Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: City moves forward with 4-year bike plan

  1. #1

    Default City moves forward with 4-year bike plan

    City council is moving forward with a comprehensive four-year plan that will see more bike lanes in Edmonton.

    The transportation committee passed the plan Thursday, which could mean up to 500 kilometres of bike routes and shared paths being added or updated in the city core.

    The report focuses on improving bike-friendly infrastructure in the downtown, Oliver, Strathcona, Garneau and University neighbourhoods, given the volume of current cyclists as well as popular bike routes and destinations.

    The report also stresses the importance of consultation prior to putting in the many kilometres of bike lanes.

    “The key thing is we need to do a little more consultation and engagement with neighbours that are going to see bike lanes coming through them, affected business owners and landowners,” said Mayor Don Iveson.

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmont...plan-1.2666801
    Last edited by Mr.D; 07-06-2014 at 01:46 PM.

  2. #2
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,374

    Default

    Yup they'll consult and engage the neighbors, then promptly ignore any suggestions and do it the way they want to.

  3. #3

    Default

    Um.. I think you will find this NEW bike plan was a direct result of feedback from the OLD one...
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  4. #4

    Default

    which was a complete sh*t show last time because they didn't listen to people or do much research.

  5. #5
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,374

    Default

    One can only hope, but judging by the latest debate regarding Blatchford Lands I'm not sure anything has changed.

  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    which was a complete sh*t show last time because they didn't listen to people or do much research.
    they tried to value engineer it....

    "oo we are fixing this road than we will put in a bike lane that connects nothing to nowhere" and do it in a community that is't ready for it yet yet.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  7. #7

    Default

    ^ pretty much what everyone was saying when they were implementing it... but you reacted like we were car driving nazis who love Rob ford and hated cyclists cause we opposed it for those exact reasons....

    hit the core areas first with some nice flowy bike routes that allow for proper commuter riding and then expand from there....

  8. #8

    Default

    I don;t think you have any idea what I felt, what groups I was working with or the feedback I was providing and to whom regarding this subject.

    If you wish to continue riding me in such a fashion I am either going to start charging or demand a ring with a big rock.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  9. #9

    Default

    I'm just going by your posting on this forum... and what was said when I provided reasoning for not supporting the city of Edmonton's previous bike lane plan.... when I provided my said reasoning (much similar to what you are now saying today), you called me Rob Ford.
    No, you are quite correct, I have no idea what you felt, or why you felt the need for calling me Rob Ford, or a car driving nazi. I also have no idea what groups you have provided feedback to, and was only responding to your reactions you provided to my posting. (I dont really care where you participate or who you give feedback too either... spare me)

    I will continue to do as I wish... if you don't like be held to what you are saying, stop saying stuff.

  10. #10
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    I'm not sure "hit the core first" is a good plan. Well, not a whole plan. The core is where you need to focus if you want to get lots of people cycling, but there are places where only the very braves would try to go by bike, and those places need work too. Crossing the yellowhead, or the henday in most places, or the eastern half of the Whitemud isn't at all pleasant or safe for cyclist, and some of those holes can be fixed fairly easily. The NE LRT path, for instance, connects to 66st just south of where it would need to be to provide reasonable access for neighbourhoods north of there. The same path could cross 118ave on the bridge at minimal cost, or it could be possible to use the VIA bridge to cross the yellowhead at 121st, or the vacant bridge to cross Argyll road east of gateway.

  11. #11

    Default

    ^ start with the communities that are asking for it and build out from there.

    The cors is also wonderfully set up to promote biking, compact form, young, lower income levels...

    There are lots of good reasons to start with the core first.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  12. #12

    Default

    Would love to see a proper bike path setup from 95 street to 127 street along 102 avenue... I think it would be so well used.

    (by proper bike path, one that seperates you from crazy motorists at busier intersections, and the whole thing painted green and clearly identifying this as a bike-only lane.

  13. #13
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    The core has all that, so the core is where you put the best infrastructure that might be controversial elsewhere, certainly.

    But there are easy wins at low cost and no lost general traffic lanes elsewhere, that could make inaccessible places accessible. Have you ever tried to bike to Sherwood park, or St. Albert? You would have to be crazy to try (I've done it, but I'm crazy) but there are simple improvements that could make either trip reasonable, and could be done cheaply and now. Add some off street cycle paths to link together service roads, for instance. Widen a few sidewalks and mark them for cycling use (cyclists yield to pedestrians).

    Easy, and just like protected lanes in the core, big results.

  14. #14
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,448

    Default

    ^ Agreed. There are opportunities to improve bicycle infrastructure across the city at low cost without inconveniencing anyone.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •