LRT Expansion Planning

[Barnaby]

I'm just thinking about incrementalism, and supporting the existing business corridors. The extension would be 2.65 kilometers, bring rail service to the entire length of 124st up to 118th, bring service to the entire industrial area that lines that old rail right of way, and would be extremely cheap. No new maintenance facility would be needed. Barely any rolling stock would need to be purchased (if any).

I'm not an estimator, but a barebones extension could almost definitely be done for under $200 million. It would only have 2 street crossings, and share only 330 meters of roadway that is already due for a major resurfacing.

 

[AJo]

Here's an idea from Lincoln Ho.

Streetcar Reimagined + Buena Vista Cable Car - Yegventures.ca

Here’s a proposal of the historic Edmonton Streetcar reimagined. Taking the model of the Portland Streetcar or Trams in Rome (a

yegventures.ca

Took a look at that and its a very interesting idea and would certainly be handy. Though I am not sure what to think about a Streetcar passing that close to my house. Not to dox myself but I would definitely hear it every time it went by.
And while I find it personally interesting that he chose 119 ave, I don't see why thats preferable to 118 ave. unless he is worried about traffic congestion. And if traffic congestion is the problem why not move it to 122 ave which is much wider than 119th and also gives almost as direct a connection to Coliseum and the potential redevelopment there.

 

[The_Cat]

I think 119 Avenue has a bike path.

 

[AJo]

I think 119 Avenue has a bike path.

It does have one. A really nice two way separated path. And the traffic was converted to one way (eastbound). With a parking lane. Running a two way streetcar there would be challenging unless they widen the road space. And if they did that. They would likely need to remove a number of boulevard trees.

 

[IanO]

 

[NateTheUrbanist]

Worth the price to get an LRT line under Whyte Ave.

 

[Gronk!]

As long as Whyte Ave is left intact from 99 St to 112 St, it's all good. The tunneling work won't be cheap by any stretch of the imagination. My only concern would be clashes with any proposed Gateway Blvd tunneling projects from south of Whyte Ave to the river.

 

[dunno]

As long as Whyte Ave is left intact from 99 St to 112 St, it's all good. The tunneling work won't be cheap by any stretch of the imagination. My only concern would be clashes with any proposed Gateway Blvd tunneling projects from south of Whyte Ave to the river.

Has that ever been officially proposed? It's always been a pipe dream or rumour from what I know.

 

[Barnaby]

I would prefer an at grade low floor tram to a subway down Whyte Ave. It's cheaper, and will improve the area more by calming traffic and improving walkability.

 

[dunno]

I would prefer an at grade low floor tram to a subway down Whyte Ave. It's cheaper, and will improve the area more by calming traffic and improving walkability.

It'd be slow and get stuck in traffic. Would you have also preferred a low floor tram down Jasper Ave? I'd rather have the best for that area -- transit that is quick, efficient, and reliable. You don't get that by throwing people's F150s into the equation. If this were a less intense area, such as 95th St from Jasper to 118 Ave, down 102 Ave in Oliver-Downtown, or maybe down Norwood/112 Ave between Kingsway and 50th St via the Highlands, I could see the merit in a streetcar.

 

[The_Cat]

I’d like to see how the BRT route performs along Whyte before committing to LRT.

 

[Barnaby]

It'd be slow and get stuck in traffic. Would you have also preferred a low floor tram down Jasper Ave? I'd rather have the best for that area -- transit that is quick, efficient, and reliable. You don't get that by throwing people's F150s into the equation. If this were a less intense area, such as 95th St from Jasper to 118 Ave, down 102 Ave in Oliver-Downtown, or maybe down Norwood/112 Ave between Kingsway and 50th St via the Highlands, I could see the merit in a streetcar.

No it wouldn't? The low floor line will have it's own ROW like it will along Stony Plain Rd. Why do you envision a TTC style tram when Edmonton has two examples under construction of a system that doesn't get stuck in traffic?

 

[dunno]

No it wouldn't? The low floor line will have it's own ROW like it will along Stony Plain Rd. Why do you envision a TTC style tram when Edmonton has two examples under construction of a system that doesn't get stuck in traffic?

The Valley Line already has problems with drivers crashing into the trains. Wait until it's in regular service with passengers getting delayed because of idiot drivers. The line doesn't have full right of way like Metro/Capital and the City says it will simply time signalling to allow no stopping at lights, but I'm skeptical (though willing to be pleasantly surprised). It will also, despite needing to connect populations over vast distances in Edmonton, be no quicker than the bus between Mill Woods and Downtown.

It's also worth noting that not all TTC streetcars are in traffic. The Spadina streetcar is notable for its own ROW but also infamous for how slow it is.

 

[Barnaby]

We'll agree to disagree on this one. I think for the type of street that Whyte is, grade separation is a drawback when it comes to the urban experience. I'm not opposed to grade separation at 109th st, and maybe elevated at Gateway, but the rest of the West/East alignment should be highly visible, asthetically pleasing, and have frequent stops for shoppers, and visitors.

Ride times aren't going to be negatively affected by this, because you can restrict left turns (of course the big pro car argument is that it's a thoroughfare, so that wouldn't matter), you can also give priority to the tram like what's done on much of the Valley Line. Realistically this is a connector to the U of A, Grandin/Government, and Corona Underground subway portion of the LRT system. It's not going to be a rapid transit connection to anywhere, and if it miraculously gets to Sherwood Park someday, you can get low floor rolling stock that goes 90kph. But obviously high floor is better for this purpose that is atleast 20-30 years away.

I love underground systems, and I think Edmonton's subway is underrated, but I will admit that I didn't like taking the underground in Brooklyn, a place that should have streetcars already. It should be possible to spot a restaurant on Whyte from the tram, and be seated within 3-5 minutes.

 

[yeggator]

It'd be slow and get stuck in traffic. Would you have also preferred a low floor tram down Jasper Ave? I'd rather have the best for that area -- transit that is quick, efficient, and reliable. You don't get that by throwing people's F150s into the equation. If this were a less intense area, such as 95th St from Jasper to 118 Ave, down 102 Ave in Oliver-Downtown, or maybe down Norwood/112 Ave between Kingsway and 50th St via the Highlands, I could see the merit in a streetcar.

To add to this, with the amount of drunk party-goers and jaywalkers around, a street-level LRT would be a disaster.