[northlands]

Thanks for sharing @CplKlinger !

Imagine if he had visited ten years ago. So much of what he featured (for better or for worse) is all quite recent within the last decade: majority of the bike infrastructure, Valley Line LRT, new Walterdale and tawatina bridges, Happy Beer Street, sidewalk extended patios, funicular, Blatchford, Manchester Sq, ICE District, revamped Stadium LRT & Stadium Yards, most of the murals, list goes on.

For me, what a great showcasing of all the progress made recently, even despite some pretty challenging circumstances (oil glut, borderline hostile provincial gov't, COVID). Lots more that needs to be done but nice to not see everything through an overly critical lens, which I myself am super guilty of when it comes to this city.

 

[constance_chlore]

Lots more that needs to be done but nice to not see everything through an overly critical lens, which I myself am super guilty of when it comes to this city.

I think there's a sort of hedonic treadmill thing going on here—once something good happens, you internalize it as part of your baseline and don't really register it as progress anymore.

 

[archited]

Three areas where bridge infrastructure would benefit peds and cycos to tremendous advantage in Edmonton would be:
1. the council-impeded bridge adjacent to the Macdonald Hotel and the Funicular across 99th Street (maybe the CRL can have an impact here)
2. conversion of the Low Level bridge to permanently remove moto-vehicular traffic in favor of the foot-'n-pedal crowd (the bridge itself could be made into a gathering point attraction for that area of the river valley)
3. a bridge over 109th Street along 102nd Avenue with the conversion of one-o-twoth into a spine for LRT, hoofers and sprocketeers -- from the Google ruler in the snapz below it would be 666+ (Devil-got-my-tongue) feet in length making a 1:20 incline doable in clearing the 109th impasse (easy, peasey, and breezy). A 5% incline is easily negotiated by even over-aged, underdeveloped, sedentary whozits such as myself (TJ) and the bridge could be wide enough to segregate the slow-movers from the whiz-byers. This makes sense for the near-by NorQuesters most of whom -- as the 'O has noted -- would be car-less and yet downtown centric in their off-book hours. My expansive gut tells me that it would be a strong connector to the opposing sides of the 109th impediment.
Whoever brings this trio to life in the upcoming election will have my interest.

 

[archited]

Oh, I forgot to mention that the 2nd Avenue bridge could be High-Line-esque in its demeanor with maybe even a few kiosks on board.

 

[Kosy123]

I think there's a sort of hedonic treadmill thing going on here—once something good happens, you internalize it as part of your baseline and don't really register it as progress anymore.

I think it’s a function of being stuck in our own bubble of being the only major city for hours around, and an urbanism geek, advocate or supporter. Personally, I didn’t really appreciate our bike lane system, thinking it was this horrible trash system, until visiting other Canadian cities where I went “huh okay never mind”.

Isolation breeds tough love and criticism, and it really takes a change in scenery and perspective to appreciate how far we’ve progressed as a city.

 

[TAS]

Ontario court strikes down Ford government's plan to remove Toronto bike lanes​

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-ford-bike-lane-toronto-court-ruling-1.7597460

Will be interesting to hear what Dresheen has to say and whether he will continue his pursuit of removing the 4 bike lanes in Edmonton he has identified (two of them being 132 Ave in the north and 100Ave downtown). The 132 Ave removal would be expensive now.

Ontario is appealing court decision.

 

[mcr]

Will be interesting to hear what Dresheen has to say and whether he will continue his pursuit of removing the 4 bike lanes in Edmonton he has identified (two of them being 132 Ave in the north and 100Ave downtown). The 132 Ave removal would be expensive now.

Ontario is appealing court decision.

This government is the absolute worst. F*** them.

100 Ave and 132 Ave are not "major corridors" they are side streets. I could understand the annoyance people had if these lanes were on Jasper Ave, 137 Ave, those types, but they're put on adjacent side roads as NOT to disrupt the major thoroughfares. Just stay the hell out of municipal politics already.

 

[dkazzed]

Even the most cycling friendly cities in Canada face loud opposition against safe and continuous cycling infrastructure. Vancouver and Kelowna didn't turn me into a regular cyclist, Edmonton did.

My only gripe with Edmonton is that they still need to address the mid century middle, the donut of cycling hell. Fort Road is getting built and there's a bunch slated in around Jasper Place and Bonnie Doon/Forest Heights but there's still so much to go.

 

[ntt1]

Three areas where bridge infrastructure would benefit peds and cycos to tremendous advantage in Edmonton would be:

76 Ave over the railyard in the south (wishful thinking, I know) or University Ave near the Cross.

 

[trevorhayden]

AB government will keep trying because you know, Alberta is unique lol

 

[Offworld]

Watched that last night and he was a lot kinder on Edmonton than I might have expected.

I then had to remind myself that he's largely transport-oriented in his videos, and thus didn't get into a lot of the other ills Edmonton faces. Or, should I say, Edmonpeg.

 

[TAS]

Watched that last night and he was a lot kinder on Edmonton than I might have expected.

I then had to remind myself that he's largely transport-oriented in his videos, and thus didn't get into a lot of the other ills Edmonton faces. Or, should I say, Edmonpeg.

Or maybe he feels Edmonton stacks up fairly well to many of the other cities he's explored (many being in the US).

But generally his visits are also about exploring what's unique or different or special about a city so that's what he highlighted.

 

[archited]

A bridge over 109th Street along 102nd Avenue with the conversion of 102nd Avenue into a spine for LRT, hoofers, and sprocketeers -- it would be 666+ (Devil-got-my-tongue) feet in length making a 1:20 incline doable in clearing the 109th impasse. A 5% incline is easily negotiated by even over-aged, underdeveloped, sedentary whozits such as myself (TJ) and the bridge could be wide enough to segregate the slow-movers from the whiz-byers. This makes sense for the near-by NorQuesters most of whom -- as the 'O has noted -- would be car-less and yet downtown centric in their off-book hours. My expansive gut tells me that it would be a strong connector to the opposing sides of the 109th impediment.
Before:

and After:

The bridge would barely cause pedestrians a sweat (5% slope is only slightly more than drainage slopes on City sidewalks which are usually 2% to 3%) and would connect downtown proper with Wîhkwêntôwin in a major way, encouraging foot traffic and exploration. It would have vibes of NYC's HighLine with lots of socializing space along the way and quick-service food kiosks. I believe that it would be one more peg in the hole in service to the pedestrianization of downtown.

 

[thommyjo]

A bridge over 109th Street along 102nd Avenue with the conversion of 102nd Avenue into a spine for LRT, hoofers, and sprocketeers -- it would be 666+ (Devil-got-my-tongue) feet in length making a 1:20 incline doable in clearing the 109th impasse. A 5% incline is easily negotiated by even over-aged, underdeveloped, sedentary whozits such as myself (TJ) and the bridge could be wide enough to segregate the slow-movers from the whiz-byers. This makes sense for the near-by NorQuesters most of whom -- as the 'O has noted -- would be car-less and yet downtown centric in their off-book hours. My expansive gut tells me that it would be a strong connector to the opposing sides of the 109th impediment.
Before:
View attachment 670470
and After:

View attachment 670475
The bridge would barely cause pedestrians a sweat (5% slope is only slightly more than drainage slopes on City sidewalks which are usually 2% to 3%) and would connect downtown proper with Wîhkwêntôwin in a major way, encouraging foot traffic and exploration. It would have vibes of NYC's HighLine with lots of socializing space along the way and quick-service food kiosks. I believe that it would be one more peg in the hole in service to the pedestrianization of downtown.

What’s the render from the east side of 109st looking north though. Pedestrian overpasses can hurt the public realm more than they help sometimes.

 

[archited]

I am not sure what you mean exactly TJ -- do you mean what does it look like standing on the sidewalk on the east side of 109th Street some distance back from a pedestrian bridge or do you mean from a viewpoint near or under the (imaginary) bridge. Certainly one wouldn't want to build a bridge in isolation to the (macro) site. I'll take a whirl at it from a massing perspective and then you cab address what concerns are evident to you.