Valley Line LRT | TransEd/Marigold | City of Edmonton

IMG_2720.jpeg
IMG_2721.jpeg
 
It's too bad the entire line could not have been elevated! I fail to see how this doesn't look urban or that it looks 'intrusive'. Instead of a slow tram, we would have had a fast train, automated, running at 90- second frequencies during rush hour. (with awesome views!)

But city hall, in its infinite wisdom, knows best, pretending that we're some European city with dense compact development instead of the reality of the suburban development we live in.

Portland, for all its accolades about its street-level trains, actually isn't a successful system based on ridership figures. It's too slow, too infrequent.

You really want to get people out of their cars: offer a solution that's faster than their car. And a slow tram is not that answer.
 
Last edited:
whattheheck said:
It's too bad the entire line could not have been elevated! I fail to see how this doesn't look urban or that it looks 'intrusive'. Instead of a slow tram, we would have had a fast train, automated, running at 90- second frequencies during rush hour. (with awesome views!)

But city hall, in its infinite wisdom, knows best, pretending that we're some European city with dense compact development instead of the reality of the suburban development we live in.

Portland, for all its accolades about its street-level trains, actually isn't a successful system based on ridership figures. It's too slow, too infrequent.

You really want to get people out of their cars: offer a solution that's faster than their car. And a slow tram is not that answer.
Click to expand...

Good points. Was there anyone really advocating hard at that time for an elevated system either on council or community or business?
 
Well I would prefer an elevated system but for the amount of room we have everywhere and how much more it would have cost, at least that's what council was told, it didn't make too much sense. Just repeating the city administration talking points.
 
TAS said:
Good points. Was there anyone really advocating hard at that time for an elevated system either on council or community or business?
Click to expand...
Cost was a non starter I’m pretty sure. Figures were usually 3-5x what at grade would be. So this line being 3bil likely would have become 5-8bil if fully elevated, with larger stations, etc.

It’s sort of a double whammy. We’re too sprawled and low density to afford the best transit. But because we’re so sprawled, we especially need fast, grade separated transit.

So we get the worst of both.

Thankfully, as big as Edmonton is, people very much live in quadrants and many of our employment bases aren’t downtown. I suspect many valley line users will be travelling 4-6 stops often vs longer 10+ stop trips.

It’d be interesting to see how this compares to the C train or Toronto subways, skytrain etc in terms of average trip distance, how many people get off at what stop, etc. vancouver definitely mostly funnels people from suburbs to city centre.
 
Gronk! said:
For those of you who keep whining about an elevated LRT line, need I remind you of the substandard piers that kept delaying the SE line? Can you imagine if the entire line was like that?
Click to expand...
This is sort of a strawman.

Yes that was dumb and would have been brutal if the entire line was elevated.

That’s also irrelevant to the question of if elevated rail would have been superior. If all elevated rail globally consistently had pier issues, then sure, let’s talk. But a 1 off stupid mistake doesn’t have bearing on the discussion.
 
thommyjo said:
Cost was a non starter I’m pretty sure. Figures were usually 3-5x what at grade would be. So this line being 3bil likely would have become 5-8bil if fully elevated, with larger stations, etc.

It’s sort of a double whammy. We’re too sprawled and low density to afford the best transit. But because we’re so sprawled, we especially need fast, grade separated transit.

So we get the worst of both.

Thankfully, as big as Edmonton is, people very much live in quadrants and many of our employment bases aren’t downtown. I suspect many valley line users will be travelling 4-6 stops often vs longer 10+ stop trips.

It’d be interesting to see how this compares to the C train or Toronto subways, skytrain etc in terms of average trip distance, how many people get off at what stop, etc. vancouver definitely mostly funnels people from suburbs to city centre.
Click to expand...

Considering the existing lines fill up in the morning in the suburban stations and quickly unload at the University and Downtown stations, I suspect not. Yes, our employment is more decentralized than Calgary, and yes, I suspect there will be many people going a handful of stops rather than all the way from the 'burbs to Downtown, as already happens, but the system already is much busier at peak times for getting people into school or office jobs in the core and I don't think VLW will change that. Especially because rapid transit planning in Edmonton doesn't really prioritize our other large employment zones that are outside of the core, such as 50th St/Capilano, 170th/Mayfield/Industrial NW business parks, Nisku, Refinery Row, Parsons Rd business and industrial parks, and Acheson. There are obvious reasons for this but the LRT is largely designed for commuters into the core from further out, particularly considering every route meets Downtown. Peak service orients around this and the proof is in the traffic volumes.
 
I think the Valley Line West will help Misericordia and West Edmonton Mall. All the major hospitals and shopping malls will be served. I agree that the industrial areas need better transit service. I think Strathcona Transit has a stop at the Esso refinery at 34 Street, and is probably the mainline transit route to University and Downtown. Other industrial areas seem to have transit frequency similar to other far-flung suburbs.
 
dunno said:
Considering the existing lines fill up in the morning in the suburban stations and quickly unload at the University and Downtown stations, I suspect not. Yes, our employment is more decentralized than Calgary, and yes, I suspect there will be many people going a handful of stops rather than all the way from the 'burbs to Downtown, as already happens, but the system already is much busier at peak times for getting people into school or office jobs in the core and I don't think VLW will change that. Especially because rapid transit planning in Edmonton doesn't really prioritize our other large employment zones that are outside of the core, such as 50th St/Capilano, 170th/Mayfield/Industrial NW business parks, Nisku, Refinery Row, Parsons Rd business and industrial parks, and Acheson. There are obvious reasons for this but the LRT is largely designed for commuters into the core from further out, particularly considering every route meets Downtown. Peak service orients around this and the proof is in the traffic volumes.
Click to expand...
But other than Southgate, there’s not a lot of destinations besides uni and downtown on the capital line.

Whereas WEM is a whole different beast. Especially with parking, tourism, and the numbers of residential stops the valley line stop has that could feed into WEM.

West valley also goes to Mis, and then 124th street and brewery district stops are huge in terms of main streets/food/leisure sort of stuff.

I might be wrong, but I really do think the valley line has a more balanced connectivity vs capital.
 
thommyjo said:
But other than Southgate, there’s not a lot of destinations besides uni and downtown on the capital line.

Whereas WEM is a whole different beast. Especially with parking, tourism, and the numbers of residential stops the valley line stop has that could feed into WEM.

West valley also goes to Mis, and then 124th street and brewery district stops are huge in terms of main streets/food/leisure sort of stuff.

I might be wrong, but I really do think the valley line has a more balanced connectivity vs capital.
Click to expand...

WEM will definitely draw people, but while it does employ a lot of people, my hunch is that you're still going to get more people on the Valley Line from Meadowlark going to Downtown (or Oliver, which is basically an extension of Downtown) than WEM on a Tuesday morning.

Sure there's the Mis, but Metro Line already has the Royal Alex and the VLSE has the Grey Nuns. And while Health Sciences does see significant commuter traffic, the number of people getting off there vs University Station most of the time is still significantly different.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top