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

Avonmore Stop this afternoon.
What's with the "Edmonton beige/grey" metal trim on top? Looks nothing like what was rendered or this is not a finished product?
2021-03-23 158.JPG
2021-03-23 159.JPG
 
The_Cat said:
I'm glad to see the wooden poles are coming down. 75 Street looks like it's from the 1960's. Also, the bike paths will also help. There's no real pedestrian link along 75 Street.
Click to expand...
Hopefully it helps. But I'm a bit skeptical from looking at page 38 and 39 of this document, because it looks like pedestrian connections to other parts of the area aren't in the scope of this project. I'd love for the city to improve pedestrian connections in the broader area, or at least nearby businesses and the W.P. Wagner school. For reference, this is what it looks like currently along Davies Road.

20210320_173848.jpg20210320_173825.jpg20210320_173840.jpg20210320_173813.jpg
 
CplKlinger said:
I'd love for the city to improve pedestrian connections in the broader area, or at least nearby businesses and the W.P. Wagner school.
Click to expand...
If there could be a more direct and improved path from the school to the station that could be a large catchment of ridership for the line. But I mean, kids from Ainlay walk all the way to Southgate soooo 😆
 
It still blows my mind how much bigger the Valley Line elevated sections are compared to the Skytrain and Canada Lines.... They feel so massive when walking underneath them compared to Vancouvers.


Valley Line (2021) approx. 12m wide, LRV width 2.65m
1616620527107.png



Skytrain Evergreen Extension (2016) approx. 8m wide, LRV width: 2.65m
1616620624845.png


Canada Line (2009) approx. 8.5m wide, LRV width: 3m
1616620704816.png



Obviously since it's pulled from Google Earth it won't be entirely accurate but still give a sense of how big the VL's are even with Vancouver being in a higher seismic area
 
My guess is they were trying to fit it in with things in the area. Might
archited said:
"involved" is quite a strong word.
Click to expand...
They might pay a bit more attention to people from say the DBA, than to the rest of us plebes, but the city can be quite impervious to feedback that doesn't support what they want to do anyways.
 
realkevbo said:
It still blows my mind how much bigger the Valley Line elevated sections are compared to the Skytrain and Canada Lines.... They feel so massive when walking underneath them compared to Vancouvers.


Valley Line (2021) approx. 12m wide, LRV width 2.65m



Obviously since it's pulled from Google Earth it won't be entirely accurate but still give a sense of how big the VL's are even with Vancouver being in a higher seismic area
Click to expand...
I'm not a structural engineer or even an engineer, but soil here can be soft and we also have a much harsher freeze-thaw cycle than Vancouver does, so I imagine that must come into some consideration.
 
cliffapotamus said:
Okay. So. i know no one else sees this as a conspiracy, but i have photo evidence now: Transed built an extra 2 sections of viaduct in the forest to the East of Wagner High School. the sections are along the rail line (ie behind the warehouses, pretty hidden from view) and perpendicular to the existing completed viaduct. I believe they are on temporary scaffolds (ie not in their final positions) but crews are taking the formwork and tarps off the larger of the two sections now. they must be planning on moving them soon. but where?! TO WHERE TO DO WHAT AND WHYYYYYY WERE THEY HIDDEN?!?!
Click to expand...
@realkevbo This topic came up around the above comment. back when the replacement sections were being cast. I'm very much not an engineer either, but there were some very good points about deliberately overbuilding at this phase of the P3 contract to avoid higher maintenance costs later on that seemed cogent. I think the point about the freeze-thaw cycle makes a lot of sense. Our freeze-thaw situation is pretty brutal; just look at Groat Bridge. Oversizing the viaduct, ensuring the rebar is encased in more concrete, might be a way of preventing water ingress to the rebar and keeping it from rusting.
Another good point made by someone was that the rushed schedule could have influenced the engineering/design. If exact loads couldn't be pinned down, they would have to design for the heaviest train that could conceivably run on the line. This extra structural capacity would end up useless most likely, but if the trainsets changed and got heavier, for example, the design work wouldn't have to be repeated. it would be faster and cheaper (i guess, the way the contract was written for late penalties, idk) to overbuild.
***edit: i can't find the actual original comment that made this point, i want to say it was sometime this fall, they were talking about Davies Station in particular, which is apparently super overbuilt****
Lastly, occam's razor: the Valley line viaduct flares out rather dramatically, adding a metre or two on each side. are the other viaduct sections straight-sided? that might be it right there.
 
cliffapotamus said:
@realkevbo This topic came up around the above comment. back when the replacement sections were being cast. I'm very much not an engineer either, but there were some very good points about deliberately overbuilding at this phase of the P3 contract to avoid higher maintenance costs later on that seemed cogent. I think the point about the freeze-thaw cycle makes a lot of sense. Our freeze-thaw situation is pretty brutal; just look at Groat Bridge. Oversizing the viaduct, ensuring the rebar is encased in more concrete, might be a way of preventing water ingress to the rebar and keeping it from rusting.
Another good point made by someone was that the rushed schedule could have influenced the engineering/design. If exact loads couldn't be pinned down, they would have to design for the heaviest train that could conceivably run on the line. This extra structural capacity would end up useless most likely, but if the trainsets changed and got heavier, for example, the design work wouldn't have to be repeated. it would be faster and cheaper (i guess, the way the contract was written for late penalties, idk) to overbuild.
***edit: i can't find the actual original comment that made this point, i want to say it was sometime this fall, they were talking about Davies Station in particular, which is apparently super overbuilt****
Lastly, occam's razor: the Valley line viaduct flares out rather dramatically, adding a metre or two on each side. are the other viaduct sections straight-sided? that might be it right there.
Click to expand...
I can confirm it was overengineered. My friend used to work for a company that did some of the steel for Davies Station and he said they advised TransEd several times that they could do it for cheaper and less steel. He basically said you could drive a train of tanks down the thing without an issue.
 
westcoastjos said:
I can confirm it was over-engineered. My friend used to work for a company that did some of the steel for Davies Station and he said they advised TransEd several times that they could do it for cheaper and less steel. He basically said you could drive a train of tanks down the thing without an issue.
Click to expand...

They also picked the wrong station to over-engineer. This is a beautiful station, but it's in the least sexiest location along the line. Why not choose Mill Woods station for this? or perhaps Bonnie Doon? At least for those stations you could tie in better with any high density developments around it
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top