000 vehicles a day including trucks and if you understand that collectively, the AND serves as part of the commute or route of in excess of 300,000 vehicles per day, with significant reductions in commute times, the economics are clear.

    Compare that with the Millwoods line expected ridership. Most of which are current bus users. Just changing modes from bus to streetcar with as you have argued, no improvement in commute time.

    https://www.edmonton.ca/transportati...2015_AAWDT.pdf
    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 30-01-2019 at 09:44 AM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  10. #410

    Default

    Is the Valley Line going to be like Capital whereby the traffic lights are controlled by the trains?

  11. #411

    Default

    Can you imagine the NE without LRT?

  12. #412

    Default

    You avoided my point and ignored your own previous comments on the 30+ minute commute time from Millwoods on a slow streetcar.

    Answering yours, the NE line I have repeatedly agreed with because it was so economical and well thought out, servicing major points including the arena and stadium.

    And yes, I can imagine the NE without LRT as we have seen the line shut down many times. In fact, I remember transit strikes in Edmonton. Inconvenient for sure and increased the amount of traffic on the roads but the city was generally 'business as usual'.

    If as you propose, that the AHD did not exist or even all roads that 'drivers use for free', were closed, no buses could run and the city would cease to function.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  13. #413

    Default

    Your idea is to replace LRT with PRT or GPRT, or Segways, or Gondolas really isn't an alternative. Yes, building the LRT in an existing rail corridor is cheap. Sending it through established areas costs more money, logically. The valley line is now well under construction... Are you suggesting we full stop on that and give up? We've signed a contract that you can't back out of now. Although the plan isn't ideal, doesn't offer much if any of a time savings, it is what it is.

  14. #414

    Default

    I thought that you were proposing BRT and express buses along with better routes or did you forget that, just to argue.

    I haven't proposed PRT in years for Edmonton.

    I have proposed that the Millwood line have a elevated line over Whyte, BD Mall and the BD traffic circle to improve transit times and reduce traffic jams. We all remember the assurances we got on the Metro Line that failed miserably.

    I also proposed the same thing as you, BRT and express buses along with better routes.

    I also support a private venture of a gondola from the Old Strathcona Market to Hudson's Bay or Rogers Place, not Shaw.

    IF, that is a big IF, the gondola is successful, allow the private company to build a line from 103rd and Whyte to the UofA and a additional line to BD Mall.

    That would eliminate the need for the COE proposed LRT line to Whyte that would require a new LRT bridge.
    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 30-01-2019 at 10:52 AM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  15. #415

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    I thought that you were proposing BRT and express buses along with better routes or did you forget that, just to argue.
    I've proposed the existing express routes (like the 15) already are time competitive with the LRT line under construction.


    I haven't proposed PRT in years for Edmonton.
    Might be time for a new username.


    I have proposed that the Millwood line have a elevated line over Whyte, BD Mall and the BD traffic circle to improve transit times and reduce traffic jams. We all remember the assurances we got on the Metro Line that failed miserably.
    And yet you are already lamenting about the cost of the line without this extra elevation. $ $$ $$$!


    I also proposed the same thing as you, BRT and express buses along with better routes.
    I support BRT and express routes as a pre-cursor on future LRT routes, and places where LRT might not be a good fit


    I also support a private venture of a gondola from the Old Strathcona Market to Hudson's Bay or Rogers Place, not Shaw.
    okay


    IF, that is a big IF, the gondola is successful, allow the private company to build a line from 103rd and Whyte to the UofA and a additional line to BD Mall.
    I disagree with this extension. Gondola works good with two end stations, and maybe a mid station. There's too many places it would miss, and no room for gondola stations.

    That would eliminate the need for the COE proposed LRT line to Whyte that would require a new LRT bridge.
    Nah, the bridge isn't needed, but we can still have a streetcar/LRT run along whyte avenue from Bonnie Doon to UofA... a gondola here just doesn't make sense.

  16. #416

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Can you envision what traffic and commerce would be today without the AHD? Or maybe no WMD and no YH as well...

    portions of the AHD have up to 125,000 vehicles a day including trucks and if you understand that collectively, the AND serves as part of the commute or route of in excess of 300,000 vehicles per day, with significant reductions in commute times, the economics are clear.

    Compare that with the Millwoods line expected ridership. Most of which are current bus users. Just changing modes from bus to streetcar with as you have argued, no improvement in commute time.

    https://www.edmonton.ca/transportati...2015_AAWDT.pdf
    Can you envision what traffic would be like without transit? Or how much more parking would be required around the city?

  17. #417

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    I thought that you were proposing BRT and express buses along with better routes or did you forget that, just to argue.
    I've proposed the existing express routes (like the 15) already are time competitive with the LRT line under construction.


    I haven't proposed PRT in years for Edmonton.
    Might be time for a new username.


    I have proposed that the Millwood line have a elevated line over Whyte, BD Mall and the BD traffic circle to improve transit times and reduce traffic jams. We all remember the assurances we got on the Metro Line that failed miserably.
    And yet you are already lamenting about the cost of the line without this extra elevation. $ $$ $$$!


    I also proposed the same thing as you, BRT and express buses along with better routes.
    I support BRT and express routes as a pre-cursor on future LRT routes, and places where LRT might not be a good fit


    I also support a private venture of a gondola from the Old Strathcona Market to Hudson's Bay or Rogers Place, not Shaw.
    okay


    IF, that is a big IF, the gondola is successful, allow the private company to build a line from 103rd and Whyte to the UofA and a additional line to BD Mall.
    I disagree with this extension. Gondola works good with two end stations, and maybe a mid station. There's too many places it would miss, and no room for gondola stations.

    That would eliminate the need for the COE proposed LRT line to Whyte that would require a new LRT bridge.
    Nah, the bridge isn't needed, but we can still have a streetcar/LRT run along whyte avenue from Bonnie Doon to UofA... a gondola here just doesn't make sense.
    Exactly. It was much like his PRT proposal when it was pointed out that you'd need all these stations with either a drop down to street level (Hey, the view out your front door just disappeared) or elevated (Stairs and elevator at each station). A gondola makes sense for direct connections across differing elevations.

    And a spur off the valley line from Bonnie Doon to the university is all that's needed really. Since there's already a connection to downtown. "But what about the people from the west end", people cry. Sorry, but you had your chance for that and you got a streetcar down SPR instead. Transfer at Churchill if you must.

  18. #418

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Can you envision what traffic would be like without transit? Or how much more parking would be required around the city?
    Been there, done that... twice


    Nov. 29, 1973: Commuters hit with city’s first winter bus strike (50 days)
    https://edmontonjournal.com/news/loc...ter-bus-strike

    Feb. 16, 1982: Edmonton Transit workers settle in for a long strike
    https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmon...nton-1.3986207

    If you watch the video, they report only minor issues and a shrug from commuters
    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 30-01-2019 at 12:10 PM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  19. #419

    Default

    Because people were hitchhiking and finding other ways to get around because they knew it was temporary. It's not like everyone ran out and bought a car. If it was such a minor issue and warranted no more than a shrug, why do we spend millions running a system? Let's shut it down. No biggie, right?

  20. #420
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Westmount
    Posts
    3,603

    Default

    My life would be turned upside down if there were no ETS. Same with those of many of my clients. It would not be met with a shrug.
    “Son, one day this will be an iconic structure shaping Edmonton’s skyline.”

  21. #421

    Default

    You guys missed the point completely.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  22. #422

  23. #423

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    No I think you did
    Not the post I was expecting...

  24. #424

    Default

    The falicy of your argument is that you assume that the media cares or is interested in highlighting the opinion of the people truest affect by the shut down of transit. The super poor and poor, people with mobility issues, homeless or even that of students....

    Populations we would rather ignore as a Soviet or oppress rathan than see on tv “whining.” I mean 1982. We had barely ended the forced sterilization of disabled people and we thought aids came from toilet seats just to highlight some of the societal views at the time.

    Large city’s cannot function without transit.... that case is pretty much proven throughout the world.

  25. #425

    Default

    You forget and ignore that I advocate a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

    I just don't subscribe to spending billions to provide a singular route with no decrease in trip times, no more efficient and no significant change in the number of people leaving their cars at home.

    Churning the existing ridership to give them a more comfy seat, or even worse, make them stand for their entire journey is not an improvement.


    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 31-01-2019 at 09:59 AM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  26. #426

    Default

    Better is subjective. And better for whom... and if your gut reaction is to say everyone, let me make it crystal clear that your idea of everyone likely excludes people.

  27. #427

    Default

    Not subjective at all. I clearly state three criteria. As for "better" Better for the transit user.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  28. #428

    Default

    and yet some how a gondola the length of whyte have won't cost "billions,000,000.00$

  29. #429

    Default

    Where do you get that???

    First of all, gondolas do not cost billions.

    Second, the proposed gondola across the river would be built privately.

    Third, the Whyte route would only be built after the river crossing proves effective, efficient and economical transit.

    Your scare mongering is fully apparent.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  30. #430

    Default

    wPRT has a point though. No city that uses PRT as a public transit service has ever had a strike. They've also never had a cost overrun. Or run a deficit.

  31. #431

    Default

    Scare mongering? You mean like your whole first 10 years on this forum until you finally realized PRT wouldn't work anywhere? If you don't realize, I'm throwing your tactics right back at ya.

  32. #432

    Default

    When I said LRT was going to cost billions, it was truth

    Medwards saying that a privately built gondola would cost "billions,000,000.00$, is a lie
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  33. #433

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    wPRT has a point though. No city that uses PRT as a public transit service has ever had a strike. They've also never had a cost overrun. Or run a deficit.
    Technically wrong

    Morgantown PRT/GRT has been running successfully for nearly 45 years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgan..._Rapid_Transit

    But the whole PRT issue in this thread is a deliberate distraction and a feeble attempt at character assassination rather than debating the thread topic.

    I am not talking about PRT in this thread and you can take your issues about PRT to the appropriate thread.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  34. #434

    Default

    5 stations and it hasn't added any since it was built in 1975.

    It was built as a people mover for a very specific location and isn't a full public transit system

    Yeah, real effective.

    And just look at how small and unobtrusive it is.

    Last edited by kkozoriz; 31-01-2019 at 11:17 AM.

  35. #435

    Default

    Wrong again

    The Phase I system began operations in 1975, with 5.2 mi (8.4 km) of guideway, 45 vehicles and 3 stations

    Phase II in 1979 expanded the system to 71 vehicles, 8.65 mi (13.92 km) of guideway, and a total of 5 stations.

    There are two proposals to extend the line from both ends and almost double the system in length.

    It is a reliable system of automated transit that is inexpensive to operate. It has offered on-time service rates far better than the bus services it replaced, and eliminated the gridlock that had locked up the city center. It is the third least expensive (after New York and Boston) for any fixed guideway system in the United States



    Moving on, what has this to do with the thread topic? You can take your issues about PRT to the appropriate thread.
    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 31-01-2019 at 12:00 PM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345

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
  •