News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 10K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 42K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.9K     0 

BrettB said:
There is an argument that "key urban roadways which connect to the provincial road network" should be made as efficient as possible. 132 Ave is not one of them.
Click to expand...
I did respond with roughly that line. And added my two cents' worth on their incessant bitching about overreach while engaging in it every chance they get. I'm sure I'll be on some blacklist when the dark times come. As an aside, I honestly feel like I should be sending any mental-health-related bills to the province cause they're plenty responsible for it, and I know it's not just me.
 
BrettB said:
There is an argument that "key urban roadways which connect to the provincial road network" should be made as efficient as possible. 132 Ave is not one of them.
Click to expand...

Exactly this. Not to mention enhanced safety for all users to commute, get to school/rec spaces etc who don't choose to drive or can't drive (medical, financial, age). Our transportation system can't be a one size fits all approach.
 
ADob said:
Ugh, I just received a form letter response from the transportation minister re: bike lane removal. It's astonishing how these people can shift language to attempt to tweak reality to reflect their ideology. You'd think 132 Ave was the Yellowhead or similar. And don't get me started on the hypocrisy of endlessly whining about federal overreach and then continuing to overreach into municipal politics. I am so deeply, profoundly sick of these clowns. And if that guy is an honourable anything, Imma eat my hat.

View attachment 654508
Click to expand...

I also find it hilarious they keep saying "Alberta's roads must continue to support evolving transportation needs".

That's literally what's already happening here. The road is evolving to better accommodate active transport and all the new e-scooters, e-bikes and other personal electric vehicles people are using to get around now.
 
ADob said:
Ugh, I just received a form letter response from the transportation minister re: bike lane removal. It's astonishing how these people can shift language to attempt to tweak reality to reflect their ideology. You'd think 132 Ave was the Yellowhead or similar. And don't get me started on the hypocrisy of endlessly whining about federal overreach and then continuing to overreach into municipal politics. I am so deeply, profoundly sick of these clowns. And if that guy is an honourable anything, Imma eat my hat.

View attachment 654508
Click to expand...
I got the same reply.

My response was a bit more direct, calling on the minister to produce data backing up claims of congestion, and calling into question his credentials and lack of understanding of the specific situation as well as broader transportation planning.

He called 132 ave 137 ave in one of his interviews haha. Which might explain his confusion about the importance of the road for cars…
 
thommyjo said:
I got the same reply.

My response was a bit more direct, calling on the minister to produce data backing up claims of congestion, and calling into question his credentials and lack of understanding of the specific situation as well as broader transportation planning.

He called 132 ave 137 ave in one of his interviews haha. Which might explain his confusion about the importance of the road for cars…
Click to expand...
I would find a response letter like that very frustrating, but I do still feel it is important to respond to them on issues. Will it get eventually get through to them? Hard to say, but if they don't get push back I feel they will take it as agreement with their positions.
 
David A said:
I would find a response letter like that very frustrating, but I do still feel it is important to respond to them on issues. Will it get eventually get through to them? Hard to say, but if they don't get push back I feel they will take it as agreement with their positions.
Click to expand...
Yeah, especially now that recent polling shows that Edmonton is electorally in play, we need to be really clear in giving positive feedback when politicians do things we like and negative feedback when they do things we don't.
 
dkazzed said:
There's a counter on 132 Ave just east of 108 St in both directions.

Average cyclist counts per day
June - 122
July - 150
August - 130

Record day - August 16, 2025 - 286 cyclists
Click to expand...

Good to have these early counts. Of course the whole middle section of the 132Ave network isn't complete yet.

Be curious what the pedestrian count is as well but I don't believe that info is captured.
 
jason403 said:
Hopefully the new government comes in and removes them.
Click to expand...

I wonder if there was a big turnover on council if that could possibly even happen.

Would Cartmell and his team? Principe would maybe make a motion.

@jason403 you should ask the mayoralty candidates Cartmell and Jaffer in particular if they would go that far?

Certainly Knack and Walters would be against.

Some PACE candidates probably would be in favour.
 
To be honest, I thought they were going to just build standard 2 lane asphalt bike paths. Instead they went overboard on 132 Ave. with 2, 2 lane asphalt bike paths and extra wide sidewalks. If we did that everywhere with the 100 million budget we wouldn't go far. Seriously, who's idea was it to build 132 Ave this way? As a taxpayer I feel like I've been duped. I thought we were going to get bike paths throughout the city.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top