^ Wonder if the real purpose is to improve form tolerance? Can't really see it being that much faster since most of the time in laying track bed is rod busting vs setting forms, no?
I feel like tolerance would be better if they did everything normally, as it would be easier for this machine to have small things out of alignment vs setting forms? Never seen something like this used before
 
Reopening of 104 Avenue between 121 Street and 105 Street

On April 14, Marigold reduced traffic on 104 Avenue to a single lane in either direction, and closed several accesses on the south side of the road, as part of the accelerated roadwork associated with the Valley Line West LRT. On December 9, 2025, 104 Avenue between 121 Street and 105 Street reopened to two lanes in either direction. All access closures on the south side of 104 Avenue also reopened.

What you can expect:
• East/west traffic on 104 Avenue is open to two lanes of traffic in either direction.
• North/south access across 104 Avenue is maintained at 121 Street, 118 Street, 116 Street, 114 Street, 112 Street, 109 Street, and 105 Street.
• Other cross streets have reopened to right in/right out access.
• Most left turn movements are maintained at 121 Street, 118 Street, 116 Street, 114 Street, 112 Street, 109 Street, 107 Street, and 105 Street.
• Pedestrian access is open throughout the area.
• Bike access across and adjacent to 104 Avenue is maintained.

While the majority of the roadwork is complete and traffic along 104 Avenue has reopened, construction in the area will be ongoing until completion. The public will be notified ahead of further disruptions. For detailed information of what this area will look like in its final configuration, check out the City of Edmonton’s Valley Line West LRT Booklet.
 
I was going through the booklet again, and looking at final configurations, and I got myself wondering about a few traffic lights (and left turns) that I don't think should have been kept. In particular 126 st, 118 st and 114 st, through Winketowin, especially considering that there are crossings at 127 st and 125 st, 119 at and 117st, 115 and 113 st already. Seems very counterintuitive, especially because these crossings at 126, 118 and 114 streets were obviously made to maintain the status quo for cars as much as possible.
 
Looking at the booklet again too and the need to fit a lane for cars in on every single road is seriously ruining the potential of 102ave. This road has such potential especially with already connecting to the 102ave bike path in oliver and the railtown park path. I really hope the conversation about closing 102ave can be had again and actually be considered once the line is running, with an extent from 109st to 95st. This road will serve such a tiny amount of cars for the inevitable conflicts with bikes and trains (as we've seen by Churchill). I'm salivating at the thought of a 2way bike lane where each direction is the width of a car lane.

No cars along this stretch would absolutely transform this area as it coincides with all of the development around warehouse park
 
"He expects all of the building to be done and testing to start in 2026 and hopes the city approves an accelerated work plan, like was used on 104 Avenue, again"

Woah testing to start in 2026??
I re-read that a few times thinking I missed something, seems way faster than expected. Hopefully not too far fetched?
 
I re-read that a few times thinking I missed something, seems way faster than expected. Hopefully not too far fetched?
I wonder if they're referring to initial testing of some electrical or mechanical systems?
 
"He expects all of the building to be done and testing to start in 2026 and hopes the city approves an accelerated work plan, like was used on 104 Avenue, again"

Woah testing to start in 2026??
Honestly I don’t see how it’s reasonable tbh. They have ~5% of the OCS wire up right now, no track on 102, no steel up for any of the stops. I think finish building by end of 2027 is reasonable. Commissioning of the trains themselves has already started, which is maybe what he’s referring to there
 
The challenge is all the existing access points for 102ave. Hard to retroactively do those things.

One alternative would be to essentially modal filter/block the north side of 102ave so there’s way less points of conflict. Sort of like 100ave from 163-149st.

Keep a few that connect through. But most could close.

IMG_4623.jpeg
 

Back
Top