News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 8.3K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 39K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 4.5K     0 

Untrue, the Valley Line tunnel broke through on schedule. It was the concrete lining that had issues (if CBC's reporting is accurate), and the project had issues with concrete in general. Not tunnels.

Edmonton's downtown LRT tunnel is well built and functional (it needs repairs, but it is also almost forty years old). The city has suitable ground conditions for digging and has a long history of tunnelling, from the first coal mine tunnels that were dug in its formative years.
Breaking through is not the same as being usable. Reports of delays and sub par work in 2019 are well known. I stand by my point. Every tunnel project has been problematic, faced delays and additional expenses.

I know you want something to be true, but that doesn't make it so.
 
Last edited:
I think the 170 St crossing could have just as likely had ended up at-grade. When the full Valley line is open, it would be interesting to compare the 87 Ave guideway stretch with 83 St at Bonnie Doon.

As I have stated earlier, Ellerslie is comparable to 23 Ave which is getting grade separated.
That is an interesting take. I have never heard anyone argue for at grade crossing at 170.

I think 170st is too large personally with 9 lanes of traffic and a fly over entrance just past the lrt crossing plus all the bus transit traffic.
 
170 st was elevated because it had to be elevated over the Mis entrance so it only made sense
 
The official reason the city gave for elevating the Valley Line over 170th Street is that it's considered part of the city's "inner ring road" (same with 75th Street) so they didn't want to disrupt traffic there as much.
 
Breaking through is not the same as being usable. Reports of delays and sub par work in 2019 are well known. I stand by my point. Every tunnel project has been problematic, faced delays and additional expenses.

I know you want something to be true, but that doesn't make it so.
I forgive you for this comment.

Ellerslie will never be 170st. Ellerslie is currently 4 lanes max 6 wide. 170st is 9 lanes.

Ellerslie runs parallel to, and mere blocks from, a multilane divided freeway.

23 ave has 8 lanes of traffic intersecting with 7 lanes of traffic. Again NOT comparable to the Ellerslie situation, nor will it ever be.

Ellerslie at 130 St (where the LRT is supposed to cross) is already 5 lanes, and will almost certainly be expanded to 6 once the LRT opens to accomodate turning movements between 127 St, the PnR entrance, and 135 St. If a third through lane is eventually required it will be 8 lanes.


Ellerslie also already sees a higher peak lane traffic count than 170 St, which is the primary determinant for grade separation. It is the only city-spanning arterial south of the Henday, too much of 41 Ave is still a rural road.

I would strongly prefer the City safeguard a grade separation over Ellerslie.

170 st was elevated because it had to be elevated over the Mis entrance so it only made sense

Ironically, Misericordia (AHS) was against elevation because of the STARS helipad just north of 87 Ave.
 
178 street was originally supposed to be at grade. Maybe that is where the confusion comes from.
 
I mean you are free to believe that ellerslie, steps away from the Henday, in the middle of 2 major Henday access points will be 8 lanes. Its pure folly though.

Also 23 ave is clearly going under so they can easily reorient the line to the side of 111st where it should of been all along. as well as avoid a truly large complex intersection.



t
IMG_5708.png
 
I forgive you for this comment.



Ellerslie at 130 St (where the LRT is supposed to cross) is already 5 lanes, and will almost certainly be expanded to 6 once the LRT opens to accomodate turning movements between 127 St, the PnR entrance, and 135 St. If a third through lane is eventually required it will be 8 lanes.


Ellerslie also already sees a higher peak lane traffic count than 170 St, which is the primary determinant for grade separation. It is the only city-spanning arterial south of the Henday, too much of 41 Ave is still a rural road.

I would strongly prefer the City safeguard a grade separation over Ellerslie.



Ironically, Misericordia (AHS) was against elevation because of the STARS helipad just north of 87 Ave.
Traffic volume on Ellerslie is only going to grow as development continues in the area. Elevation will almost certainly be necessary. @Yeggy insists that the presence of the Henday makes expanding Ellerslie unnecessary but it's important to remember that the Henday does not provide direct access to many neighbourhoods whereas Ellerslie does. When the LRT expands south of Heritage Valley the at-grade line will cause major backups when the gates are down and the city will be swamped with complaints from residents.
 
Traffic volume on Ellerslie is only going to grow as development continues in the area. Elevation will almost certainly be necessary. @Yeggy insists that the presence of the Henday makes expanding Ellerslie unnecessary but it's important to remember that the Henday does not provide direct access to many neighbourhoods whereas Ellerslie does. When the LRT expands south of Heritage Valley the at-grade line will cause major backups when the gates are down and the city will be swamped with complaints from residents.
I'm almost convinced that you are an actual car at this point.
 
I forgive you for this comment.



Ellerslie at 130 St (where the LRT is supposed to cross) is already 5 lanes, and will almost certainly be expanded to 6 once the LRT opens to accomodate turning movements between 127 St, the PnR entrance, and 135 St. If a third through lane is eventually required it will be 8 lanes.


Ellerslie also already sees a higher peak lane traffic count than 170 St, which is the primary determinant for grade separation. It is the only city-spanning arterial south of the Henday, too much of 41 Ave is still a rural road.

I would strongly prefer the City safeguard a grade separation over Ellerslie.



Ironically, Misericordia (AHS) was against elevation because of the STARS helipad just north of 87 Ave.

Misericordia is operated by the Catholic Covenant Health Care organization and not AHS. AHS has precious little to do with it.
 
I'm almost convinced that you are an actual car at this point.
I'm almost convinced that you are an actual Calgarian at this point.

What other reason would there be for your opposition to giving Edmonton proper infrastructure? Why else would you support something substandard when a growing city deserves public facilities and a transportation network that is designed for the long-haul, rather than something that will quickly prove problematic and require an expensive fix down the line?

To be fair, living in Whitehorn or Taradale you've probably never driven University Avenue at 114 Street at rush hour, or the level crossings at Kingsway.

So I invite you to take the drive up the QEII, visit Edmonton (possibly for the first time) and see the concerns we're talking about, with your own eyes.
 
I'm almost convinced that you are an actual Calgarian at this point.

What other reason would there be for your opposition to giving Edmonton proper infrastructure? Why else would you support something substandard when a growing city deserves public facilities and a transportation network that is designed for the long-haul, rather than something that will quickly prove problematic and require an expensive fix down the line?

To be fair, living in Whitehorn or Taradale you've probably never driven University Avenue at 114 Street at rush hour, or the level crossings at Kingsway.

So I invite you to take the drive up the QEII, visit Edmonton (possibly for the first time) and see the concerns we're talking about, with your own eyes.
Read my introducing myself post if you want to know alot about me. I'm not really sure why you think I'm from Calgary, seeing that I'm only posting in the Edmonton threads, regularly posting photos I've taken in Edmonton.

You and I won't agree on infrastructure needs based on the limited interaction that we've had. If your proposed solution to vehicle traffic on highways and collector streets is more lanes, the conversation might as well end. I think the supposed importance of Ellerslie and Whyte is a consequence of bad planning (giving space to cars).

I like grade seperation though, like you. I just prefer at grade trams to subways or elevated rail in less dense areas. I wouldn't be bothered if Ellerslie had 2-4 lanes tunneled or elevated. It would make future widening prohibitively expensive, so I'd like that aspect of it.

I don't really get why you seem surprised though, this is a thread on a rail project. I may drive, but I have a general dislike for vehicle infrastructure. That view is likely shared by a majority of posters you'll encounter in this thread.
 
I mean you are free to believe that ellerslie, steps away from the Henday, in the middle of 2 major Henday access points will be 8 lanes. Its pure folly though.

Also 23 ave is clearly going under so they can easily reorient the line to the side of 111st where it should of been all along. as well as avoid a truly large complex intersection.

View attachment 522813

I quoted the LRT crossing assessment evaluation made by the City that explains the criteria for grade separation already.

I know you want something to be true, but that doesn't make it so.

Misericordia is operated by the Catholic Covenant Health Care organization and not AHS. AHS has precious little to do with it.

I was talking about the STARS helipad though, unless AHS and Covenant Health run separate air ambulance services?
 
Read my introducing myself post if you want to know alot about me. I'm not really sure why you think I'm from Calgary, seeing that I'm only posting in the Edmonton threads, regularly posting photos I've taken in Edmonton.

You and I won't agree on infrastructure needs based on the limited interaction that we've had. If your proposed solution to vehicle traffic on highways and collector streets is more lanes, the conversation might as well end. I think the supposed importance of Ellerslie and Whyte is a consequence of bad planning (giving space to cars).

I like grade seperation though, like you. I just prefer at grade trams to subways or elevated rail in less dense areas. I wouldn't be bothered if Ellerslie had 2-4 lanes tunneled or elevated. It would make future widening prohibitively expensive, so I'd like that aspect of it.

I don't really get why you seem surprised though, this is a thread on a rail project. I may drive, but I have a general dislike for vehicle infrastructure. That view is likely shared by a majority of posters you'll encounter in this thread.
I don't draw my conclusions based on members' self-descriptions or avatars, but rather on the positions they take. A Calgarian would advocate for surface running LRT and against grade separation because it's a decision (read: mistake) the city made decades ago and it's what that community is used to. A Calgarian, in the interests of misery loving company, might also like to see Edmonton making long-term and expensive mistakes.

It was a major mistake to run their C-Train on the surface downtown, but it would be enormously expensive and disruptive to change that now. But it was initially cheaper to stay on the surface so that's what successive councils and city planners did. Now the error can't be repaired. Edmonton, by contrast, did the right thing with the Capital Line downtown in 1978 by going underground. Now, of course, councils and city planners are frantically trying to emulate Calgary's errors by cheaping out and avoiding grade separation wherever possible (Ellerslie in this case and Bonnie Doon on the Valley Line SE, not to mention Kingsway on the Metro Line).

I never said that the entire Capital Line extension should be elevated (or underground or trenched), I merely advocated for grade separation and the requisite elevated station at Heritage Valley because of Edmonton's experiences elsewhere in the city with at-grade LRT--at University Avenue, at Kingsway/111 and at Princess Elizabeth to name a few. Whether you like it or not, Ellerslie is a busy road and will only get busier. Having the gates down on a regular basis will lead to traffic backups and demands from taxpaying residents in the area to fix the problem. My view is to spend extra money now and do the thing right, rather than either: have to construct a massively disruptive and expensive replacement station and elevated crossing after the line is open, or else suffer for decades because we "saved" money in the short term.

There is no need to elevate the line at 9 Avenue SW (Twin Brooks) because the road that crosses the line is not a major east-west arterial and its traffic volume is not, and will never be, anything remotely resembling Ellerslie. My point is only about the Ellerslie crossing.

I am not in favour of the car, or LRT or anything else. However, as a keen observer of the world around me, I have noticed that hundreds of thousands of people in Edmonton drive (and will presumably continue to do so) and thus there will inevitably be points of conflict between the LRT and motor vehicles at the many points along the various lines where the two can come into conflict. The idea is to mitigate the worst of those conflicts.
 
I don't draw my conclusions based on members' self-descriptions or avatars, but rather on the positions they take. A Calgarian would advocate for surface running LRT and against grade separation because it's a decision (read: mistake) the city made decades ago and it's what that community is used to. A Calgarian, in the interests of misery loving company, might also like to see Edmonton making long-term and expensive mistakes.

It was a major mistake to run their C-Train on the surface downtown, but it would be enormously expensive and disruptive to change that now. But it was initially cheaper to stay on the surface so that's what successive councils and city planners did. Now the error can't be repaired. Edmonton, by contrast, did the right thing with the Capital Line downtown in 1978 by going underground. Now, of course, councils and city planners are frantically trying to emulate Calgary's errors by cheaping out and avoiding grade separation wherever possible (Ellerslie in this case and Bonnie Doon on the Valley Line SE, not to mention Kingsway on the Metro Line).

I never said that the entire Capital Line extension should be elevated (or underground or trenched), I merely advocated for grade separation and the requisite elevated station at Heritage Valley because of Edmonton's experiences elsewhere in the city with at-grade LRT--at University Avenue, at Kingsway/111 and at Princess Elizabeth to name a few. Whether you like it or not, Ellerslie is a busy road and will only get busier. Having the gates down on a regular basis will lead to traffic backups and demands from taxpaying residents in the area to fix the problem. My view is to spend extra money now and do the thing right, rather than either: have to construct a massively disruptive and expensive replacement station and elevated crossing after the line is open, or else suffer for decades because we "saved" money in the short term.

There is no need to elevate the line at 9 Avenue SW (Twin Brooks) because the road that crosses the line is not a major east-west arterial and its traffic volume is not, and will never be, anything remotely resembling Ellerslie. My point is only about the Ellerslie crossing.

I am not in favour of the car, or LRT or anything else. However, as a keen observer of the world around me, I have noticed that hundreds of thousands of people in Edmonton drive (and will presumably continue to do so) and thus there will inevitably be points of conflict between the LRT and motor vehicles at the many points along the various lines where the two can come into conflict. The idea is to mitigate the worst of those conflicts.
cmonnnn man we're not all that bad 😭
 

Back
Top