Valley Line LRT | TransEd/Marigold | City of Edmonton

@archited We almost did at one point... (trembles in METS freeway)
 
Freedm said:
Removing traffic lanes may reduce traffic but it also reduces visitors to the downtown.
Click to expand...

Not sure how that follows. Giving people more options (and increasing transportation capacity) to get downtown is a net gain, not a net loss.

Especially when you don't have to pay for parking.
 
Although it seems counter-intuitive to how car-centric our city is (and a lack of park-and-ride can exacerbate this issue for people coming in from far suburbs) the valley line, even with its small (relative to high floor) capacity, will be capable of moving 6600 people per hour per direction at peak frequency. Again using some rough numbers, the average traffic lane moves 2000 people per hour (some situations reduce this further, ie traffic lights, low speeds, so some planners quote even lower numbers of around 1600). So, with the valley line replacing a single lane in each direction, we're taking a 4-lane road and turning it into an 8-lane artery. LRT allows this increase with minimal footprint increase (relative to a freeway/road of the same passenger capacity) and providing opportunities for density along the way, helping reduce the demand for housing in those same distant suburbs we are having such a hard time servicing.
For this I'm using capacity numbers from the Valley line literature, and the lane capacities (which can vary base on the type of road) from HGP 240 (uni class) i found this good article on road capacity as well, which lays out some of the constraints for car-only roads. http://www.mikeontraffic.com/numbers-every-traffic-engineer-should-know/
While we can't ignore auto traffic, as it is central to how so many people live in our city, but we need to recognize that it isn't a terribly efficient way for all 1.4 million people in the region to move around.
 
Daveography said:
IMPORTANT NOTICE
I don't normally use big fonts, but want to be sure to try and get everyone's attention here. 😁

Some reps from TransEd have reached out to me about a possible in-person tour and Q&A of the Valley Line project, for the benefit of SkyriseEdmonton members specifically.

Details - including the date - are still being worked out, but:

1) If you have questions about the project you'd like me to ask, please post them here or DM them to me. I'll be providing them to TransEd in advance to ensure they have people on hand who can answer.

2) Right now there's room for one more person to join me. If you have a decent camera, a pair of steel-toed boots, don't mind wearing a face mask for what might be an extended period of time (due to COVID), and are comfortable being on active construction sites, please DM me. I'm sorry I can only select one other person for now, BUT they indicated that there is a possibility for another tour and Q&A with more members may be possible depending on how this one goes.
Click to expand...

Update: Sounds like this will be happening late July or early August, once the 7th set of cable stays are up.
 
Daveography said:
Not sure how that follows. Giving people more options (and increasing transportation capacity) to get downtown is a net gain, not a net loss.

Especially when you don't have to pay for parking.
Click to expand...
Adding a train does not help people with cars. If those people find it more difficult to go downtown with the reduction of driving lanes, those people will stop going downtown. The new train people on the other hand are already currently bus people so there's no net gain there.
 
@Freedm "People will stop going downtown if it's harder to drive there" Sorry, but I think you know that isn't necessarily true. Firstly, People will commute to wherever they need to, and while this logic may work for people who have jobs with high turnover rates, if somebody has a sustainable job that is important to keep then they'll make the accommodations needed on their end to get to and from work. I need to address this too, because it's related to this whole argument: When comparing the travel time between the LRT and cars, a lot of people make the mistake of thinking as though the car will have an empty and open road to drive on, which, in that case commutes times will be fairly similar between the two. However, an open road is far from the truth, and traffic jams and other holdups are going to become much more prevalent as Edmonton's population naturally grows (they already are for the record), extending the vehicle commute time drastically. Hey, maybe taking the train isn't such a bad idea when driving to and from work involves spending hours in traffic, huh? 😀

Secondly, it is proven through various studies that specifically vehicle commuters are more likely to utilize a new rail line rather than a new bus line, ranging from moderately more into drastic levels. That doesn't include people who also walked or biked previously to their destinations, either. So in other words No, it isn't just "bus people" that'll use this line ;)
 
Last edited:
^^^ Nearly all LRT users are also (reluctantly) bus users (needed to get to a transit station) -- some drive cars to transit parking lots, but I doubt it is the majority. We have already heard on this site alone some frustrations with bus travel. And time savings are measured in whole route applications, not simply the LRT portion of a travel complex. Anecdotally, I have a business associate who was looking to get to a meeting at City Hall and he intended on driving his car to the Clairview long term parking and taking LRT downtown. When he got to the lot there was no parking available so he drove all the way downtown and made the meeting on time. He vowed never to make that mistake again realizing that if he wanted to be assured of a parking spot he would have to arrive at the facility earlier by hours. The point is that there are inconveniences in both modes and, until transit can work to better interest in accessibility and timely connections, then it is going to remain difficult to pry people out of their cars. Additionally, there are many auto drivers who have to make several stops through the day at a variety of locations (not just one destination) and transit has zero appeal to those folks. Currently the best projected savior for transit lies in TODs and their innerCity connections; in the future it will be automated on-demand buses connected to light rail that will make a difference in ridership -- that plus on-vehicle applications such as wifi, snacks and beverages, porter-services, etc.(many of these are also overlooked potential income streams). The more enjoyable the ride, the more interest in taking it. @Daveography is quite correct in his vision of a balanced system.
 
Platinum107 said:
@Freedm "People will stop going downtown if it's harder to drive there" Sorry, but I think you know that isn't necessarily true. Firstly, People will commute to wherever they need to, and while this logic may work for people who have jobs with high turnover rates, if somebody has a sustainable job that is important to keep then they'll make the accommodations needed on their end to get to and from work. I need to address this too, because it's related to this whole argument: When comparing the travel time between the LRT and cars, a lot of people make the mistake of thinking as though the car will have an empty and open road to drive on, which, in that case commutes times will be fairly similar between the two. However, an open road is far from the truth, and traffic jams and other holdups are going to become much more prevalent as Edmonton's population naturally grows (they already are for the record), extending the vehicle commute time drastically. Hey, maybe taking the train isn't such a bad idea when driving to and from work involves spending hours in traffic, huh? 😀

Secondly, it is proven through various studies that specifically vehicle commuters are more likely to utilize a new rail line rather than a new bus line, ranging from moderately more into drastic levels. That doesn't include people who also walked or biked previously to their destinations, either. So in other words No, it isn't just "bus people" that'll use this line ;)
Click to expand...
Taking a car, as opposed to public transit, is more about freedom than anything so even with traffic jams I still prefer my car. I don't have to worry about a schedule or a fixed route. I can go wherever I want, whenever I want and public transit just can't compete with that.
 
IMG_20200627_174148.jpg
 
@Freedm Great... that's your personal preference. Good for you. I'll concede that I better understand now how, at the current moment, only a portion of commuters from the suburbs will use the LRT, but not the majority of them. In the end, you're right in saying that the system is meant for long-term increases in ridership from TOD and inner-city users as opposed to trying to pull people from their cars. I still believe that another increase will come later down the line when extreme traffic becomes more of an issue.
 
Last edited:
There was a time when I used transit to get to work downtown but that was because my wife and I shared a car and she needed it for kids 'n stuff. As soon as we could afford two cars, that transit pass went out the window.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top