cloney said:
What? The article you linked was referencing a study where they looked at 20 intersections across Canada, and this had nothing to do with LRT, it was just people/cars. And the article even mentioned the recommended changes being safer interaction design with more advanced left turns and leading signals for pedestrians. Again, nothing about cars colliding with the VLSW.
Click to expand...
SO, at the core the argument about the mud/lrt intersection is dangerous and needs to be fixed. The above article points out FAR more dangerous intersections.

We can agree a dollar is a dollar right, we can also agree they are finite.

So it doesn’t take a lot to understand that if we have finite dollars to spend on intersection improvements we should do it at the most dangerous and where we will see the biggest return on investment.

This Lrt intersection is not that place. This LRT system does not exist in vacuum. Its pretty straightforward.
 
Construction has resumed on 104ave, west of 110st
IMG_0913.jpeg
 
cloney said:
Wow, I’ve never seen this before. Was this for the LRT construction?
Click to expand...
Reverse image search gives me this.
blog.mastermaq.ca

Edmonton’s Pedway: The Growth Years

This is the second part in a series of posts looking at the past, present, and future of Edmonton’s pedway network. The pedway system we know today was largely built in the 1980s. According to the …
blog.mastermaq.ca blog.mastermaq.ca
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top