ntt1
Active Member
It's funny that they act like these things haven't been done already, like "consultation". When they're really just upset that they aren't getting their way.
|
|
|
- Thread starter Daveography
- Start date
trevorhayden
Active Member
I am sure it will make some bored Traffic Engineering consultants happy.
an_edmontonian
New Member
Traffic studies would have been carried out for these projects. Whether they are publicly available is another question. I suspect that the Delton project will have not have negative effects on the road capacity of these local roads that likely see less than 1000 aadt. In fact the installation of separated bike lanes would likely increase the capacity of these local roadways.
policyenthusiast
Active Member
The UCP isn't known to release data that doesn't align with their policy objectives.
TAS
Senior Member
There is so much misinformation about these 'bike lanes' in Delton and Alberta Ave. To be clear, from what I understand, there are no lanes to be be built - no concrete to create separation.
These are painted lanes in one direction for bikes and in the other direction, bikes share the lane with one way traffic (and the traffic count along this stretch of road is very low).
So I don't know about where all this talk from area residents and people in social media is coming from when I read about roads getting ripped up or bulldozed for this.
There are going to be speed humps added which we're seeing in more and more neighbourhoods along with some curb extensions and centre medians (not all permanent infrastructure as some vision zero street lab elements are being added as well).
This is all local street bikeways - not any multi-use paths or separated infrastructure. Removing parking on one side makes it safer though for everyone - drivers, cyclists, pedestrians and kids playing.
This is about the loss of some parking directly in front of their homes. Again this is what it will look like.
Last edited:
TAS
Senior Member
The 124 Ave local street bikeway where there is low traffic and bikes sharing space with cars and traffic calming being added, will connect NAIT, Blatchford and areas further west, with Delton and Alberta Ave.
There is a new crossing at 97st. The route west of 97st goes along the cemetery and is a pleasant, quiet ride.
There is a new crossing at 97st. The route west of 97st goes along the cemetery and is a pleasant, quiet ride.
an_edmontonian
New Member
BrettB
Active Member
But where will everyone park? The 2025 Google street view can be instructive: https://maps.app.goo.gl/TdbGBNEktCLBpxWC7
I'd also like to point out that every house and apartment along 96 St. has a one-car or two-car garage off the alley.
Well, credit to the minister, he HAS got us talking about bike lanes!
I'd also like to point out that every house and apartment along 96 St. has a one-car or two-car garage off the alley.
Well, credit to the minister, he HAS got us talking about bike lanes!
policyenthusiast
Active Member
TAS
Senior Member
It was mailed to area residents.
But to add to the confusion (my own) - even though it's just a painted lane on 96 between 111-119ave, when going on city website it DOES say the part from 119-124 will be protected with a physical barrier. So when I talked with city previously, it was going to be a continuation of the painted lane. They must have upgraded it.
So 96st is protected from 104 to 111Ave (McCauley renewal), then painted from 111-119ave, and then apparently protected again from 119-124st.
I wonder if they will go back and upgrade the painted portion.
thommyjo
Senior Member
What's a bit frustrating with this design, like a handful of others the city has done, is that cyclists actually don't love these. Why?
Not sure why they don't just do the same as 110st, 102ave, 127st, etc which are all bi-directional, on street, 1 way for cars, concrete barrier.
I still bike 83ave to gateway in the Winter. But never east of there until summer because of the exact design they're doing here (painted contraflow plus sharrows)
- Not 8-80, AAA infrastructure. It's still biking on the road with vehicles like the F350 that killed a lady in edgemont this week.
- It's not separated, meaning winter riding will still be impossible without perfect conditions.
- Speed bumps suck and are annoying for all road users
Not sure why they don't just do the same as 110st, 102ave, 127st, etc which are all bi-directional, on street, 1 way for cars, concrete barrier.
I still bike 83ave to gateway in the Winter. But never east of there until summer because of the exact design they're doing here (painted contraflow plus sharrows)
TAS
Senior Member
So 96st northbound from 119 to 124st will have a protected one-way bike lane that will be separated with pin-on curbs with flex posts spaced approximately 15 metres apart (pic below shows what it looks like).
Cyclists travelling southbound will share a driving lane with one-way traffic.
Cyclists travelling southbound will share a driving lane with one-way traffic.
Gronk!
Senior Member
Why it costs so much more to clear snow from sidewalks, bike lanes than roads
The City of Edmonton spends close to the same amount clearing snow from 11,000 linear kilometres of roads as it does clearing it from about 1,500 kilometres of active pathways and other pedestrian spaces.
edmonton.taproot.news
thommyjo
Senior Member
thommyjo
Senior Member
Don’t love this article. The vast majority of the costs are eaten up clearing bus stations, plazas, sidewalks around parks, river valley stairs, etc. but the article is written like it’s “bike lanes vs roads”. I would expect better from taproot.Why it costs so much more to clear snow from sidewalks, bike lanes than roads
The City of Edmonton spends close to the same amount clearing snow from 11,000 linear kilometres of roads as it does clearing it from about 1,500 kilometres of active pathways and other pedestrian spaces.