News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 11K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 43K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 6.9K     0 
With that 132 Ave renewal talk and the Minister butting in, I really think it's time for the city to make data on cyclist counts much more visible for the public. With fancy visuals, maps, graphs and growth percentages. It's stuff like this not being in the public narrative that allows talk of "nobody bikes here" (I've seen stuff online about how nobody uses the 83 ave bike lane, which is stupid). Without that data being easily accessible to the public, it's going to be harder to fight the online narrative of "nobody using the LRT/bikes"

Same with LRT stations, but I think it's high time that active transportation and public transportation statistics like that flood the internet.
 
I think that lack of visibility is one of the bigger downsides of having our primary bike infrastructure on residential roads parallel to main thoroughfares. I personally prefer that approach for when I’m biking since it just feels safer and more pleasant, but nobody who isn’t biking sees them. Right now I’m parked on 102 ave, have been waiting for an appointment for about 10 minutes and have already seen over 20, maybe close to 30 people bike past… even though April is part of our supposed “9 months of winter”
 
Seamusmuldrew said:
I think that lack of visibility is one of the bigger downsides of having our primary bike infrastructure on residential roads parallel to main thoroughfares. I personally prefer that approach for when I’m biking since it just feels safer and more pleasant, but nobody who isn’t biking sees them. Right now I’m parked on 102 ave, have been waiting for an appointment for about 10 minutes and have already seen over 20, maybe close to 30 people bike past… even though April is part of our supposed “9 months of winter”
Click to expand...
Tbh though, the side road approach might save us if the idiots at the province push this forward…

Bike lanes on jasper would probably get ripped out. 102 ave? Likely safe.
 
I think there are multiple reasons to put bike lanes on side streets when possible. Another is that collisions are possible even when bike lanes are protected, but low traffic speeds would probably make them both less likely and less severe.

I imagine it can make sense to put bike lanes on major roads if it allows greater continuity. I'm thinking of Montreal's St-Denis bike superhighway—any of the parallel side streets would get cut off at some point. But I would feel uneasy if that bike lane were any less protected than it is.
 
thommyjo said:
Tbh though, the side road approach might save us if the idiots at the province push this forward…

Bike lanes on jasper would probably get ripped out. 102 ave? Likely safe.
Click to expand...
That’s absolutely true, there’s no justification (rational or not) to remove those which I think is a huge advantage. But I mean also against my own point, even ones on main roads like Bloor where the heavy use of bike lanes is visible to drivers, people still manage to conjure up a collective delusion of how empty and useless they are.
 
Seamusmuldrew said:
That’s absolutely true, there’s no justification (rational or not) to remove those which I think is a huge advantage. But I mean also against my own point, even ones on main roads like Bloor where the heavy use of bike lanes is visible to drivers, people still manage to conjure up a collective delusion of how empty and useless they are.
Click to expand...
I would put a large wager that many people who crusade against these likely haven't ridden a bike since they were a teenager (or younger), nor have ever considered at any time any other mode of transport than a motor vehicle. Then again, so many people also think they are entitled to speed wherever without any consequences, too.
 
Seamusmuldrew said:
That’s absolutely true, there’s no justification (rational or not) to remove those which I think is a huge advantage. But I mean also against my own point, even ones on main roads like Bloor where the heavy use of bike lanes is visible to drivers, people still manage to conjure up a collective delusion of how empty and useless they are.
Click to expand...
Yeah. The trade offs are something like:

Main road:
- often more connected to broader urban grid and major destinations
- visibility of businesses and directness of accessing a business from the front vs sidewalk riding from around the corner
- drivers can see cyclists and might be less inclined to think no one bikes

Side road:
- calmer and safer vs main roads
- less likely to enrage car brains if installation involves removing lanes/parking or 1 way conversion
- often less impacts for construction, deliveries, and other urban busyness that main roads experience
 
Highly recommending making your voice heard here:

You might just want to blow off steam. But I’d recommend appealing to conservative values to make a more compelling case.

I emailed and called. Emphasized concern for the safety of my kids and wife, the concern about big government and overreach when locals have clearly voted and engaged on existing projects, and the tax/personal savings of biking being supported. Talked about how without bike lanes, we would need a second car, which from a cost perspective would force my wife back to work full time and away from our young kids.

- fiscal conservatism
- freedom
- anti big gov
- family values
- personal COL savings.

Hoping that resonates with a UCP leader as going against the very thing he’d claim to support.

Dreeshen, Devin, Honourable
Minister of Transportation and Economic Corridors
Members of Executive Council
Executive Branch
127 Legislature Building
10800 - 97 Avenue
Edmonton, AB
T5K 2B6

Phone: 780 427-2080
Fax: 780 422-2002
E-mail:transportation.minister@gov.ab.ca
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top