Metro Line LRT | ?m | ?s | City of Edmonton

[thommyjo]

I feel like a big thing with TOD (this is very anecdotal from just knowing a few friends in Van/tor mind you), is having a DT job (or something on the line), and having the surrounding area be walkable and somewhat self containing.

We don’t have as big of DT job market and century, claireview, etc are pretty car dependent still.

Stadium is getting closer to being a true community. Century likely should be too soon. But I would see the valley line as being better than many of our high floor stations for TODs.

Bonnie doone, hollyrood, 124st, 142st/Westblock are all areas where a TOD lifestyle, or car free lifestyle is a lot more possible. Until a critical mass of destinations for someone is walkable or along the train line, TOD doesn’t have a ton of appeal.

 

[David A]

TOD has not been a failure in Edmonton, in fact I think it has been a resounding success thus far. The only Canadian cities the beat out Edmonton in this metric are Toronto and Vancouver, both much larger centres with much larger established transit rider-base, honestly not even Montreal has an much even though it's denser in the first place. Century Park and the Stadium District are the best examples but we are seeing a number of other centres emerge and those two that were previously mentioned are growing as well including Blatchford. Garneau is another example of increased density around transit nodes, (though it was already somewhat dense so maybe it's more Development Oriented Transit rather than the other way around, though the density is now increasing even more now that the LRT is here). Holyrood is also getting new high-rises and that area with Holyrood, Bonnie Doon and Strathearn is on track to become a highly successful transit region. There are also a number of proposals that are coming through along the rest of the Southeast VL, like Mill Woods. I'm sure we'll start to see a bunch more development along the VL West as well. TOD is better than average already among Canadian cities and is only getting better.

While I am not quite as positive about a few parts of this, such as Blatchford, I do agree with your comments about most of the other areas.mentioned. I'm not sure comparisons by others to places 2 or 5 times bigger than Edmonton, with considerably more density to begin with, are that meaningful or helpful. I feel the best measure is to look at what was in these parts of our city 5 or 10 years ago and also consider what is planned in Bonnie Doon, Millwoods and elsewhere. So, I think we have done fairly well and are on track to continue to do more.

 

[CaptainBL]

I feel like a big thing with TOD (this is very anecdotal from just knowing a few friends in Van/tor mind you), is having a DT job (or something on the line), and having the surrounding area be walkable and somewhat self containing.

We don’t have as big of DT job market and century, claireview, etc are pretty car dependent still.

Stadium is getting closer to being a true community. Century likely should be too soon. But I would see the valley line as being better than many of our high floor stations for TODs.

Bonnie doone, hollyrood, 124st, 142st/Westblock are all areas where a TOD lifestyle, or car free lifestyle is a lot more possible. Until a critical mass of destinations for someone is walkable or along the train line, TOD doesn’t have a ton of appeal.

100% accurate. When I lived in Toronto, the TOD type nodes were great for people that wanted to live outside of downtown where it was less expensive but could work downtown. 1000s of people could live in Liberty Village or Mimico (which both exploded over the past 5-10 years) where there were mini livable cities while hopping on the train to their downtown jobs.

I struggle with the idea here because TOD doesnt work for the 1000s that work in Nisku, refinery row, or many of the west and south burb offices given that the concentration of office workers downtown are so low. Maybe it works for students going to GMac or U of A that want to live outside where its cheaper? But with the 0 downtown job growth we have held for the last decade and no signs of that changing I do struggle with the whole idea of living at a TOD to commute to where for who?

 

[ChazYEG]

While I am not quite as positive about a few parts of this, such as Blatchford, I do agree with your comments about most of the other areas.mentioned

Blatchford has been slower than I'd like, but I believe that once we start seeing some of the multifamily, mixed use and commercial buildings go up, it will pick up momentum. I think it was a mistake to start with the lowest density possible, there (and I am not sure if it was a choice or not, but if it was, we should be thinking about incentives to get the higher density things built ASAP).

I'm not sure comparisons by others to places 2 or 5 times bigger than Edmonton, with considerably more density to begin with, are that meaningful or helpful. I feel the best measure is to look at what was in these parts of our city 5 or 10 years ago and also consider what is planned in Bonnie Doon, Millwoods and elsewhere. So, I think we have done fairly well and are on track to continue to do more.

That was my point back there. Vancouver an Toronto, the two examples we hear a lot here to compare are substantially larger, have more of a transit culture and, Vancouver in particular, started building those TODs before the huge immigrant inflow that we've been having for the past 15 years or so (which was also prior to the insane housing costs increase there). And it took places like Metrotown well over a decade to get to where it is.
I think that, considering what we had in these places, and how they are now, we're doing okay. Could be better? Yes, but it has been at least moderately successful and, in my opinion, it'll gain more momentum as the city grows, and these places become more and more desirable.
I honestly believe that the Stadium and Century Park TODs will be bustling in the next 5-10 years, and will become some of the most successful TODs in cities that are comparable to Edmonton, and even some bigger. I also do have relatively high hopes for the Bonnie Doon/Strathearn area, although I do believe that will take a little bit longer.

 

[ChazYEG]

100% accurate. When I lived in Toronto, the TOD type nodes were great for people that wanted to live outside of downtown where it was less expensive but could work downtown. 1000s of people could live in Liberty Village or Mimico (which both exploded over the past 5-10 years) where there were mini livable cities while hopping on the train to their downtown jobs.

I struggle with the idea here because TOD doesnt work for the 1000s that work in Nisku, refinery row, or many of the west and south burb offices given that the concentration of office workers downtown are so low. Maybe it works for students going to GMac or U of A that want to live outside where its cheaper? But with the 0 downtown job growth we have held for the last decade and no signs of that changing I do struggle with the whole idea of living at a TOD to commute to where for who?

I'll counter that it might become more attractive to live in TODs here, even for the 1000s of people working in industrial/suburban areas once we have more entertainment and shopping options connected to the system (hence why I think the Valley Line West will be one of the biggest game changers in our whole urban dynamic). This is also one of the reason why I honestly think there should be a bigger push to make Downtown more entertainment and residential focused than just an employment node.

If you live in places like Clareview or Century Park, for example, it's very convenient to get to work in places like Leduc, Fort Sask and any of our industrial areas (most of our job base), while it might be very handy to have easy access to entertainment destinations such as Whyte Ave, Rogers and WEM, with our having to worry about parking, drinking-and-driving, etc.

It would really help if the LRT had a better safety perception, too. Just as an anecdote, I went to the Oktoberfest with a friend, and we had someone to drop off and pick us up at Century Park. This friend rarely leaves the Southside, and usually drives everywhere, so the whole time we were in the LRT, especially on the way back, at night (but even on the way t the festival, when it was still day), she was feeling like we were riding in the worst places of the Bronx, in the 1970s, even though it was a busy day, even at night (12am-ish), due to the Iron Maiden concert at Rogers, and the Oktoberfest itself. We didn't really see anyone particularly sketchy, and for a regular transit rider, it must have felt as safe as it could possibly get, that late in the day, but for her, whose only perception of the LRT comes through the media, it felt like the most dangerous situation she could possibly be in.

We do have safety issues, compared to some other places, but gosh, the perception people have is WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY worse than reality, and the media blows everything out of proportion. If one person gets assaulted by a random dude, they make it feel like LRT trains are a constant brawl, with bloody conflicts and people getting stabbed and assaulted at all times and nothing and no one is safe, at any time.

 

[trevorhayden]

Let's not forget about the Police chief playing politics with our taxes by inciting fears in the media.

 

[erudyk_29]

We do have safety issues, compared to some other places, but gosh, the perception people have is WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY worse than reality, and the media blows everything out of proportion. If one person gets assaulted by a random dude, they make it feel like LRT trains are a constant brawl, with bloody conflicts and people getting stabbed and assaulted at all times and nothing and no one is safe, at any time.

Absolutely, and it really shows how skewed our sense of risk is in car-dependent North America. People are terrified of taking public transit due to crime, and yet the chance of you being attacked on transit, let alone killed is miniscule compared to the chance of being killed in an auto related accident. I have rode the LRT weekly over the past couple years from the University to Downtown, through some of the sections which have the worst reputations and have never seen, or experienced anything even remotely threatening. I'm sure most others who ride transit would agree with this. I have never felt unsafe on public transit, now I am coming from the privileged perspective of a white male, however it is clear that perceptions of the safety of transit are very far from the reality. Especially when comparing it to other transit modes aka. driving when it comes to safety.

 

[Platinum107]

TOD has not been a failure in Edmonton, in fact I think it has been a resounding success thus far. The only Canadian cities the beat out Edmonton in this metric are Toronto and Vancouver, both much larger centres with much larger established transit rider-base, honestly not even Montreal has an much even though it's denser in the first place. Century Park and the Stadium District are the best examples but we are seeing a number of other centres emerge and those two that were previously mentioned are growing as well including Blatchford. Garneau is another example of increased density around transit nodes, (though it was already somewhat dense so maybe it's more Development Oriented Transit rather than the other way around, though the density is now increasing even more now that the LRT is here). Holyrood is also getting new high-rises and that area with Holyrood, Bonnie Doon and Strathearn is on track to become a highly successful transit region. There are also a number of proposals that are coming through along the rest of the Southeast VL, like Mill Woods. I'm sure we'll start to see a bunch more development along the VL West as well. TOD is better than average already among Canadian cities and is only getting better.

I never really thought about out city in relation to the average but yeah, Edmonton does have some strong TOD game in that respect.

I agree! I think the whole “forget it, TOD in Edmonton has failed” thing is just another case of Edmonton-bubble-expectation-let-down syndrome. Is there a North American metro close in population that has more successful TOD than us?

Overall I think TOD is growing across the board (generally), however Edmonton definitely leads in terms of effort and amount of developments fore its size I think.

 

[erudyk_29]

Also speaking on the responses who say that Edmonton can't have proper TOD due to being a more blue collar city compared to Toronto and Vancouver with jobs more concentrated in suburbs like Nisku and that only University Students will use TOD areas. The top employers in the city are: AHS, The Government of Alberta, Stantec, PCL and The City of Edmonton. PCL is the only one of those that wouldn't necessarily lend well to use of TOD and transit in general. Hospitals are generally well connected to transit and all the others are primarily located in Downtown or Strathcona. So yes while Edmonton may be less centralized than Toronto and Vancouver when it comes to the locality of jobs, most of the top employers are actually concentrated in areas that are well supported by transit. So this would not be a major concern for the future of TOD in Edmonton. Plenty of people have jobs that require a commute into the centre of the city and would like housing located a quick train ride from their work, not just students.

 

[Kosy123]

I think one thing I'd also like to add is that some TOD's (in Vancouver from my experience at least) have the issue of not being as walkable as you think. Brentwood is one big example of it. Massive towers, transit connection, absolutely subpar street experience since it's on a stroad. It's the one thing I really believe we can try and beat other major cities on.

I really think that the Valley Line might be a different breed when it comes to fostering TOD's, just based on the fact it's a weird low floor tram style train. It's speculation but I'm just super curious on how future TOD;s on this line will develop. I'm personally super excited for West Block for that reason, especially as they build more closer to the line's opening.

 

[ChazYEG]

I think one thing I'd also like to add is that some TOD's (in Vancouver from my experience at least) have the issue of not being as walkable as you think. Brentwood is one big example of it. Massive towers, transit connection, absolutely subpar street experience since it's on a stroad. It's the one thing I really believe we can try and beat other major cities on.

I really think that the Valley Line might be a different breed when it comes to fostering TOD's, just based on the fact it's a weird low floor tram style train. It's speculation but I'm just super curious on how future TOD;s on this line will develop. I'm personally super excited for West Block for that reason, especially as they build more closer to the line's opening.

I agree.

I honestly think the VLW will be a game changer for Edmonton. Connecting the WEM to the LRT, going through dense and/or mature neighbourhoods and extending the system outside of the Henday for the first time will all mean A LOT.
I won't be surprised if on top of West Block, we see more "TOD" spontaneously spur along the line, especially on SPR and 87 Ave. Not to mention what I think it'll do for Westmount/Oliver around 124 st, which Is already booming right now.

And we've been talking about TOD, but what I think will be the most important thing the Valley Line will do, due to it's characteristics, is spur some moderate density increase, spread out along the whole line. This is something that I don't really see the Metro or Capital lines as capable of doing. They can integrate better with traditional TODs, though.

To your point about the pedestrian experience, I mentioned The Louvre at Century Park earlier, and I think we'd be incredibly well served if all of our TOD buildings were like that. I've been there a few of times in the past few months, and the retail, especially on 26 avenue, is thriving. If you get another building like that on the north side of that road, to give it a more complete feeling, it would probably be one of the nicest areas in the city to just stroll by, grab a bite, take your dog for a walk and into a pet spa... But even looking at the area as a whole, The only big misses I see there are the fact that we got both a Safeway and Shoppers in big box format, with sprawling parking lots, instead of inside of buildings' podiums. And even so, I have a friend who lives on 25 ave, just east of 109 st, and reports that the ease of walking to either of these, as well as the retail on that strip mall, makes life almost as convenient as it was when he lived Downtown (and even more so, for some things).

 

[dunno]

I feel like a big thing with TOD (this is very anecdotal from just knowing a few friends in Van/tor mind you), is having a DT job (or something on the line), and having the surrounding area be walkable and somewhat self containing.

We don’t have as big of DT job market and century, claireview, etc are pretty car dependent still.

Stadium is getting closer to being a true community. Century likely should be too soon. But I would see the valley line as being better than many of our high floor stations for TODs.

Bonnie doone, hollyrood, 124st, 142st/Westblock are all areas where a TOD lifestyle, or car free lifestyle is a lot more possible. Until a critical mass of destinations for someone is walkable or along the train line, TOD doesn’t have a ton of appeal.

There is potential on the Capital Line and arguably Blatchford will eventually be a giant TOD. Though I'd overall put the Metro Line in a worse position for TOD potential than the Capital, mostly because the area it will be going through looks like this:

Kind of hard to retrofit that loopy road layout for density, aside from the area around 127 St/153 Ave. 137th Ave had way more potential and would have actually hooked people up to a plethora of amenities instead of 153rd's low density no man's land.

Capital Line, though, beyond Stadium and Century Park, there's strong potential at Belgravia-McKernan (if the NIMBYs get out of the way), South Campus, Coliseum, and Belvedere. Clareview feels a bit like a failure because despite the medium density residential, it's all so car-oriented. I'm sure one at Manning/Gorman or Horse Hills would be better because our standards are much higher now than 25 years ago.

 

[ChazYEG]

Capital Line, though, beyond Stadium and Century Park, there's strong potential at Belgravia-McKernan (if the NIMBYs get out of the way), South Campus, Coliseum, and Belvedere. Clareview feels a bit like a failure because despite the medium density residential, it's all so car-oriented. I'm sure one at Manning/Gorman or Horse Hills would be better because our standards are much higher now than 25 years ago.

There's also potential in Southgate, and eventually, Heritage Valley.

 

[thommyjo]

What I’m very excited about, and think we have done better than other places, is connected a lot of “secondary destinations”. We often think of transit as serving job commuting. Which makes sense for the density and consistency historically.

But I think our connection of Malls, Universities, sports venues and Hospitals, might be better than most other cities I’ve seen. So that’s a huge thing to celebrate. And should make TOD more attractive in the future as the valley lines get going.

We honestly just don’t have a great example yet either of TOD. Again, century and stadium are ok. But if we have a truly amazing TOD type neighbourhood, I think that becomes a thing that opens people’s imagination. Regent Park really did that for me in Toronto. Gave vision for what a mixed use, mixed affordability type community could be. Even just good towers do that. Once you visit a friend in CX, Augustana, Macleran type buildings, saving $100-200/month for a crappy wood frame building by the henday is a lot less appealing cause you know what a good apartment actually is.

 

[dunno]

There's also potential in Southgate, and eventually, Heritage Valley.

I was on the fence about bringing up Southgate. I agree that there's potential, but the mall is a bit of a fortress. This means that the parking lots on mall property lend themselves well to densification at some point, but beyond that it seems harder. There's Empire Park to the east, which is already fairly high density, but with its airy nature could accommodate more. In terms of being connected to the LRT, a lot of this would mean people would have to cut through the mall for ease of access. I could see this going either way as a cost/benefit. But my biggest issue is that, after the mall itself, the next closest land to the LRT station is across 111th St in low density housing. This area should be a lot denser, but it has an awkward road layout that would need to be retrofitted to better accommodate the density.

Absolutely agree on Heritage Valley.