Page 22 of 23 FirstFirst ... 12181920212223 LastLast
Results 2,101 to 2,200 of 2201

Thread: West LRT | Downtown to Lewis Estates | Conceptual Discussion About Approved Route

  1. #2101

    Default

    I don't see anyone claiming half the price, but if you consider that maybe the whole proposal for a new LRT bridge with tunneled approaches for the Central Loop pretty much exists to get west-end valley-line riders to the U from the west end without an additional transfer you can just trade one for the other and call the 878ave route a half-billion dollars saved.

    And 20 minutes faster to boot.
    There can only be one.

  2. #2102

    Default

    ^
    No one answered my question upthread; do high floor and low floor LRT share the same rail gauge? Many decades from now, could you run a low floor spur over along 87 avenue, to the U of A, and have people transfer to high floor? Or could you have build additional high floor stations at West Ed and Lewis Estates, and run the 87 ave / U of A as a high floor line? I know its pie in the sky, and the other city zones would come first, but the ROW will still be there twenty years from now to use.

  3. #2103

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Glenco View Post
    There is absolutely no way it would be half the cost. Period
    Where are you getting that someone said half the cost? Period?

  4. #2104

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alex.L View Post
    It could be, but rest assured 87th Ave route would still need to be elevated over 170th and there would be an uproar about traffic elsewhere that would drive costs up as well.
    Actually, there wouldn't be much of uproar, because the route makes sense, and goes straight the university. There would still need to be the elevated 170th street, and 178th, and Henday too.

    Were most of you just not aware of LRT discussions prior to 2010?

  5. #2105

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ustauk View Post
    ^
    No one answered my question upthread; do high floor and low floor LRT share the same rail gauge? Many decades from now, could you run a low floor spur over along 87 avenue, to the U of A, and have people transfer to high floor? Or could you have build additional high floor stations at West Ed and Lewis Estates, and run the 87 ave / U of A as a high floor line? I know its pie in the sky, and the other city zones would come first, but the ROW will still be there twenty years from now to use.
    Same gauge but the platforms are different heights. The overhead wire would be at a different height. Essentially, you can't run them on the same track.

  6. #2106

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ustauk View Post
    ^
    No one answered my question upthread; do high floor and low floor LRT share the same rail gauge? Many decades from now, could you run a low floor spur over along 87 avenue, to the U of A, and have people transfer to high floor? Or could you have build additional high floor stations at West Ed and Lewis Estates, and run the 87 ave / U of A as a high floor line? I know its pie in the sky, and the other city zones would come first, but the ROW will still be there twenty years from now to use.

    The reason is that gauge doesn't really matter. Low floor can run the same guage as high floor, or a different gauge all to its own.

  7. #2107
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    6,585

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alex.L View Post
    It could be, but rest assured 87th Ave route would still need to be elevated over 170th and there would be an uproar about traffic elsewhere that would drive costs up as well.
    Actually, there wouldn't be much of uproar, because the route makes sense, and goes straight the university. There would still need to be the elevated 170th street, and 178th, and Henday too.

    Were most of you just not aware of LRT discussions prior to 2010?
    No I remember it, but it just stands to reason that the further along these plans get the more issues arise and the more negative public image they are open to. Things tend to reach a fever pitch right before funding is secured or shovels hit the ground. Since the 87th route didn't get to that point, the memory and perception of it are likely being seen through rose-coloured glasses to a degree. I'm not taking a stance on it here, I'm just saying that even with all the planning that was done on it, a specific cost and design was never locked down. Even if it had been, it's likely that the NIMBYs would have come out again and caused delays and cost overruns.

  8. #2108

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    If you refer to the studies done prior to 2008, I would consider what envaneo is saying to be relatively true. The cost per KM was higher, but the route is much shorter, and the ridership estimates higher, and travel time shorter. Also the disruption to the communities was much less.

    When you don't tunnel or elevate, you expropriate land, still have to deal with utilities above and below...

    City Administration has brained washed many of the citizens into believing that anything but ground level is super expensive, and not worth even considering, however, one only needs to look at the cost of the skytrain in Vancouver, or the WLRT leg in Calgary to see that city administration is trying to pull a fast one. What's even more telling about the misleading city administration is when asked to do a cost comparsarion, they don't give actual costs

    Option A: $
    Option B: $$
    Option C: $$$
    By 2010 they had costs for each route but none were over 1.1 billion. Any alterations to THEIR PLAN was given the "That will cost $200 million more" mantra.

    We were told that low floor was cheaper but not how much. Now the cost is 2.2 billion.

    They will blame the increase on the delays but funny, in 2010 we were in an oil boom. Now in a bust we should get some discounts, NO????
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  9. #2109

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Ustauk View Post
    ^
    No one answered my question upthread; do high floor and low floor LRT share the same rail gauge? Many decades from now, could you run a low floor spur over along 87 avenue, to the U of A, and have people transfer to high floor? Or could you have build additional high floor stations at West Ed and Lewis Estates, and run the 87 ave / U of A as a high floor line? I know its pie in the sky, and the other city zones would come first, but the ROW will still be there twenty years from now to use.

    The reason is that gauge doesn't really matter. Low floor can run the same guage as high floor, or a different gauge all to its own.

    In Edmonton's case they both run on the same gauge. Catenary height isn't much different, since the high-floor lines can be low as in the tunnel or high as when crossing major streets.

    To make the change from low to high floor you would need to raise the platform height including extending stairs and elevators on above-grade stations, extend them to the 5-car length they would need, and and change out the power transformers and contact wires if the voltage is significantly different. Our high floor is 600V, I can't recall what the Valley Line will be but I've read that 750V and 1500V are more common than 600V for new systems.
    There can only be one.

  10. #2110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Ustauk View Post
    ^
    No one answered my question upthread; do high floor and low floor LRT share the same rail gauge? Many decades from now, could you run a low floor spur over along 87 avenue, to the U of A, and have people transfer to high floor? Or could you have build additional high floor stations at West Ed and Lewis Estates, and run the 87 ave / U of A as a high floor line? I know its pie in the sky, and the other city zones would come first, but the ROW will still be there twenty years from now to use.

    The reason is that gauge doesn't really matter. Low floor can run the same guage as high floor, or a different gauge all to its own.

    In Edmonton's case they both run on the same gauge. Catenary height isn't much different, since the high-floor lines can be low as in the tunnel or high as when crossing major streets.

    To make the change from low to high floor you would need to raise the platform height including extending stairs and elevators on above-grade stations, extend them to the 5-car length they would need, and and change out the power transformers and contact wires if the voltage is significantly different. Our high floor is 600V, I can't recall what the Valley Line will be but I've read that 750V and 1500V are more common than 600V for new systems.
    Thanks for the info; I never event thought of the differing power requirements between low floor and high floor trains. So a future 87 avenue line would either have to be low floor to the U of A, with a transfer to the high floor Capital/Metro line, or you would have run it as a high floor line to Meadowlark and have them transfer to the low floor line station at Meadowlark. And that assumes the Lewis Estate to Meadowlark leg can handle the increased traffic. Either way, not going to happen any time soon.

  11. #2111

    Default

    You could convert to high floor but it would be a bit of a process, either a year or more bus substituted, or a painstaking long process allowing cross-platform transfers that move west one station at a time might work depending on where crossovers are.

    As big of a job as conversion would be I think it would make more sense to do that than to either dead end the high-floor at Meadowlark or build a low floor spur with a transfer at Health Sciences.
    There can only be one.

  12. #2112

    Default

    My plan was to run the high floor from Health Sciences to WEM and the low floor line would run down 104 ave to 124 st, north to 111 ave, west to 142 street (major stop at Westmount, another TOD location), south to 107 ave, west to 156 street and south to a transfer station as Meadowlark.

    Not as disruptive, better coverage and more TOD opportunities along 124 st and 111 ave and at the traffic circle at 107 ave & 142 street.

    https://www.google.com/maps/dir/53.5...ae9729!1m0!3e0

    Alternatively, you could turn west on 95 ave to 178 at and then south to Callingwood. Move the WEM station closer to 178 street and eliminate the 184 street stop

    https://www.google.com/maps/dir/53.5...e136ba!1m0!3e0

  13. #2113

    Default

    Note: Express bus currently runs from WEM to South Campus. New transit strategy aims to improve that service, similar service. This bus line utilizes the Fox Drive bus ROW. Improvements could be made for the route along Whitemud Drive.

    http://webdocs.edmonton.ca/transit/route_schedules_and_maps/future/RT133.pdf

    20-30 minutes.
    Last edited by GenWhy?; 04-04-2018 at 05:54 PM.
    Live and love... your neighbourhood.

  14. #2114

    Default

    Quick question, how does the city plan to get the Valley/Whatever Line over the NSR on the West? Any potential to double the current Capital Line Bridge?

  15. #2115

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reecemartin View Post
    Quick question, how does the city plan to get the Valley/Whatever Line over the NSR on the West? Any potential to double the current Capital Line Bridge?
    Ha ha. It's a dog's breakfast. CoE preferred route is over another bridge beside High Level. Discussion about it here:
    http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/showt...LRT-Strathcona

  16. #2116

    Default

    The Valley Line West doesn't cross the river.

  17. #2117

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    The Valley Line West doesn't cross the river.
    Sorry, turns out I'm talking about the Centre LRT

  18. #2118

    Default

    Another Valley Line question: Do they plan to run 2 car trains from day 1 or only once ridership grows?

  19. #2119

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reecemartin View Post
    Another Valley Line question: Do they plan to run 2 car trains from day 1 or only once ridership grows?
    That's a good question. We have 26 cars on order. So 13 for northbound, 13 for southbound. Supposed to be 5 minute headways for a ~30 minute run, at peak as per the P3 contract, so that means 6 consists per direction, 2 car trains would be 12 cars northbound, 12 cars southbound. Leaves only 2 cars. Could be a 2-car consist at one end doing the turn-around.

    So... possible to do 2 car consists. Leaves no cars in reserve though. Can't expect them to do all the maintenance off hours, plus there will be breakdowns, crashes etc. Even then, two full cars is only 550 passengers. Not the numbers we're used to with our high floor lines.

  20. #2120
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Beaumont, ab
    Posts
    672

    Default

    L,l
    Quote Originally Posted by reecemartin View Post
    Another Valley Line question: Do they plan to run 2 car trains from day 1 or only once ridership grows?
    Am I the only seeing this? It's clear this guy is writing a paper or article on our systems wth his incessant questions......he's doing the same thing over on SSP. Shut this guy down and DON'T answer any more of his questions......

  21. #2121

    Default

    Take your tin foil hat off mac. You're a paranoid fool

  22. #2122
    First One is Always Free
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    TO
    Posts
    50

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by maclac View Post
    L,l
    Quote Originally Posted by reecemartin View Post
    Another Valley Line question: Do they plan to run 2 car trains from day 1 or only once ridership grows?
    Am I the only seeing this? It's clear this guy is writing a paper or article on our systems wth his incessant questions......he's doing the same thing over on SSP. Shut this guy down and DON'T answer any more of his questions......
    My feelings exactly - I think your analysis is spot-on.

  23. #2123
    First One is Always Free
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    TO
    Posts
    50

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gwill211 View Post
    Take your tin foil hat off mac. You're a paranoid fool
    I think you're the one with the blind-spot Donald...your data are being mined under your very nose by somebody far, far away with no substantive connect to Edmonton, let alone Alberta...

  24. #2124

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OLM View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by maclac View Post
    L,l
    Quote Originally Posted by reecemartin View Post
    Another Valley Line question: Do they plan to run 2 car trains from day 1 or only once ridership grows?
    Am I the only seeing this? It's clear this guy is writing a paper or article on our systems wth his incessant questions......he's doing the same thing over on SSP. Shut this guy down and DON'T answer any more of his questions......
    My feelings exactly - I think your analysis is spot-on.

    Quote Originally Posted by OLM View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by gwill211 View Post
    Take your tin foil hat off mac. You're a paranoid fool
    I think you're the one with the blind-spot Donald...your data are being mined under your very nose by somebody far, far away with no substantive connect to Edmonton, let alone Alberta...



    Interesting. So... one, interesting first assumption ( with added oppositional/defensive views...), two, “it’s clear” means full acceptance of the point, three, if so, why the seemingly natural opposition and hostility?


    Are the questions and answers of no value to Edmontonians? If so, yes it’s wasting people’s time.

    However as anyone asked Reecemartin ?

    Reecemartin, why the questions? Do you live in or around Edmonton?

    I’m back
    A google search find a Reecemartin posting on a Toronto forum. Again, without more information, so what? If it’s the same person they even used their same username. If so and it’s the person’s actual name then that doesn’t seem very nefarious to me. It’s the internet, that’s how it works.

    https://urbantoronto.ca/forum/thread...18819/page-104
    Last edited by KC; 09-04-2018 at 06:20 AM.

  25. #2125

    Default

    I'm kind of amazed at the hostility here, seems to me my questions aren't so unreasonable given that I can't find this kind of info very easily on the City or TransEd Websites.

    Why I'm asking:
    -I spend about half my time in Vancouver half in Toronto at University right now have a deep interest in both their transit systems: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCf4..._as=subscriber
    -Upon graduation I am seriously considering a move to Edmonton and hence I am curious about the transit etc. (maybe I should reconsider given the discourse here....)

    Lastly, I'm a transit nerd for gods sake I love following projects etc hence I am just curious! Isn't that why everyone is on here? SSP seems to kind of suck for Edmonton Transit so I came here.

    In response to the consists sounds like they may run 50% two car trains? Kind of strange given the difference in size but, seems crazy to have half the trains as reserve.
    Interesting fact that relates to why I asked, in Toronto the Eglinton vehicles are actually only single cab since they are planned to run 2 or three car trains from day one (30 m vehicles though).
    Last edited by reecemartin; 09-04-2018 at 09:17 AM.

  26. #2126

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reecemartin View Post
    I'm kind of amazed at the hostility here, seems to me my questions aren't so unreasonable given that I can't find this kind of info very easily on the City or TransEd Websites.

    Why I'm asking:
    -I spend about half my time in Vancouver half in Toronto at University right now have a deep interest in both their transit systems: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCf4..._as=subscriber
    -Upon graduation I am seriously considering a move to Edmonton and hence I am curious about the transit etc. (maybe I should reconsider given the discourse here....)

    Lastly, I'm a transit nerd for gods sake I love following projects etc hence I am just curious! Isn't that why everyone is on here? SSP seems to kind of suck for Edmonton Transit so I came here.

    In response to the consists sounds like they may run 50% two car trains? Kind of strange given the difference in size but, seems crazy to have half the trains as reserve.
    Interesting fact that relates to why I asked, in Toronto the Eglinton vehicles are actually only single cab since they are planned to run 2 or three car trains from day one (30 m vehicles though).
    Yeah, maybe don’t consider that move to Edmonton. We are a pretty petty and hostile place. Lots of great people but nothing like the city I knew as a kid.


    Oh and OLM, maclac, please provide us with your real names and any conflicts of interest or vested interests you may have. .

    Just kidding.
    Last edited by KC; 09-04-2018 at 09:31 AM.

  27. #2127

    Default

    At least as it seems now the West LRT should be fully funded and moving ahead. Edmonton will actually have a pretty impressively extensive LRT system upon completion of this line and can move to doing some of the extensions etc.

    Another question (I have many), with regard to the Smart Card system being designed by VIX what is the plan for the Valley Line? Will it open with the system? Any idea if they are doing readers on LRV's or will they be at the stops?

  28. #2128
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    6,585

    Default

    Odds are pretty good that nobody here knows any actual details surrounding a lot of the questions you're asking. I might suggest compiling a list and emailing 311 or the contact listed on the Valley Line page on the city's website.

  29. #2129

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reecemartin View Post
    At least as it seems now the West LRT should be fully funded and moving ahead. Edmonton will actually have a pretty impressively extensive LRT system upon completion of this line and can move to doing some of the extensions etc.

    Another question (I have many), with regard to the Smart Card system being designed by VIX what is the plan for the Valley Line? Will it open with the system? Any idea if they are doing readers on LRV's or will they be at the stops?
    These are really great questions, and the important ones that address the system as a whole, the working parts outside the line itself. I usually e-mail Trans Ed for answers to my parents questions who live along the SE Line. With implementation of the smart fare system to be in place by 2020... you'd hope it will be set up and integrated from day 1. I'm still waiting on a response from the City and Trans Ed.

    The fact that many of your questions cannot be answered even by folks following this project rigorously is a testament to the grey area and complexity of a system not fully... communicated. Also the Internet is a bubble and a non-reflection of the City as a whole. I was in Vancouver recently and talked to a woman from New Jersey who no only heard of Edmonton, but said "it's very up and coming". She knew lots about Edmonton, and her friend from Hawaii was blown/away/confused/impressed. This transit line will completely transform the city.

    Keep asking questions, Reece.
    Live and love... your neighbourhood.

  30. #2130
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Beaumont, ab
    Posts
    672

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gwill211 View Post
    Take your tin foil hat off mac. You're a paranoid fool
    Naw....no foil hat for me.... I guess my BS sniffer is a lot more acute than yours....

  31. #2131

    Default

    reecemartin, please ignore the one or two negative people on this thread. I love your interest in our city and our mass transit system. I too am a transit nerd and have studied transit systems around north america and further for many many years as a hobby/self interest.

    And even if you were writing a paper on our LRT system - who cares? You are seeking information - that's half the premise of this website, is to provide information about the city of Edmonton to others inside and outside that might be seeking it. I see no reason to shut you down for asking questions. OLM and maclac should apologize.

  32. #2132

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    reecemartin, please ignore the one or two negative people on this thread. I love your interest in our city and our mass transit system. I too am a transit nerd and have studied transit systems around north america and further for many many years as a hobby/self interest.

    And even if you were writing a paper on our LRT system - who cares? You are seeking information - that's half the premise of this website, is to provide information about the city of Edmonton to others inside and outside that might be seeking it. I see no reason to shut you down for asking questions. OLM and maclac should apologize.
    “Clearly” OLM and maclac aren’t even Edmontonians and are just trying to bring down people’s impression of the quality of our city’s people...

  33. #2133
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,774

    Default

    So what if someone is asking questions, this is still a free country.

  34. #2134
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    1,253

    Default

    There’s a couple arrogant people with little intelligence on this board that like to troll, I would just ignore it. If a person wants to do research on mass transit or the public perception of it, then why not go to message boards where the demographics range widely? I have no problems with curiosity, and nor do 99 percent of people here. So ask away Reece.

  35. #2135
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    8,383

    Default

    I have a question. Are all Valley line train platforms the same size?

    Thanks
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  36. #2136

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stevey_G View Post
    There’s a couple arrogant people with little intelligence on this board that like to troll, I would just ignore it. If a person wants to do research on mass transit or the public perception of it, then why not go to message boards where the demographics range widely? I have no problems with curiosity, and nor do 99 percent of people here. So ask away Reece.
    savage but true

  37. #2137

    Default

    If by size you mean length than yes they should be slightly longer than the maximum train which would have a max length of 84 m.

  38. #2138
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    8,383

    Default

    ^ Thanks. So that means that each platform could hold up to 4 LRV cars right?
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  39. #2139

    Default

    No it does not.

    I'm not sure if you know but they aren't using the same LRV's as on Edmontons current LRT network. They are using 7-segment low floor LRVs each of which is 42m long. So the maximum train length is 2 cars....

  40. #2140

  41. #2141
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    8,383

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reecemartin View Post
    No it does not.

    I'm not sure if you know but they aren't using the same LRV's as on Edmontons current LRT network. They are using 7-segment low floor LRVs each of which is 42m long. So the maximum train length is 2 cars....
    Yes because they are 2 different systems

    I'm trying to wrap my head around the station stops. For example, the Jasper place station from Stony Plain Road to 100A ave is ~ 87m. Enough room for 3-4 cars. Even if the WLRT advances the station a block South between 100A and 100th Ave (taking out that strip mall,) is ~ 83m is enough room for 3 cars.

    I don't see how the Jasper Place transit stop can have 2 tracks unless the 2 tracks are going to merge into one track at the station from SPR and 156th street. But its early yet. That much we know.
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  42. #2142

    Default

    How do you figure 87m is enough room for 3-4 42m long cars?

    2 cars = 84m
    3 cars = 126m
    4 cars = 168m
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  43. #2143
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    8,383

    Default

    ^ Oops, I meant 2 cars, my bad.

    Either way if the Jasper Place transit station is going to hold only 2 cars there's no accounting for peak hour capacity unless off peak is one car. Its a tram, then in LRT name only.
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  44. #2144

    Default

    2 cars as in 2 seven-module cars? Or 1 7-module car... which I think is measured at 30.m metres with capacity of just over 275 people. As per the info I got from Bombardier on the Flexity Freedom. Trying to re-wrap my head around what we're getting.
    Live and love... your neighbourhood.

  45. #2145

    Default

    2 cars that are 7 modules each (so 14 modules total)

    also the capacity data given is for like a very comfortable full. During rush hour on the capital line, the amount those cars are full are above the "comfortable" amount that is being used for the statistics for the valley line. (Sorry if my wording is confusing I wasn't sure how to say this haha)

  46. #2146

    Default

    I'd not consider a train where 2/3 of the passengers are standing to be "comfortably full". Only 80-some seats for 250 passengers.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  47. #2147

    Default

    Oh I assume over 275 at rush hour. Ok I re-read everything.

    Platform Length: 84 metres
    1 Flexity 7-module Car Length: 30.8 metres

    Platform capacity allows 2 7-module cars at over 550 "comfortable ridership capacity". Correct? Running at a max of 5-minute frequency at peak time?
    Live and love... your neighbourhood.

  48. #2148

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    I'd not consider a train where 2/3 of the passengers are standing to be "comfortably full". Only 80-some seats for 250 passengers.
    On a train for any duration. Comfortable, as a regular transit user. On a bus for over 10 minutes... not comfortable. Packed anything, however, is agonizing. Just like in a car in gridlock.
    Live and love... your neighbourhood.

  49. #2149

    Default

    23m U2 and SD160 cars are comfortable up to about 130 of the 160 service load, after that you're brushing up against backpacks and to/away from the doors can be a pain. Not like it's so horrible even at 160, though. 200+ after an esks game is another story.
    There can only be one.

  50. #2150

    Default

    max of 5 minute frequency during peak time as of the current intended functionality. frequency can be increased in the future but there will be higher traffic impacts. I personally don't consider people all standing to be uncomfortable, having been pushed onto trains when living abroad, but I can understand the concerns regarding capacity. Council was ensured at the council meeting by admin that frequency could be doubled if ridership was much higher than expected, but that this would require more cars to be ordered, require increasing the electricity to the line, and that traffic would be further impacted. Admin said there is nothing in the design of the line itself that would not allow for increased frequency. cheers.

  51. #2151

    Default

    The Valley Line has about half the maximum capacity of the Capital line.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  52. #2152

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    The Valley Line has about half the maximum capacity of the Capital line.
    just wondering if that includes the whole 3 car long nait train?

  53. #2153

    Default

    Given that the 3 car line is technically the Metro & the article mentions 5-car consists on 5 minute headways, I'd wager not.

    https://globalnews.ca/news/4095116/e...-lrt-capacity/
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  54. #2154

    Default

    With 30m vehicles it could be possible to get 3 cars into an 84m platform if the front/rear doors are far enough from the end of the car. otherwise a design that requires a 84m platform for just 60m of vehicle seem excessive.
    There can only be one.

  55. #2155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    Given that the 3 car line is technically the Metro & the article mentions 5-car consists on 5 minute headways, I'd wager not.

    https://globalnews.ca/news/4095116/e...-lrt-capacity/
    ahh. yeah. capital line cars are definitely not every 5 minutes lol. from what i recall its usually 2 capital line cars followed by a 3 car nait car, and there is usually some 7-10 minute gap between some of them, while others are 4-5 minutes apart. kinda chaotic right now.

  56. #2156

    Default

    Well all the Valley Line estimates are predicated on the assumption that this time, the third time, they'll actually pull off their whole timing/signalling schtick, despite them showing they learned nothing from the first try (SLRT), or at least didn't apply anything they did learn on their second failed attempt (Metro).

    I'm not nearly so confident.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  57. #2157

    Default

    true enough! I guess we will see in 2020 when SValley opens up. Hopefully everything works out. I feel this system may be more flexible that the metro or capital.

  58. #2158

    Default



    I'm just glad I gave up on my whole car-less Edmonton experiment a couple years ago so I can avoid ETS as much as possible.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  59. #2159

    Default

    ^CoE has big plans for getting you out of that car, noodle. Gridlock everywhere. Take the (slow, packed in like sardines) train... or else!

  60. #2160

    Default

    Nah, because I have the good sense to live centrally & work anywhere but. I drive against the gridlock, not in it. It'd take a level of buffoonery that even CoE Administration couldn't muster to screw up my reverse commuting.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  61. #2161

    Default

    That's good. I did a reverse commute years ago. Lived DT and worked in the west end. Smooth sailing.

  62. #2162
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    13,669
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Ha...I did the same thing years ago...lived on 121 Street...worked out west.
    Since calm logic doesn't work, I guess it is time to employ sarcasm. ...and before you call me an a-hole...remember, I am a Dick.

  63. #2163
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    13,669
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post

    ...I normally HATE memes...but this one is perfect for the topic. Slow service and planned congestion!
    Since calm logic doesn't work, I guess it is time to employ sarcasm. ...and before you call me an a-hole...remember, I am a Dick.

  64. #2164

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GenWhy? View Post
    Oh I assume over 275 at rush hour. Ok I re-read everything.

    Platform Length: 84 metres
    1 Flexity 7-module Car Length: 30.8 metres

    Platform capacity allows 2 7-module cars at over 550 "comfortable ridership capacity". Correct? Running at a max of 5-minute frequency at peak time?
    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    With 30m vehicles it could be possible to get 3 cars into an 84m platform if the front/rear doors are far enough from the end of the car. otherwise a design that requires a 84m platform for just 60m of vehicle seem excessive.
    Again 5 segment cars are 30 meters, 7 segment cars are 42......

    The only conceivable way of getting a longer train would be to order a single long LRV

  65. #2165
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    8,383

    Default

    So in other words at peak hour its going to be like a wagon train with trains backed up from 156th street to 149th street heading West? Also what about vehicle traffic on SPR heading East at the SPR/156th street intersection? How are 2 lanes of Eastbound traffic going to merge into one lane Eastbound?
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  66. #2166

    Default

    tough luck according to the city. everyone will be riding LRT instead, remember.

  67. #2167
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    8,383

    Default

    Pardon my rough sketch here so, is the train going to merge from 2 tracks into one as in my sketch here?



    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  68. #2168

    Default

    Vancouver, Toronto etc have natural barriers to growth that do wonders for driving up desirability and real estate prices in certain areas. Of course, sometimes man can duplicate natural effects.

  69. #2169
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    10,663

    Default

    One of the worst things about Edmonton's traffic are the four-lane roads in the older neighbourhoods. Traffic definitely sped up when Fort Road was widened.

    I think the city is going to have a hell of a surprise when traffic spills over to collector routes like 142 Street and 95 Avenue.
    "Talk minus action equals zero." - Joe Keithley, D. O. A.

  70. #2170
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    10,254

    Default

    142 is not a collector. It's an arterial by any definition.

  71. #2171
    First One is Always Free
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    TO
    Posts
    50

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dark Magnus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevey_G View Post
    There’s a couple arrogant people with little intelligence on this board that like to troll, I would just ignore it. If a person wants to do research on mass transit or the public perception of it, then why not go to message boards where the demographics range widely? I have no problems with curiosity, and nor do 99 percent of people here. So ask away Reece.
    savage but true
    oh, i know; it's just awful...

  72. #2172
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    13,669
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    142 is not a collector. It's an arterial by any definition.

    Exactly...
    Since calm logic doesn't work, I guess it is time to employ sarcasm. ...and before you call me an a-hole...remember, I am a Dick.

  73. #2173
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    8,383

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    142 is not a collector. It's an arterial by any definition.
    Correct. There are 2 types of roads as defined by the City of Edmonton: Collector and local. I got an education about this when we did the Jasper Ave. Make over survey.
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  74. #2174
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,304

    Default

    Judging by how their performance, late, overbudget, ignoring many citizens, I wouldn't advise on trusting their material. See what other cities do and form opinions based on best practices.

    Enough about the rant, I still think it should go over or under 149th up to the curve down 156th Street.

  75. #2175
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    8,383

    Default

    What about the 2 lanes of traffic heading East along Stony Plain road at the 156th street intersection? What's going to happen with them?
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  76. #2176

    Default

    They'll be backed up, just like the rest of the routes going eastbound from the west end headed for the core.

  77. #2177
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    8,383

    Default

    That's if Stony plain road is a for lrt (tram) only to 156th street. Eastbound traffic before the 156th street intersection will need to be routed North on 156th street to 107 if non lrt/tram commuters want to go to the core etc.

    Who's hair brained idea was this?
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  78. #2178

    Default

    This will be forever known as "Mandel's Folly" or "Mandel's Revenge"?

  79. #2179

    Default

    Rather than building this line south down 156 street, they should continue the line heading West on Stony Plain Road to Mayfield Common, or beyond that. But then have a line from Lewis Estates and West Edmonton Mall to head East to South Campus.

  80. #2180

    Default

    With that they can have a stop at the Valley Zoo

  81. #2181
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    4,394

    Default

    The routing has been decided it is getting built as is. Move on.

  82. #2182

    Default

    ^ thank you
    "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits" - Einstein

  83. #2183

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Glenco View Post
    The routing has been decided it is getting built as is. Move on.
    Just like the route was decided in 2008, things can and will change. Discuss at will.

  84. #2184

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GizmoForMayor View Post
    ^ thank you
    ^ you're welcome

  85. #2185

    Default

    Carry on... just don't hold your breath. Meanwhile I will check this thread again when we're done dreaming about route changes and arguing about low floor vs high floor LRT *eye-roll*
    "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits" - Einstein

  86. #2186
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    10,663

    Default

    There are probably some people in Edmonton who will drive no matter what. If an LRT train can take 550 people every five minutes, one traffic lane will take about 300 cars, or perhaps 400 people.
    "Talk minus action equals zero." - Joe Keithley, D. O. A.

  87. #2187

    Default

    I forgot we are pass the dream phase of this line. We can't bring up anything that would benefit it or can't change it what so ever. The blueprints are printed and concrete is on the way. Just deal with the problems to come.

  88. #2188
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    8,383

    Default

    Just like with the Nait line. City of Edmonton still hasn't figured out what option to go with at Glenrose.
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  89. #2189
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    6,585

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brody View Post
    I forgot we are pass the dream phase of this line. We can't bring up anything that would benefit it or can't change it what so ever. The blueprints are printed and concrete is on the way. Just deal with the problems to come.
    There's bringing up problems, and there's beating a dead horse.

  90. #2190
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    4,394

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Glenco View Post
    The routing has been decided it is getting built as is. Move on.
    Just like the route was decided in 2008, things can and will change. Discuss at will.
    Having problems letting go?
    “Canada is the only country in the world that knows how to live without an identity,”-Marshall McLuhan

  91. #2191
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,774

    Default

    There is the other thread created to discuss different routes and ideas for WLRT.

  92. #2192

    Default

    Typical Edmonton, accept mediocrity... and move on. It's no wonder our mass transit system causes fits of laughter from parts that understand what real transit is like. Enjoy the modal shift to transit not happening at all. Enjoy Edmonton continuing to have the lowest transit usage for major cities in Canada.

  93. #2193
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    6,585

    Default

    So discussing the plan that will actually be built, not daydreaming for 10 years about an alternate reality, is accepting mediocrity?

  94. #2194

    Default

    Well, given that the current plan is mediocre at best, kinda?
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  95. #2195

    Default

    Yes, if the plan is mediocre.

    And It's not quite a done deal yet.
    There can only be one.

  96. #2196
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    6,585

    Default

    By focusing on a former route like Health Sciences->87th you're also kind of accepting mediocrity because your solution is very unlikely to be built. So if you shifted your focus to the *real* route and the issues that come with it, those efforts would be moving us away from mediocrity rather than essentially spinning your tires and hoping for a miracle. Unless you're actively lobbying council to reconsider the routing, of course.

    Talking about it 87th routing at this point is basically yelling into the void is all I'm getting at. I don't really see it as a productive use of anybody's time. Voices have been heard, stances have been solidly entrenched. Any time any conversation happens about West LRT it gets sidetracked by 87th route chatter from the same voices. There is no news on the 87th route, so we don't need to keep hearing about it.
    Last edited by Alex.L; 16-04-2018 at 03:44 PM.

  97. #2197

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Glenco View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Glenco View Post
    The routing has been decided it is getting built as is. Move on.
    Just like the route was decided in 2008, things can and will change. Discuss at will.
    Having problems letting go?
    The city bureaucracy has decided, the city knows best, do not question the city. They are omni impotent.

  98. #2198

    Default

    Yes. They did the Metro line so flawlessly. Shall I mention some of the other perfectly planned projects?
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  99. #2199
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    8,383

    Default

    ^ I think Dave was making hyperbole here.....
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  100. #2200

    Default

    No, sarcasm. If it was a billion times better, that would be hyperbolic sarcasm.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

Page 22 of 23 FirstFirst ... 12181920212223 LastLast

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
  •