IanO said:
Based on the 'iconic' bridge designs presented thus far?

Hear me out.

How about we did the architectural wonder competition approach and go for a simple, effective design that's utilitarian and cost-effective.

Looking at the maps it looks like there are a few spots for column supports in the yard vs. clear span.

All options presented thus far are massive arch, cantilever or cable-stayed.

It would be interesting to see a simpler more cost-effective bridge.
Click to expand...
I was under the impression that CN showed no interest in cooperating and wouldn't allow columns. That's a big part of what is driving the design. Other cities have had similar problems with CN.
 
TAS said:
Getting our two federal government MPs aware and on board couldn't hurt either.
Click to expand...
I also wonder if there could be provincial support if we linked this to the upcoming provincial rail master plan. Assuming the ultimate plan matches the engagement materials and an Edmonton-St. Albert connection is in the 30-year plan, then Edmonton could frame this as being similar to the LRT airport connection that got planning funds in the recent provincial budget. Maybe Edmonton could argue that since either the province or the feds would need to bridge/tunnel that gap at some point regardless, it makes sense to do it before costs inflate even more?
 
  • Like
Reactions: TAS
The Yellowhead is being realigned south. There will be a little land between Yellowhead and the Calder/Walker Yards. something like the Gantry crane may be able to help.
 
husky said:
Pretty frank discussion in council today around Clr. Rutherfords motion to provide a memo outlining mass transit options for NW Edmonton. Sounds like crossing the Yellowhead and the CN Yard will cost a ridiculous amount. A realignment may be considered, based on the discussion.
Click to expand...
Realignment? Where? I can fathom going east to 97 Street, but uh... good luck.
 
husky said:
Pretty frank discussion in council today around Clr. Rutherfords motion to provide a memo outlining mass transit options for NW Edmonton. Sounds like crossing the Yellowhead and the CN Yard will cost a ridiculous amount. A realignment may be considered, based on the discussion.
Click to expand...
This was always the challenge and my biggest issue with the approved Metro Line alignment. It shoudl've always crossed at either 97th Street or 127th Street and avoided the CN Yards. Planning to cross the Yards at their widest point was always an idiotic choice, in my opinion.
 
Avenuer said:
This was always the challenge and my biggest issue with the approved Metro Line alignment. It shoudl've always crossed at either 97th Street or 127th Street and avoided the CN Yards. Planning to cross the Yards at their widest point was always an idiotic choice, in my opinion.
Click to expand...
While the bridge is undeniably a huge financial challenge in getting the LRT across the yard, that's also what would make it so valuable. The yard is hard to cross right now for anyone and everything, which is why we should cross it (imo).

The very problem, that it's a new large crossing, is the value. That's why I'd still love to see this alignment as a bridge (in an ideal world). To bridge that gap and allow pedestrians, cyclists, and transit riders a direct path that does not otherwise exist.

Based on what I heard in the city council meeting, they'll either kick the can down the road to the 2 million population point, or be fully reliant on federal funds that don't exist right now. I'm hoping for campaigning to find the necessary higher order funding, but I won't hold my breath.
 
Avenuer said:
This was always the challenge and my biggest issue with the approved Metro Line alignment. It shoudl've always crossed at either 97th Street or 127th Street and avoided the CN Yards. Planning to cross the Yards at their widest point was always an idiotic choice, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Did the Blatchford design impact this alignment decision or did Blatchford's design work around a previously approved alignment?
 
TAS said:
Did the Blatchford design impact this alignment decision or did Blatchford's design work around a previously approved alignment?
Click to expand...
All corridor options were designed to integrate with Blatchford, but it did not constrain the options. The source is this report from this council package.
Screenshot 2026-04-29 142403.png

Screenshot 2026-04-29 142854.png


Screenshot 2026-04-29 141912.png

Screenshot 2026-04-29 142135.png

Screenshot 2026-04-29 142145.png
 
Last edited:
CplKlinger said:
All corridor options were designed to integrate with Blatchford, but it did not constrain the options. The source is this report from this council package.
View attachment 732895
Click to expand...
The dismissal of 97th Street as a potential corridor for the Metro Line is ridiculous. I can’t believe the city planners were so insistent on prioritizing the link between St. Albert to NAIT that they completely neglect the massive ridership potential on 97th Street (actually, it should make sense considering where a lot of these city managers might live).

For a 1.3 km “out-of-direction” travel distance along Yellowhead Trail:
- you could put the 132nd Ave station next to TWO high schools - whose students are more likely to take cross-city train trips - instead of an elementary school
- the 137th Ave station would be next to Northgate Mall, the transit centre, and the actual commercial and high-density residential centre of Griesbach instead of being surrounded by mostly single-family homes
- you could add a stop near the Eaux Claires transit centre (and relocate it)
- the trains wouldn’t have to go around that at-grade 90-degree turn pulling into Castle Downs
- the span across the rail yards would only be 80 meters
- so much of the bus network would feed into the LRT instead of needing a BRT to run parallel service a mile east of the LRT
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top