Why I Can’t Wait To Hop On The Energy Line
Last week, the City’s Naming Committee released its choices for what to call the city’s LRT lines as the system is fully built out over the next few decades, and according to at least one article on CBC.ca—as well as a few other comments I’ve seen in social media—the Naming Committee has slighted Edmonton in a way not seen since the last time a Calgarian said something mean about us in public.
The specific criticism of the names—the Capital Line, Metro Line, Valley Line, Festival Line, and Energy Line—at least according to the CBC post, is that they’re bland.
I’ve seen some people say that the names don’t mean anything, and others have suggested that the names might cause confusion to citizens and visitors alike.
I couldn’t disagree more. The line names are fine.
Sure, they aren’t going to blow anyone’s socks off, but let’s remember: these are the names of what are basically roads made out of rail that a train travels upon. It’s not like we’re naming the first ever space train or anything. This is a piece of public infrastructure; something too flashy or too plain evokes the dreaded “Lame!” expression from citizens.
A brief look at how other major Canadian cities have named their subway lines reveals a global lack of originality, so we’re basically on par with our Canadian brethren in our blandness:
- Calgary’s C-Train routes are called the Red Line and the Blue Line. Mind-blowing.
- Vancouver’s SkyTrain lines are called the Expo Line, Canada Line and Millennium Line. Innovative.
- Montreal’s Metro lines are called Orange, Green, Blue and Yellow Lines. Désolé!
- Toronto’s TTC lines are colour-coded as well, but named for places: Yonge-Univeristy-Spadina; Bloor-Danforth; Scarborough RT; and Sheppard. Local-tastic.
The naming of subway lines does not present an opportunity for Edmonton to be on the leading edge. It presents an opportunity for Edmonton to provide citizens and visitors with a common way-finding language so we all know what the fuck we’re talking about when we ride the LRT.
Honestly, a part of me is just glad we didn’t name these lines after all the centremen on the 1989–90 Stanley Cup Champion Oilers—the Messier Line, the Lamb Line, the Murphy Line, the MacTavish Line, and the Ruzicka Line.
The LRT is a future-focused project that will help move people through this city much more easily. The naming committee has done its job to ensure we know what we can call our new train system. And if placenames like the Universiade Pavilion—also known as the Butterdome—is any indication, Edmontonians will give these new line names their own spin, once they’ve gotten to know them better.
Adam Rozenhart podcasts at The Unknown Studio, founded the wildly successful hockey blog OilersNation.com, and works as a digital-marketing suit. He loves the City of Edmonton, and sharing its untold stories. He has a weakness for animals, music of all kinds, and technology.
“Honestly, a part of me is just glad we didn’t name these lines after all the centremen on the 1989–90 Stanley Cup Champion Oilers—the Messier Line, the Lamb Line, the Murphy Line, the MacTavish Line, and the Ruzicka Line.”
THANK GOD.
I don’t mind the LRT line names, though I do think the debate over changing the name of the South Campus LRT station to South Campus/Fort Edmonton was silly and especially confusing because Fort Edmonton is nowhere near that station. Does anyone know if they are still changing the names?
Adam, I can’t agree more on the relief our lines weren’t named on sports references.
Having said that, I think that these names are dull, and I wish that they were a bit more innovative. At the end of the day though, you’re right, that they’re just line names. I think that what we really should focus on is making sure that the new station names (whenever those stations are built) will be location-based or heritage-based, and not vague indicators that a train stops there.
Also, we should focus on getting the proposed LRT lines on a shirt. So I can wear it.
Where can I appeal to the Naming Committee for a Ruzicka Line?
Well said Adam. I can just see some wag (ok me) renaming the Metro line “The Rathole” in honour of the old tunnel that the LRT line passes near.
That will be followed by the “Mall Line” (to WEM), the “Hell Train” (to Sherwood Park” and the “Ikea train” (for the boxes that will be carried by all the students on that line).
Dave, according to Don Iveson, Executive Committee’s decision is final and the station name will be changed.
http://www.doniveson.ca/2012/09/06/on-south-campusfort-edmonton-station-renaming/
Finally! Well said, Adam. When they released the names I was shocked at all the haters, although I probably shouldn’t have been. Jesus, people, simmer down already. There’s nothing wrong with the names but people just love to hate. It’s refreshing to read a post not full of negativity. Thanks for reminding us that we don’t need to overreact to everything. Save the passion for something more important.
I genuinely felt the names were professional sounding. They are very traditional sounding train line names. They aren’t ridiculous sounding, they aren’t particularly mundane, either. They sound like train lines in a City taking itself somewhat seriously.
I mean, “Space-’n-Time Rail” would’ve sounded great or whatever. We could’ve done that. But we didn’t want to present ourselves that way.
[...] A blog about Edmonton urban planning and design – written in plain English [...]
The names are fine. Each line also has a number and a colour, btw.
By the way, there is a minor distinction between track and line that doesn’t seem clear. Lines are like bus routes, which travel on tracks. Several parts of the track network will have more than one line running on them.
Wow, thanks for the responses, everyone!
I think one of the things to remember, and something I didn’t touch on in my post, is that the names of the lines are currently completely out of context. I feel like once we know what the station names are going to be (and I don’t think we do yet, but correct me if I’m wrong), this will feel less weird and amorphous to the haters.
They’re values Edmonton prides itself on as a community, particularly, the Festival, Energy, Valley and Capital lines.
With Edmonton wanting to become a “city” in the next decade, Metro line makes sense in that context– being seen as a metropolis rather than a small market.
That’s just my opinion. I have no idea though. I mean, I was only just accepted into Urban Planning at a University today. I have no idea what the hell I’m talking about yet.
I’m really against these new names and for the same reason I’m against the addition of “Enterprise Square” to “Bay” station, and the Fort Edmonton Park debacle. It’s the same reason why naming transit lines after colours is the best choice.
+ Accessibility
+ Functionality
+ Simplicity
Hopefully it is not too late to implement the following ideal colour coding for maps, station signs and communications.
(R)ed Line
(B)lue Line
(G)reen Line
(Y)ellow Line
(O)range Line
Why do we let pride get in the way of logic?
Personally, I’d wish we’d just gone the color order. Station names need to be informative (and I’m in the “Fort Edmonton is not remotely close enough to South Campus” camp there), but the train? You’re going to color-code them on the map, so are people going to remember that the Energy line is red, or are they just gonna get on the Red Line? (And I suspect they’ll end up being called that by people giving directions anyway).
I’m not sure they need names in the first place – no-one worries about the name of the route the plane taking you to Las Vegas, after all.
On second thought, I do have a better suggestion – why not give them numbers and end-point titles, same as all the current routes (and the current LRT)? The name tells you where you’re going.
[...] you disappointed with the new LRT line names? Read Adam’s take. I think he’s totally [...]
[...] I wrote a guest post for the Charrette about the names of the LRT lines. [...]
@ Jordan Schroder, Allen Gould, et al.
The thing about naming lines simply as colours is that, while they seem to work for many transit lines, it’s not the word that typically gets stored in one’s memory, but the actual colour. On their own, colours make lines pretty easy to differentiate, especially on complex system maps like the London Underground or New York’s subway system.
Thankfully, we’re not dealing with a system with dozens of lines but only five. And it will probably only ever be five. So we’ve got a little bit of leeway to be creative. That said, we can’t lose touch with quote-unquote “logic” and utility.
That’s why the names have hit the spot. They’re short and universal, making the titles themselves quite easy to remember. And they’re all somehow tied to Edmonton. What’s more, given that each line will be attached to a specific colour, we get two methods of differentiation, each made stronger by the fact that they’re tied to the other.
So yeah, the names are perfect. This is an all-too-uncommon example of Edmonton naming something usefully without getting its own pride too much in the way.
Allen Gould, Jordan Schroder:
The lines DO have numbers and colours.
[...] – Capital, Metro, Valley, Energy, and Festival lines. While there was some griping initially, there is an argument to why simpler is [...]
Leave your response!
The Charrette Photo Pool
The latest photos added to the Charrette Photo Pool:Want to add yours to the mix? Submit your best shots to the photo pool today!
League Blogs
Edmonton Blogs
What We’ve Said
What You’ve Said
Recent Posts
Most Commented
Recent Comments