[edm13]

I live north side, and most of the roads around me have a wide asphalt multiuse path, which I like for running and biking. For example 153 ave from 82 street down to manning. Since probably 7/10 people in Edmonton have nothing nice to say about bike lanes, wouldn’t it be easier to just fly under the radar and replace the side walks in older areas with wider side walks and call it a day? Just call them multi use paths lol

 

[Coprolite]

I live north side, and most of the roads around me have a wide asphalt multiuse path, which I like for running and biking. For example 153 ave from 82 street down to manning. Since probably 7/10 people in Edmonton have nothing nice to say about bike lanes, wouldn’t it be easier to just fly under the radar and replace the side walks in older areas with wider side walks and call it a day? Just call them multi use paths lol

Arterial roads from the 1990s and later were built with ample space to either side to accommodate well separated MUPs. They were also built as roads rather than stroads right up against people's houses. There isn't really an option to viably convert 132 Ave into anything resembling that without generous application of the old SimCity bulldozer tool. Its current form is basically the function of a series of weird retrofits that fulfil the functions of neither street nor road well.

The rebuild of 132 Ave is not strictly about introducing bike mobility, but to make it a less terrible place to exist alongside of, rationalize intersections, and transform it into an actual street rather than a stroad.

 

[thommyjo]

I live north side, and most of the roads around me have a wide asphalt multiuse path, which I like for running and biking. For example 153 ave from 82 street down to manning. Since probably 7/10 people in Edmonton have nothing nice to say about bike lanes, wouldn’t it be easier to just fly under the radar and replace the side walks in older areas with wider side walks and call it a day? Just call them multi use paths lol

That’s the primary approach we are taking as a city. And makes the most sense for residential routes or anything lower traffic. MUPs shouldn’t be used for higher traffic bike routes though.

A few downsides:

1) sharing with pedestrians also causes conflicts. People walking dogs, running with headphones, walking 3-4 wide. Little toddlers wandering along. Etc don’t mesh well with someone “commuting” at 25km/hr. Biking along river valley road road’s MUP is a good example of an “overloaded” MUP that needs mode separation.

2) intersections are more dangerous for MUPs vs bike lanes.

3) in many areas, MUPs aren’t an option due to boulevard size or other space constraints. During full renewals, MUPS are easier to install. But for adaptation of existing roads, on street bike lanes with curbs or bollards/parking are cheapest and easiest to implement.

 

[an_edmontonian]

I don't understand the opposition to this retrofit, some from a few users on this forum, but also councilor's and also the minister of transportation. This particular road is one of the best suited in Edmonton to have a conversion. Its previous design was WAY overbuilt for its purpose.

Just look at this street view of a stretch of the road I chose at random. It perfectly shows the issues that exist with this road.

1. Completely overbuilt for the use. I count maybe a half dozen vehicles of this stretch for at least a km in each direction. AADWT data shows this road gets 6000-8000 vehicles a day (4-5 vehicles per minute on average weekdays). Think of the resources required to construct this road, and the continual maintenance, etc.
2. Design speed is probably 70km/h, maybe more. That is frankly absurd for a collector road with a K-6 school fronting it. Posted speed was probably 50km, 30km in school zones. But people typically drive closer to design speeds than posted speeds.
3. Safety. Point 2 leads into the safety element. When a road has a design speed of 70km/h, other users will not want to use the road. Hence a cyclist using the sidewalk rather than the 20 meter wide road surface.

 

[CplKlinger]

I live north side, and most of the roads around me have a wide asphalt multiuse path, which I like for running and biking. For example 153 ave from 82 street down to manning. Since probably 7/10 people in Edmonton have nothing nice to say about bike lanes, wouldn’t it be easier to just fly under the radar and replace the side walks in older areas with wider side walks and call it a day? Just call them multi use paths lol

It depends on the context. Want a bike/active transport route next to a busy arterial roadway where we want to move as many cars as fast as possible, or a quite neighbourhood road where traffic is already calm? Sure, MUPs are fine. But with a collector road like this, especially one that goes through ten school zones, then raised crosswalks, narrowed roads, etc. can make a world of difference.

 

[Coprolite]

It depends on the context. Want a bike/active transport route next to a busy arterial roadway where we want to move as many cars as fast as possible, or a quite neighbourhood road where traffic is already calm? Sure, MUPs are fine. But with a collector road like this, especially one that goes through ten school zones, then raised crosswalks, narrowed roads, etc. can make a world of difference.

Even from a driver's perspective, it's also a lot easier to make a left turn onto 132 Ave from any of the very many side streets that feed directly onto it on the rebuilt portion than I remember it being back when I lived near there, because it turns out that just having a whole bunch of neighbourhood streets and back alleys directly feeding into a mighty overbuilt stroad just isn't good road design. This rebuild isn't just about hippy things like making it safe to walk across the street or not having Billy Shitdick race his numpty truck down it at Mach Jesus, but about applying actual principles of street design that make the street environment less chaotic for cars.

 

[TAS]

Even from a driver's perspective, it's also a lot easier to make a left turn onto 132 Ave from any of the very many side streets that feed directly onto it on the rebuilt portion than I remember it being back when I lived near there, because it turns out that just having a whole bunch of neighbourhood streets and back alleys directly feeding into a mighty overbuilt stroad just isn't good road design. This rebuild isn't just about hippy things like making it safe to walk across the street or not having Billy Shitdick race his numpty truck down it at Mach Jesus, but about applying actual principles of street design that make the street environment less chaotic for cars.

People may tend to think some of these road renewals are just based on ideology, but in fact there are valuable design principles that have been learned over time, been applied, evaluated etc and are subsequently integrated into renewals because they make sense in terms of a variety factors - longterm sustainability, safety, health etc

 

[thommyjo]

Love to see it

Do it for the kids everyone; for that reason alone this is worth it.

 

[dkazzed]

From 2 lane traffic down to 1. On a bus route, this has traffic backed up when busses stop or people turn. Traffic is more congested while bike lanes have sparse to no users outside of central Edmonton. Emergency services have increased response times during peak hours accessing certain neighborhoods. Neighborhood parking is also reduced making it more difficult for multi u it infil to have adequate parking, hindering growth potential.

Expand sidewalks into multi use paths, or build bike lanes where there is available space. It shouldn't be coming at the expense of a good transportation network .

Traffic volumes at most are 9800 vehicles a day around Q.E. High School. The average on that corridor is 8,000. They are retaining ample parking and school bus bays, and ETS stops where buses are expected to layover for any period of time are also out of traffic lanes. Other than a couple of 10-15 minute periods in the morning and another couple of 10-15 minute periods in the afternoon, there's never a true rush hour on 132 Ave, ever.

City of Edmonton won't allow less than two off street parking stalls for new builds. Three if there's a legal basement suite. Having more transportation choices mean some families have the option of not needing a second vehicle.

 

[BrettB]

A local YouTuber took a ride down the completed sections of 132 Ave and, boy, does it look impressive.

 

[fromyeg]

A local YouTuber took a ride down the completed sections of 132 Ave and, boy, does it look impressive.

Not according to Devin Dreeshen.

 

[David A]

Not according to Devin Dreeshen.

For some people it seems the words bike lanes are like waving a red cape in front of a bull.

 

[thommyjo]

I think the biggest gap in the bike advocacy work of our city right now is with kids and schools.

People under 16 are one of the biggest beneficiaries of safe bike infrastructure. And if you want to convince the masses about the value of something, make it something kids use and appreciate.

We’ve spent hundreds of millions to build so many playgrounds all over the city. Which have the same “seasonal” challenges of biking. Yet no one advocates to remove them.

We need a more intentional NPO focused on helping kids get into cycling and encouraging programs through schools. Also leads to a great future investment as more youth riders will translate into more adult ones in a decade.

 

[dkazzed]

Schools would be a great place to gain support for safe and protected ways to kids to get to school.

There's a Kidical Mass starting from Rosslyn School Sunday May 25th at 11am. The group hosting is about kids and cargo bikes but given the current political situation we're in right now, I think we could use all the adults, older kids, etc. on board.

Let's Bike There YEG - Kidical Mass Edmonton

Kidical Mass Berlin / Photo Norbert Michalke

www.letsbikethere.com

View this content on Instagram

View this content on Instagram

This does conflict a little with River Valley Heart of the City Bike Ride starting at Government House Park at 8:45am the same day but it's a leisurely paced ride (18 km over 3 hours, lots of stops) and I don't think they'll mind if people drop out early.

 

[Coprolite]

Not according to Devin Dreeshen.

Currently writing him a letter referring to this as "fiscally responsible road design", waxing poetic about the "good old days" of bicycling to school in Lougheed era Alberta, decrying how sheltered children are nowadays, and what a shame it is that a good working-class neighbourhood has to be a shortcut for the Volvos and Range Rovers of the yuppy elite.