Foolworm
Active Member
It's not obvious and very misleading because all the elevated Canada Line stations have the same basic setup, but Richmond-Brighouse specifically is single-tracked and is effectively half a station as a result.
Metro Line LRT | ?m | ?s | City of Edmonton
- Thread starter Daveography
- Start date
It's not obvious and very misleading because all the elevated Canada Line stations have the same basic setup, but Richmond-Brighouse specifically is single-tracked and is effectively half a station as a result.
Barnaby
Active Member
I believe you knew what I meant and you're being pedantic.
TravellingChris
Active Member
No, let's stick with the underground/trenched stations at these locations. It seems that in this instance the City is making the right decision for the long-term. Particularly at 137 Avenue, where an at-grade crossing would be a disaster.
North of the CN rail yard, the line will be running through residential areas. There's no way any of those communities would go along with an elevated section.
Barnaby
Active Member
Underground is fine. What do you think about the Castle Downs street crossing? Does it even make sense if the other two stations are grade separated?
BrettB
Active Member
I grew up right next to Castledowns Rd +153 and though I haven't lived there for a while, I have no real qualms with the design as envisioned. Occasionally, there's traffic but not always. To me, there's no real need to trench or elevate in that particular area.
BASE
Active Member
I would have a preference to make it policy to grade seperate from any arterial roads.
TravellingChris
Active Member
I would rather see that crossing underground or trenched. However, I'm willing to live with it as proposed so long as the other two are underground--137 Avenue most of all. But you're right, having an underground/trenched station immediately before and after a street-level station with an at-grade crossing seems odd. It strikes me as the City trying to be cute by bringing the line back to the surface quickly to save a few bucks, then burying it again where it becomes problematic once more.
I suspect that the City would have proposed an elevated crossing at 137 Ave/113A St if it weren't in the middle of residential. The only reason they're going underground is because the neighbourhoods would revolt against the massive pylons and the very long ramps that would be required to get the trains up at 137 Avenue, through an elevated station and down again.
My nagging fear is that a future council pulls a Bonnie Doon/Heritage Valley and decides to run the line on the surface all the way north from Grand Trunk Park on the grounds that it's cheaper.
We've seen this movie before.
Foolworm
Active Member
I didn't, and to the contrary I think you're shooting the messenger rather than admit your example was flawed.
Given how the Metro line has been built to date and the whole fracas with Ellerslie, I expect the number of at-grade crossings to increase due to cost concerns. Just hope there is actually money to start on it before the 2030s run their course.
The_Cat
Senior Member
I like the signs for NAIT and Blatchford stations.
occidentalcapital
Senior Member
Me too - love the bold / in your face aspect - feels big city.
trevorhayden
Active Member
All the barriers west of the line are gone and the road is basically finished up to new NAIT station.
BrettB
Active Member
I wonder if/when ETS will add a line to their station announcements as they have in Seattle and Portland where the announcements alerts passengers "Doors to my left (or right)"
EdwardEdm
Active Member
It already exists, although it is a manual intervention the operator would have to make.
Foolworm
Active Member
Anyone planning to line up for the first train when new NAIT station opens?
trevorhayden
Active Member
Is there a date yet?