Valley Line LRT/ Valley Line West | ?m | ?s | City of Edmonton

Aaron_Lloyd said:
This just reminds me of how incredibly slow these trains are going to be running in some areas... 😕
I really do hope these trains in the end will be worth the billions despite ending up going slower than a bus on some stretches of road.

I worry people are expecting an experience similar to the Capital line that runs at about the same speed as the Toronto subway and will be discouraged from supporting further LRT expansion and investment if this new line underperforms in their view.
Click to expand...
These trains are still in testing phase, so I wouldn't judge the testing speed as the speed it'll actually run at when it's in full operation.

This line is definitely not going to be a fast metro train meant to whisk people around the city in minutes, and that's exactly the point. The trade-off for less speed, grade-separation and capacity is having a highly-accessible, comfortable and easy-to-use system which integrates into the areas it runs in very nicely (and being able to expand rapid transit farther for less money). If people were or still are expecting a metro experience they're mistaken to do so, and will be disappointed no matter what.

To me, it's like being mad that a cat isn't a dog. Like okay, have your opinion and like what you like, but it exists as it is and serves its niche.

Is low-floor LRT my personal first choice of mode for a route like this? No, and I actually would've liked it if the city figured out how they could've done a high-floor extension (or maybe even light metro like the Skytrain). However, this will be a solid low-floor LRT line, it's what was chosen in the end and what we have to work with now. If the need really is there, we as a city can figure it out somehow.
 
Last edited:
Platinum107 said:
To me, it's like being mad that a cat isn't a dog. Like okay, have your opinion and like what you like, but it exists as it is and serves its niche.
Click to expand...

To play off of this analogy, I'd say my worry is that the city just bought a persian cat instead of an english shepherd to herd sheep.😄

We build transit infrastructure for a purpose and I don't think it's unreasonable to argue that different approaches to transit will address those purposes better or worse.
 
Last edited:
Edmonchuk said:
Calgary's network is twice as long, 59km as opposed to 24km in Edmonton, hence triple the ridership.
Click to expand...
That's in-part because they never spent the extra money digging underground. I recall reading somewhere, perhaps in the Journal articles from the 1990s that ciculate around here occasionally, that the underground portion of the LRT in downtown Edmonton costed approximately twice as much per KM to build as the at-grade portions.

This was a major reason why going underground was such a controversial decision in Edmonton at the time; many people were upset that Edmonton spent money on the "luxury" of going underground instead of using that same money to extend the line further like Calgary opted to. I personally am glad that the downtown stretch is there, but it's important to remember the cost that it comes at. Like someone else already pointed out, we wouldn't likely be able to fund an elevated or underground version of the Valley Line while covering as much distance as this one will.
 
Tbh, I'm hoping that car ownership and usage plummet in the next 2 decades. Between climate change, the economic injustice cars perpetuate, their cost between roads built with taxes and personal ownership, the disturbance they are to the social fabric of a community, the ways they hurt and isolate children....

We have to stop all using cars. They have their use cases, but we basically need to flip how edmontonians use cars and transit/active transport. The once or twice a month use of the LRT for an oilers game or another function needs to become the once or twice a month rental of a car to head to the mountains or purchase a large item.

The future is car-less or greatly car-reduced. I'm not worried about this train being faster than cars. I'm worried about it connecting to a plethora of destinations...malls, hospitals, shopping centers, universities. And it does that.

Also, speed is overrated imo. We've been making everything in the world faster for the last 80 years, yet we are busier than ever. That tells me people just need to learn to slow down and chill a bit. Getting from millwoods to DT would be how much faster if it was underground metro? 15/20mins instead of 30? I think we'll all survive. Also, unlike a car, you can do stuff on a train like read, answer emails, etc. I was more productive when i took the train DT for work than driving, even though it was half the travel time.

Not to mention the need for 15minute communities to become real, sprawl to slow (fast transit also encourages sprawl....and often leads to commuting by transit, but all other trips being by car. See the GTA's regional rail for effect that has...), and traffic to be disrupted so it's not so convenient to live outside the henday.
 
I interrupt your regularaly scheduled zoom-zoom debate for a picture that I took tonight.
20210913_193356.jpg
 
If you want more people to give up their cars (which I certainly want too), promising them longer trip times isn't really going to convince them at all I don't think. People value their time and mobility quite a lot. 15 minutes is a fair chunk of time to add to every trip you make into downtown. Over just one week of commuting each weekday that's already 2.5 hours someone could be spending doing something else they'd rather be doing. Also while I think we should endeavour to drastically reduce sprawl, people value their privacy, space, peace, and independence so detached houses are going to continue to be the pinnacle of home ownership for most people.

I think successful transit should serve the values of our community and trying to do the opposite, trying to change our community's values to fit your personally desired transit strategy, is only going to come off as potentially patronizing and alienate people into voting for more transit skeptical politicians.
 
Last edited:
I think one appeal of the Valley Line SE will be the short-range trips. Mill Woods-Grey Nuns-Millbourne could be good for shopping (at Mill Woods Town Centre and Millbourne Mall). Avonmore-Bonnie Doon-Holyrood-Strathearn means better access to Bonnie Doon Mall. Quarters-Churchill-102 Street connects downtown locations.
 
Aaron_Lloyd said:
If you want more people to give up their cars (which I certainly want too), promising them longer trip times isn't really going to convince them at all I don't think. People value their time and mobility quite a lot. 15 minutes is a fair chunk of time to add to every trip you make into downtown. Over just one week of commuting each weekday that's already 2.5 hours someone could be spending doing something else they'd rather be doing. Also while I think we should endeavour to drastically reduce sprawl, people value their privacy, space, peace, and independence so detached houses are going to continue to be the pinnacle of home ownership for most people.

I think successful transit should serve the values of our community and trying to do the opposite, trying to change our community's values to fit your personally desired transit strategy, is only going to come off as potentially patronizing and alienate people into voting for more transit skeptical politicians.
Click to expand...
2.5hrs in a week, sure. But in reality its just 15min chunks, which aren't utilized the same as 2.5hrs.

I'm not saying time doesn't matter at all, but the notion that transit has to be superior to a car in speed feels like the wrong target.

Do we want a city where we can move faster? Or a city where kids can be independent, cycling is safe, people are healthier, noise is reduced, stress is decreased, injuries are avoided, the climate is prioritized, low income families aren't forced to spend 30% or more of their income on cars, etc etc.

There's a moral and ethical reasoning to be against car dependency. If speed is the only way to sell people, that's a deeply discouraging reality of the values and priorities of our culture.
 
thommyjo said:
2.5hrs in a week, sure. But in reality its just 15min chunks, which aren't utilized the same as 2.5hrs.

I'm not saying time doesn't matter at all, but the notion that transit has to be superior to a car in speed feels like the wrong target.

Do we want a city where we can move faster? Or a city where kids can be independent, cycling is safe, people are healthier, noise is reduced, stress is decreased, injuries are avoided, the climate is prioritized, low income families aren't forced to spend 30% or more of their income on cars, etc etc.

There's a moral and ethical reasoning to be against car dependency. If speed is the only way to sell people, that's a deeply discouraging reality of the values and priorities of our culture.
Click to expand...
I agree 100%. A good way to summarize it: we need to stop thinking transit with a car-centric mentality.

@Aaron_Lloyd, you talk about "losing" 15min chunks of time, twice a day, but you can see it as gaining 20, 30 minutes, instead.
When I was able to commute safely by bus/LRT/subway, instead of driving 20 minutes to half an hour, it took me maybe 10~15 min more, that, instead of getting pissed at bad drivers, being on constant alert early in the morning or tired by the end of the day, I would take the time to read the news, watch an episode of a show, catch up with stuff from university, watch a language lesson... Or sometimes catch up with some work that was backlogged, read a report before a meeting, mentally prepare for an important presentation or meeting.

All stuff that I can't do while driving, that I like doing, but wouldn't have the time to do otherwise. Time in transit, especially comfortable, reliable and easy to navigate, like a low floor LRT (talking from experience, it was my main mode of transportation for two years), can be EXTREMELY productive, as opposed to a car commute, that is essentially a complete WASTE of your time, not to mention the financial and environmental costs of it.

I REALLY wish that commuting by bus or rail was easier and more convenient in Edmonton (and North America in general). I had to buy a car ao I could get to work, for my last job, simply because in the winter it was essentially IMPOSSIBLE to get to work safely using buses, as I had a good 15 min walk that had to be done either on 2 feet deep snow, in a place where there are no sidewalks, or on the street, as the area was intentionally developed assuming everyone would drive there, not take the bus.

I regret it sorely. A good 1/4, if not more, of my income went into the car, between maintenance, insurance, financing and gas. Now I've lost this job and I'm stuck with the financing, because even if I sold the car, it's not enough to pay off the whole loan. If I don't pay insurance, I can't use it for anything, but I don't use it enough to be REALLY worth it.

Cars are some of the most financially inefficient things we can ever think of and one of the most ecologically damaging. They also skewed our collective minds towards a lifestyle that is unsustainable and unhealthy (both physically and mentally), especially in North America, where for the past 70 odd years we were taught to love an cherish the suburban lifestyle, the "privacy and space" of the personal kingdom that are the massive single family detached houses, driving everywhere, ever increasing speed limits, large scale highways, expressways, etc... The human scale, the social interaction, EVERYTHING that made human societies what they are today, became obsolete and bad, synonym of underdevelopment, antiquated...

This mentality of comparing travel times and treating small increases in commute times as a disincentive to ride a certain mode of transportation is just a symptom of a much worse problem. It is, again, putting the private car in the centre of city planning...

________ end of rant_____
 
Exactly.

When I lived Downtown Vancouver back in 2002/03 I would Skytrain to Burnaby for work and it permitted me 20-25mins that I would not otherwise would have had to read the paper, go over the day/notes for work or prepare for that first big meeting of the day. Occasionally it provided some time to simply listen to music and relax as we watched frustrated folks stuck in traffic below.
 
It is not called high speed rail, it is LRT. If you drive, you also have to factor in the time looking for a parking spot at your destination, unless you have a parking spot right at your work place.

However, those often cost much more than a monthly transit pass. It was the increased cost of parking downtown that led me to start taking the LRT. Not having to deal with all the aggravations of driving, saving on gas and wear and tear on the vehicle and having that time to relax or do other things were bonuses.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top