Urban Outdoorsman said:
The long term plan is far more ambitious than what's currently on the table. I suspect this is more of an interim plan to keep the area commercially active throughout the build out.
Click to expand...
If they build out the full plan and the city puts in the LRT station, this could end up being a pretty large transit adjacent development.
 
It is a little frustrating to me that we are spending billions trying to figure out the Greenline, a project with many issues and delays, and no guarantee of big redevelopment (look at the pace on other lines....), yet we can't find $30-$50 million to put in a station here, where we know there is an active redevelopment and intensification occuring.
 
MichaelS said:
It is a little frustrating to me that we are spending billions trying to figure out the Greenline, a project with many issues and delays, and no guarantee of big redevelopment (look at the pace on other lines....), yet we can't find $30-$50 million to put in a station here, where we know there is an active redevelopment and intensification occuring.
Click to expand...
Exactly. It's not that i'm against the Greenline, but this seems like a more obvioius priority.
 
MichaelS said:
It is a little frustrating to me that we are spending billions trying to figure out the Greenline, a project with many issues and delays, and no guarantee of big redevelopment (look at the pace on other lines....), yet we can't find $30-$50 million to put in a station here, where we know there is an active redevelopment and intensification occuring.
Click to expand...
$30-50M sounds way high as the rough-in for the station already exists
 
DougB said:
$30-50M sounds way high as the rough-in for the station already exists
Click to expand...
I guess there might be different definitions of rough-in, but I wouldn't describe a vacant lot (or even one with a basement dug) as having a 'rough-in for a house'. There is a spot where a station footprint can go, and the tracks don't need to be moved. This is a big deal! It makes this far more achievable! But it's not the bulk of the work. I don't know if there's any foundation work, but the entire station building needs to be built, including 500 feet of pedestrian bridge over a busy freeway.

The City high-level estimate was $57 million for adding a Northland station stop. $32 million ($16-64M range) for the station itself, and $25 million for extra train cars to maintain the same LRT headways given slower travel times due to an additional station. Operating costs are estimated at $1.3 M per year; $1M for the additional service and 300K for the station. One thing that was noted is that construction costs would be much higher than normal because of the highly constrained site; you could probably build it for $15M if you could block off Crowchild and the LRT for the duration of construction, but building next to an active LRT line in the middle of a freeway imposes a lot of time and space and safety constraints that other projects don't have.

Something that often goes unnoted in discussions around new stations is that yes, they provide a new opportunity to access the train, but they also slow down the trains that currently whip past here at full speed; everybody north of this stop will get a longer commute. And the longer it takes a train to make a trip, the more trains you need to provide the same service, and the more trains you run, the more you spend (and the less you can spend on other transit). That doesn't mean that adding infill stations is never a benefit, but it's not cost-free.

It's unclear to me if the city estimate involved the use of the existing Northland Drive overpass or the construction of a new one; although it seems like the former. To me, a new pedestrian access is vital, because the Northland Drive overpass is right at the far corner of the site. From the existing professional building, it would be 450m using the existing sidewalks to get to a train station using that overpass; 250m or so if the desire path around the car dealership is used. It would be a remarkable achievement to build an LRT station to take advantage of transit oriented development and wind up with only a car dealership within a 400m walk of the LRT station.

I think it's a good investment when the Northland plans approach buildout, but putting up the first building is a long way from that, and not every developer can or does complete all of their plans in a timely fashion, especially with such a large scope project. To me, I'd try to build it after phase 3 to match the completion of phase 4 of 6 (from the plan on the first page here); the point at which the construction on the south half of the site is done.
 
I figured some of that cost would be involved in the extra work in buildoing a station on an already active route, and the constrained natutre of the site.

ByeByeBaby said:
Something that often goes unnoted in discussions around new stations is that yes, they provide a new opportunity to access the train, but they also slow down the trains that currently whip past here at full speed; everybody north of this stop will get a longer commute. And the longer it takes a train to make a trip, the more trains you need to provide the same service, and the more trains you run, the more you spend (and the less you can spend on other transit). That doesn't mean that adding infill stations is never a benefit, but it's not cost-free.

It's unclear to me if the city estimate involved the use of the existing Northland Drive overpass or the construction of a new one; although it seems like the former. To me, a new pedestrian access is vital, because the Northland Drive overpass is right at the far corner of the site. From the existing professional building, it would be 450m using the existing sidewalks to get to a train station using that overpass; 250m or so if the desire path around the car dealership is used. It would be a remarkable achievement to build an LRT station to take advantage of transit oriented development and wind up with only a car dealership within a 400m walk of the LRT station.
Click to expand...
I think the extra costs for running trains due to slowed down times is worth, or at least it will be once Northlands is built out. I agree about the timing of the station, no need to build it right now, as a coiple of suburban looking developments doesn't necessiate major density. I would be good with the city building a station after Phase 3 is completed even though Phase 4 has most of the density.
 
ByeByeBaby said:
From the existing professional building, it would be 450m using the existing sidewalks to get to a train station using that overpass; 250m or so if the desire path around the car dealership is used. It would be a remarkable achievement to build an LRT station to take advantage of transit oriented development and wind up with only a car dealership within a 400m walk of the LRT station.

I think it's a good investment when the Northland plans approach buildout, but putting up the first building is a long way from that, and not every developer can or does complete all of their plans in a timely fashion, especially with such a large scope project. To me, I'd try to build it after phase 3 to match the completion of phase 4 of 6 (from the plan on the first page here); the point at which the construction on the south half of the site is done.
Click to expand...
This is a key point and gets at the critical trade-off here - the transit station infill is much more expensive than it would have been because it needs to accommodate car infrastructure. We can only be so transit-oriented when the closest - hypothetical, not even realized - redevelopment site is over 200m of a noisy walk from a highway median station to a highway crossing bridge.

Feel free to send this next part to a transit-fantasy thread, but since we are dreaming up new TOD, why don't we build an interchange between the bridges of Shaganappi Trail and start the NW hub area line from there Bonus is we get connect 4 activity centres (Northland, Market Mall, Children's Hospital/University District, Foothills), 1 of which is actually developing TOD friendly (University District). Gives us more 3 lottery tickets on one of these potential TODs panning out rather than just hoping Northland will justify a station one day :)

While this plan would cement Northland Station's TOD potential, two important caveats:
  • This will cost like 25 - 50x as much money
  • I accidentally cropped the bottom off so who knows where the train goes past Foothills

1637706025910.png
 
CBBarnett said:
This is a key point and gets at the critical trade-off here - the transit station infill is much more expensive than it would have been because it needs to accommodate car infrastructure. We can only be so transit-oriented when the closest - hypothetical, not even realized - redevelopment site is over 200m of a noisy walk from a highway median station to a highway crossing bridge.

Feel free to send this next part to a transit-fantasy thread, but since we are dreaming up new TOD, why don't we build an interchange between the bridges of Shaganappi Trail and start the NW hub area line from there Bonus is we get connect 4 activity centres (Northland, Market Mall, Children's Hospital/University District, Foothills), 1 of which is actually developing TOD friendly (University District). Gives us more 3 lottery tickets on one of these potential TODs panning out rather than just hoping Northland will justify a station one day :)

While this plan would cement Northland Station's TOD potential, two important caveats:
  • This will cost like 25 - 50x as much money
  • I accidentally cropped the bottom off so who knows where the train goes past Foothills

View attachment 364981
Click to expand...

Obviously it connects to the gondola over the river from Foothills to Westbrook, with a mid-station stop on the Airport-Banff heavy rail line.

Hmm, just need to figure out where the monorail interchanges with this…
 
zagox said:
Obviously it connects to the gondola over the river from Foothills to Westbrook, with a mid-station stop on the Airport-Banff heavy rail line.

Hmm, just need to figure out where the monorail interchanges with this…
Click to expand...
Hey why not, we've done some wild, expensive and speculative infrastructure in the area before. If you build it they will come:

1637772821546.png
1637772863270.png


Looks like a prime route for a Northland - Market Mall - University District - Foothills - Bow River - 17th Ave - Marda Loop - Currie - MRU - Rockyview - Chinook LRT line. Northland Mall can be the key to it all :)
 
MissingMiddle said:
www.prairieskygondola.com

Prairie Sky | Urban Gondola Edmonton

Prairie Sky Gondola is a modern-day transportation and recreation system for connecting communities and empowering city builders.
www.prairieskygondola.com www.prairieskygondola.com
Click to expand...
Edmonton's river valley works a lot better for a gondola given how deep the valley is, but I don't see why Calgary can't have one as well. Gondolas for everyone!
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top