News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 10K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 42K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.9K     0 

fromyeg said:
View attachment 669928

From CityNerd’s video.

Let’s goooooo. 😂
Click to expand...
Many, many, many years ago when the LRT only went to University and we would be compared to larger systems, what stood out to me was that no one looked at ridership per kilometer.
I'd look at other LRT systems and see them operating 1 and 2 cars trains, while Edmonton was running 3 and 4 car trains. The U2 fleet was more or less maxed out and I remember seeing only 1 or 2 spare cars in DLM, plus whatever were in for maintenance. Yet, this fleet in the 1980's was supposed to be enough to get to Mill Woods. That alone told me ridership was strong.
LA Metro operates160 km of track and San Diego MTS 105 km. You don't even need to do the math to see that with 38.5km of track, including the unopened part of the Blatchford extension, Edmonton has a far higher ridership per kilometer than LA or San Diego. When I did this calculation back in 2003 or so Calgary was the only city to beat Edmonton, and I suspect they still do. Ottawa might have higher per kilometer ridership than Edmonton as well. The APTA report showed 8.088 million trips in the quarter which is higher than Edmonton, but the overall ridership number in the APTA report seem inflated. I guess that might be why Ottawa wasn't given a place on the list.
 
I’m sure a lot of people in LA depend on transit to go places. Also (my non-scientific survey), I drove the freeway from LAX to Disneyland, and Disneyland to Universal Studios nearly 20 years ago, and the traffic slowed to 30 km/h at the interchanges.
 
I think the LRT would have the advantage crossing rivers or freeways. Before the LRT crossed the river to University, buses took about 20 minutes from Downtown to University.
 
EdwardEdm said:
Many, many, many years ago when the LRT only went to University and we would be compared to larger systems, what stood out to me was that no one looked at ridership per kilometer.
I'd look at other LRT systems and see them operating 1 and 2 cars trains, while Edmonton was running 3 and 4 car trains. The U2 fleet was more or less maxed out and I remember seeing only 1 or 2 spare cars in DLM, plus whatever were in for maintenance. Yet, this fleet in the 1980's was supposed to be enough to get to Mill Woods. That alone told me ridership was strong.
LA Metro operates160 km of track and San Diego MTS 105 km. You don't even need to do the math to see that with 38.5km of track, including the unopened part of the Blatchford extension, Edmonton has a far higher ridership per kilometer than LA or San Diego. When I did this calculation back in 2003 or so Calgary was the only city to beat Edmonton, and I suspect they still do. Ottawa might have higher per kilometer ridership than Edmonton as well. The APTA report showed 8.088 million trips in the quarter which is higher than Edmonton, but the overall ridership number in the APTA report seem inflated. I guess that might be why Ottawa wasn't given a place on the list.
Click to expand...
If you just look at population, Edmonton is about 10% that of the LA area, so we are also way ahead of them on a per capita basis.

Of course, Calgary and Ottawa are much more comparable population wise to us, although I believe both currently have more km of track right now. So we actually do quite well with what we have.
 
Something to note about LA is their Metro Rail ridership plummeted with COVID. They peaked in 2017 with ridership of nearly 113 million to 68.7 million today, although even by 2019 they were down to 93.2 million. Metro Rail does however include the red line subway. However, even if they had that higher ridership today, Edmonton would still have more riders per kilometer.
David A said:
Of course, Calgary and Ottawa are much more comparable population wise to us, although I believe both currently have more km of track right now. So we actually do quite well with what we have.
Click to expand...
Yes, Calgary has more track. Ottawa comparable to Edmonton at 35.5 km, but they have 27 km of extensions planned to open by 2027. Edmonton has 19.5 km of extensions underway. Calgary is at 59.9 km.
 

Ledcor Advances Two Major Transit Projects in Metro Vancouver and Edmonton

Ledcor is currently making significant strides on two major transit projects: the Surrey Langley SkyTrain Project in Surrey, British Columbia and the Capital Line South LRT Extension in Edmonton, Alberta.
www.ledcor.com www.ledcor.com
IMG_2851.png
 
I'm getting ahead of myself, but has anyone done the math of how much shorter the 747 trip will be once the LRT reaches Heritage Valley? Enough to increase frequency to every 20 minutes using the same resources?
 
BrettB said:
I'm getting ahead of myself, but has anyone done the math of how much shorter the 747 trip will be once the LRT reaches Heritage Valley? Enough to increase frequency to every 20 minutes using the same resources?
Click to expand...
There’s actually almost no difference at all with respect to distance or time. The key difference is that from Heritage Valley going eastbound, the route is almost all freeway (and will be free-flow going westbound after they build an all-directional interchange at Heritage Valley Trail sometime after Terwillegar Drive is done). However, considering how bad traffic is getting on the Henday and QE2, any time savings from fewer stoplights will be completely nullified 😒
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top