Council will take another stab at LRT routes tomorrow. Hopefully we can make some decisions, though it remains to be seen whether we can get to a final decision on the West route.

Yellow is 107; Red are the SPR variants; Blue is 87 Ave; Pink are Redevelopment Opportunities.

My guess is there are at least seven votes for the proposed Southeast LRT alignment to Millwoods via Connors Road as presented by city administration. I like the stop in the Quarters; I’m glad for the station in the valley at the Muttart Conservatory; I’m pleased it will connect with the proposed Strathearn Apartments redevelopment; I’m glad it will connect with Bonnie Doon and W.P. Wagner High School. Of the alternatives I think the case has been made that it’s the best. There are still questions about how to negotiate some of the tight spots around Connors Road and the Argyll Road crossing, but that comes at the next level of design refinement and will be reported to council and subject to extensive consultation with the public.

Little known fact that there’s a small change to the NAIT line to turn the train off of 106 St north of Kingsway Garden Mall and cross onto the airport lands. I suspect there are a majority of votes for this, but it will not be unanimous.

I do not have a sense of where inclinations lie on the West alignment. I think there may be a handfull of votes for each of 87 Ave, Stoney Plain Road (SPR), 107 Ave, and SPR but via 100th Ave between 156 St and 149 St, so there could be no consensus. However, I think there will be a clear majority supporting the northerly low-floor options versus the 87 Ave high-floor option. Administration has requested guidance in the cover report here:

At a minimum, it is recommended that Council provide direction relative to the criteria of Land Use and Promoting Compact Urban Form. In the case of West LRT line, the southerly lines score considerably less on this criteria and removal of the southern options from further evaluation will be beneficial.

I can be counted among those supporting the northerly option, which is a shift since I had spoken in support of 87 Ave when it was first recommended. I can assure you that no-one has ‘gotten to me’. We’ve simply learned quite a bit and made some decisions that change the LRT landscape since that initial proposal.

So what’s changed? I’ve written about the ‘urban’ shift previously here, but as far as it applies to West LRT initially 87 Ave was a single leg, not part of a whole network vision, which was considered and approved around a year ago. Similarly, shifting to the low-floor curb-loading style of train was not on the horizon when we were previously evaluating routes. With that comes a further shift away from distant station separations and a ‘commuter’ or ’suburban’ style system (think of Calgary’s LRT) to an ‘urban’ style with more frequent stops serving more people centrally – making the LRT relevant in established areas rather than just rushing through them. We also shifted the importance of stimulating potential redevelopment to the top of the list. This last change is about a lot more than ‘if you build it they will come [and redevelop],’ for me this is about ‘it’s probably not worth building at all if they don’t come [and redevelop].‘ So that’s why the Northerly, low-floor options appeal to me.

But I’m not ready to support SPR yet.

I do accept the planners’ arguments that when it’s all done the LRT could be a powerful revitalizing force on SPR, and further that the rest of the traffic system could take up the traffic displaced by the loss of the lane of traffic (you only lose one lane from the dominant flow during rush hour). However, my worry is about the in-between.

I think construction disruption will be very difficult for all along any LRT line, speaking from experience with South LRT, but businesses fronting onto the construction may find their access impaired during construction, which will be particularly difficult for them. Given this, I do worry that the spectre of that disruption could well stall investment in those properties and businesses, which could be very hard on the street. In other words, if we were ready to dig tomorrow I could hold my nose and know that it’s for the best, but since it’s some time off I think the decision could do more harm than good in the interim.

On the other hand, the 107 Ave option is listed at $250 million less than SPR, mainly because less property is required, the roadway changes are less severe, and the crossing of Groat Road is much more straightforward. This ought to count for something.

The other thing to bear in mind is that the greatest redevelopment potential of the Northerly alignments is actually the Downtown North Edge and Oliver between 121 Street and 105 Street via 104 Ave.

The opportunities between 156 St and 121 Street are different with 107 and SPR, granted. You miss 149 and 142 St intersections, but there are smaller opportunities along 107 at 156, 149 and 142 St, as well as additional opportunity at 124 St. and 107 as compared to 124 St. and SPR. Also, one still does reach and positively impact SPR with by crossing it at 156 St with 107 Ave.

But if Council wants to seriously look at 107 Ave we’ll need to do some further consultation with those neighbourhoods and hold another public hearing in the new year. I would like to explore it further but Council will decide tomorrow.