[TravellingChris]

I am not betting on ridership being low. I'm visiting someone that moved to Vancouver who hasn't taken a bus once, but takes the SkyTrain daily. I took the bus once yesterday, but I'll stick to the train or walk/bike now.

I think trains have more potential riders than busses due to preferences, from classism, comfort, predictability, frequency, etc.

One thing I noticed about the SkyTrain, is that it doesn't offer more coverage than Edmonton's system will in 2027, but it goes to every place that I'd ever want to go. If something isn't along the SkyTrain, or within walking distance, I'm probably not going there. Also, the SkyTrain is surprisingly slow. I prefer Edmonton's subway portion, it feels more New York.

The big ridership boost is absolutely going to be the West line. Opening up West Ed to young people along the entire line.

But do not underestimate young people's hatred for driving.

Interesting points.

As I've noted before, although SkyTrain in the Lower Mainland and Edmonton's LRT are vastly different systems, they actually have several striking parallels. Both started out with a single simple line from downtown (with a subway portion in the city core) that hit a few major destinations such as the arenas and stadiums. Subsequently both systems expanded and have concentrated on linking key amenities like major shopping centres, educational institutions and hospitals. All are key generators of traffic and are destinations popular with residents who may be car-challenged, such as students and seniors. This process will only continue with expansion of SkyTrain to UBC and with Edmonton's Valley Line which will bring an additional two hospitals and four major shopping centres onto the LRT network.

Neither the Lower Mainland nor Edmonton will ever be like central Paris, where most any destination is only a couple of hundred metres from a Metro station. But I think overall planners have managed to design lines that will hit the most popular destinations and serve the most important trunk routes, while allowing for bus feeder networks into local neighbourhoods.

My bone of contention with the Valley Line is the lack of grade separation and signal priority (not to mention the failure to elevate at Bonnie Doon). But those are separate issues. The route itself is well-chosen.

 

[EdwardEdm]

My bone of contention with the Valley Line is the lack of grade separation and signal priority (not to mention the failure to elevate at Bonnie Doon). But those are separate issues. The route itself is well-chosen.

Who says there's no signal priority?
This is such a persistent myth.
It might be implied by phrases like "runs with traffic" that there isn't signal priority, but, you can bet your ass there is. And it's covered in the project agreement.
This link should work: https://www.edmonton.ca/sites/defau...T Schedule 5 Part 6 Systems.pdf?cb=1691910599
Table 6-3.3 Page 6-56 - 6-57.

Anecdotally, a friend and I have seen the effects of trains getting priority at intersection in Mill Woods. In my case, my bus gets stuck at 34 Ave and is noticeably late getting to Mill Woods TC. It's been nice this summer with the trains not running to not have to have wonder if I will make my connection or not because trains are getting priority at 34 Ave.

 

[occidentalcapital]

Network effects will result in ridership increase across the entire LRT network when VLSE finally opens and I agree an even bigger boost when VLW opens.

 

[TravellingChris]

Who says there's no signal priority?
This is such a persistent myth.
It might be implied by phrases like "runs with traffic" that there isn't signal priority, but, you can bet your ass there is. And it's covered in the project agreement.
This link should work: https://www.edmonton.ca/sites/default/files/public-files/assets/RoadsTraffic/Project Agreement Valley Line LRT Schedule 5 Part 6 Systems.pdf?cb=1691910599
Table 6-3.3 Page 6-56 - 6-57.

Anecdotally, a friend and I have seen the effects of trains getting priority at intersection in Mill Woods. In my case, my bus gets stuck at 34 Ave and is noticeably late getting to Mill Woods TC. It's been nice this summer with the trains not running to not have to have wonder if I will make my connection or not because trains are getting priority at 34 Ave.

From the outset it has been made clear that some trains will be held at stations due to the phases of nearby traffic signals, before proceeding on a green light. So trains will not always have signal priority.

 

[TravellingChris]

Who says there's no signal priority?
This is such a persistent myth.
It might be implied by phrases like "runs with traffic" that there isn't signal priority, but, you can bet your ass there is. And it's covered in the project agreement.
This link should work: https://www.edmonton.ca/sites/default/files/public-files/assets/RoadsTraffic/Project Agreement Valley Line LRT Schedule 5 Part 6 Systems.pdf?cb=1691910599
Table 6-3.3 Page 6-56 - 6-57.

Anecdotally, a friend and I have seen the effects of trains getting priority at intersection in Mill Woods. In my case, my bus gets stuck at 34 Ave and is noticeably late getting to Mill Woods TC. It's been nice this summer with the trains not running to not have to have wonder if I will make my connection or not because trains are getting priority at 34 Ave.

From the Edmonton Journal:

Now the details: Here's exactly how the Valley Line LRT could impact you​

"There’s a key intersection at 90 Avenue and 83 Street where the LRT is being given only partial priority over traffic.

That’s where the Bonnie Doon traffic circle is now. The train will have to hold at one of the nearby stations, leaving when it can hit a green light and co-ordinate with traffic."

 

[etl-downtown]

For anyone who doesn't want to read through the agreement to find it: The line has only partial priority at a handfull of intersections along between downtown and MWTC.

 

[thommyjo]

From the outset it has been made clear that some trains will be held at stations due to the phases of nearby traffic signals, before proceeding on a green light. So trains will not always have signal priority.

I mean, does that not also happen for the capital line? I’ve sat on the north sask bridge so many times on that train.

 

[Barnaby]

I think that has more to do with scheduling.

 

[Glenco]

The train is also delayed at Health science station waiting for traffic light phasing. Blame NIMBYs fo that.

 

[EdwardEdm]

I mean, does that not also happen for the capital line? I’ve sat on the north sask bridge so many times on that train.

The bridge back ups are more so to do with Metro line trains turning back at HSS. Prior to the Metro line operating to HSS trains would only ever back up onto the bridge if there were late trains and/ or heavy loads slowing trains at University.

 

[CplKlinger]

The train is also delayed at Health science station waiting for traffic light phasing. Blame NIMBYs fo that.

I dislike NIMBYs a lot, but I think it's moreso the bad design in that area. It should have been grade-separated. That's why the Metro Line stops at Health Sciences instead of South Campus like it is planned to in the long term; right now, any additional LRT crossings would cause a complete failure at the 114 st/university ave intersection. I guess you could blame NIMBYs partly, since the McKernan and Belgravia communities were very vocal against a tunnel portal being built in their neighbourhood (which was the original plan in the 90s), fearing it would divide them more than an at-grade line. But I think the larger factor was the budget squeeze the city faced, since tunneling is around 2x as expensive IIRC and the Klein years had already set them back by a decade and a half.

This is my source for most of this comment (the plans for south campus I think I got from the mass transit report); I linked it before but I'll put it here again since it's a very interesting read. I believe there's a similar page for the 2000s, and another for the 2010s.

The History of the Funding of Edmonton's LRT: The 1990s

If Edmonton’s LRT is ever going to charge forward, it might be helpful to look back and see what has pushed it ahead in the past. Here’s the first in a series of po…

edmontonjournal.com

 

[Gronk!]

Union says bus driver injured in 'most severe' attack of the year; 2 teens charged

Two teenage boys have been charged in connection with the assault of a bus driver in Edmonton on Monday.

edmonton.ctvnews.ca

 

[dunno]

I dislike NIMBYs a lot, but I think it's moreso the bad design in that area. It should have been grade-separated. That's why the Metro Line stops at Health Sciences instead of South Campus like it is planned to in the long term; right now, any additional LRT crossings would cause a complete failure at the 114 st/university ave intersection. I guess you could blame NIMBYs partly, since the McKernan and Belgravia communities were very vocal against a tunnel portal being built in their neighbourhood (which was the original plan in the 90s), fearing it would divide them more than an at-grade line. But I think the larger factor was the budget squeeze the city faced, since tunneling is around 2x as expensive IIRC and the Klein years had already set them back by a decade and a half.

This is my source for most of this comment (the plans for south campus I think I got from the mass transit report); I linked it before but I'll put it here again since it's a very interesting read. I believe there's a similar page for the 2000s, and another for the 2010s.

The History of the Funding of Edmonton's LRT: The 1990s

If Edmonton’s LRT is ever going to charge forward, it might be helpful to look back and see what has pushed it ahead in the past. Here’s the first in a series of po…

edmontonjournal.com

Is there still an actual long term plan to fix the crossing with grade separation?

 

[TravellingChris]

Is there still an actual long term plan to fix the crossing with grade separation?

Not as far as I know. Even if there were, there are a pile of other projects ahead of such a proposal in the competition for scarce dollars:

• Metro Line from Blatchford Gate to Castle Downs
• Metro Line from Castle Downs to NW City Limits
• Capital Line South Phase 2
• Capital Line NE to Gorman

I don't even know how feasible grade separation would be at that intersection with the current configuration of the line. The LRT surfaces just north of Health Sciences station, it would hardly make sense to have it descend again immediately into a tunnel south of the station. The line should have been built properly from the beginning, with an underground Health Sciences station linked to the hospital by pedway, and with the line coming to the surface just south of University Avenue rather than just south of 87 Avenue.

 

[dunno]

Not as far as I know. Even if there were, there are a pile of other projects ahead of such a proposal in the competition for scarce dollars:

• Metro Line from Blatchford Gate to Castle Downs
• Metro Line from Castle Downs to NW City Limits
• Capital Line South Phase 2
• Capital Line NE to Gorman

I don't even know how feasible grade separation would be at that intersection with the current configuration of the line. The LRT surfaces just north of Health Sciences station, it would hardly make sense to have it descend again immediately into a tunnel south of the station. The line should have been built properly from the beginning, with an underground Health Sciences station linked to the hospital by pedway, and with the line coming to the surface just south of University Avenue rather than just south of 87 Avenue.

Thanks.

Kingsway is another one that should be rebuilt (elevated perhaps, with pedway direct to Glenrose and the mall) but the priority right now is on major expansion (understandable) rather than righting past wrongs.

Health Sciences could be left as-is and have trains briefly descend again. It's a bit janky and weird but a cheaper option than rebuilding the whole thing. But yeah, it should've been underground (or at least 'sunken') and done right back when it was constructed.

Southgate's the only other one I can think of that could use a re-do. And that would probably be the cheapest, as it would just involve minor reconfiguration to allow easier access to Southgate.