Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 4567891011 LastLast
Results 701 to 800 of 1069

Thread: Cycling Infrastructure | Discussion

  1. #701

    Default

    ^^My guess is the 106 Street south of 100 Avenue is one way as well as concerns about capacity. There was a whole matrix of factors and routes were considered on a bunch of criteria which was reviewed by a third party audit.

    I doubt any cyclist wants to go down 106 Street hill anyhow. Doesn't connect to anything. (or up for that matter).
    Last edited by GreenSPACE; 20-04-2017 at 05:04 PM.
    www.decl.org

  2. #702
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    9,852

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GreenSPACE View Post
    ^^My guess is the 106 Street south of 100 Avenue is one way as well as concerns about capacity. There was a whole matrix of factors and routes were considered on a bunch of criteria which was reviewed by a third party audit.

    I doubt any cyclist wants to go down 106 Street hill anyhow. Doesn't connect to anything. (or up for that matter).
    Most cyclists, I think, would rather connect with HLB, or now that that's kind of screwed up, River Valley road and Menzies. What is needed though on Southbank is a little bit more manageable or gradual hill climb to get out of the valley. The one at U of A is nuts. That's several switchbacks. Most people get out of breath just walking up that one, its not fit for bikes. I think a few times in my life I've been able to pedal up that one. Even in lower gears you wonder if you're going to break a chain or a body part..
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  3. #703
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    9,852

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hello lady View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    Interesting.

    Bikes are typically around 0.8m wide. Cars are over 2m wide including mirrors, trucks around 2.5m and close to 6m long. Average occupancy isn't much higher.

    so which one hogs the roads again?
    The guy in front of me this morning, on a bike, that acted like HE owned the road.so who do you think I would say!
    This is actually recommended for cyclists using roads, its what they are supposed to do. I don't, I cycle near the curb, but that is very hazardous to do and much moreso than just occupying the lane. When a cyclist occupies the lane drivers have to navigate around and deal with that. When a cyclist is hugging the curb at their own peril (look out for sand, gravel, lousy uneven forms, pavement) drivers drive as if you are not even there whizzing by sometimes inches from pedals and handlebars if they don't run you off the road. I've been hit by cars 3 times in my cycling career. Trust me its not something somebody wants to happen once. All of these were egregious driver errors. "I didn't see him" (in broad daylight)

    As for hogging the road multiple bikes can navigate on a standard driving lane. With quite a lot of density. Almost all of those are one person bikes, like almost all the commuting vehicles driving. 10bikes fit into the footprint of a standard SUV. Who's hogging again?

    Try Burrard Bridge or Cambie in Vancouver sometime. In rush hour there are more bikes using and fitting on that bridge than vehicles and they got only 25% of the lane spacing of the bridge if that.
    Last edited by Replacement; 20-04-2017 at 06:55 PM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  4. #704
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,354

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    107 doesn't go through Macewan while 106 does, so there's that. 108 is already fairly bike friendly, so this makes a pretty nice grid with every second street being bike friendly.
    It's my understanding that one of the double sidewalks on the south side of MacEwan is supposed to become a bike lane. Using that to get over to 107 Street from the 106 Street MacEwan underpass would have been better than having to jog over on 100 Avenue.

    Since 100 Avenue is also going to have a protected bike lane guess the City's plan won't be terrible, just not optimum.

  5. #705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post

    Since 100 Avenue is also going to have a protected bike lane guess the City's plan won't be terrible, just not optimum.
    This should be what goes on our entrance signs. "Not terrible, just not optimum".
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  6. #706

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    So just wondering when cars bend the metal pylons onto the bike path by hitting them how fast it takes to repair them. This being a city where there hundreds of traffic sign casualties a year, Where people drive thru lawns and manage to hit house full bore, where people drive into shop fronts not on purpose.

    This isn't a barrier, its psychological only.

    Oh, as Howie mentioned above, I agree. Spiked belt, lol.

    We can't really design a livable city around the expectation that cars are constantly going to be driving uncontrollably at full speed. You'd have giant concrete pits as roads and bunkers for buildings. Better to reduce the ability/desirability to drive a lot and at high speeds.

    A normal driver isn't going to be jumping those curbs.

    Calgary has these, and they work just fine, both at keeping drivers out and at encouraging more people to ride bikes (and feel comfortable doing so). For all the hand-wringing and worrying we can do about potential problems, we just have to look at Calgary (and ride a bike there) to see that they work.

    As others have mentioned, there will be more significant barriers (including planters) at key points, such as approaching intersections, where more significant protection is desirable.

    And for the real winners that manage to get their cars stuck in a bike lane: that's what public shaming is for.

    Also: the bollards are flexible. They just pop back up if someone hits them.

  7. #707

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hello lady View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    By "acted like he owned the road", you mean "refused to defer to you who really owns the road", right?

    Maybe consider that he owns the road just as much as you do.
    No, not right. And get a damn bell on your bikes!
    Just imagine that he was driving his car and you were behind him. Because that would be what he would be doing if he weren't riding his bike.

    And: ding ding ding.

  8. #708

    Default

    The kerbs work very well to separate cars and bicycles. The only exception would be a very small amount of filthy degenerates, for whom jumping barriers gets their perverted jollies going.

    Unfortunately, the filthy degenerates always make the most noise. The creeps pollute this forum as they pollute anywhere else.

    Fortunately, their easy assumption that everyone is as obscene as they are -- for wanton speeding or kerb jumping or anything else these perverts do -- is wrong.

    Most people are not degenerate creeps. Thank the gods.

  9. #709
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,158

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fryingwoks View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by hello lady View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    By "acted like he owned the road", you mean "refused to defer to you who really owns the road", right?

    Maybe consider that he owns the road just as much as you do.
    No, not right. And get a damn bell on your bikes!
    Just imagine that he was driving his car and you were behind him. Because that would be what he would be doing if he weren't riding his bike.

    And: ding ding ding.

    Is it a lot to ask though?A bell on a bicycle????????

  10. #710

    Default

    Public open house on 102 Ave. bike lane construction.

    Date: Wednesday May 3, 2017
    Time: 5-8pm
    Place: Robertson-Wesley United Church

    The meeting will provide details on construction of the 102 Ave. bike lane from Clifton Place to 111 St. Construction is planned to start in May and be completed by Fall 2017. https://www.edmonton.ca/projects_pla...ke-routes.aspx.

  11. #711
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,317

    Default

    ^^ Properly built bike lanes benefit everyone, including drivers. Cyclists don't need to compete for space, and drivers aren't impeded by cyclists occupying a full lane because there is nowhere else to go. And what is with the hangup about bells? Bike bells are like car horns - something you should have, but not something you should use often.

  12. #712
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,158

    Default

    I think you should have a bell. We've seen elderly people scared by a bike going far too fast by them, if they had heard a bell, it would have been better.Of course some people on bikes don't think that way, it's all about them!
    Nothing like a car horn at all.

  13. #713
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    edmonton
    Posts
    4,201

    Default

    Common courtesy not being very common, unfortunately.
    Nisi Dominus Frustra

  14. #714
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    9,852

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hello lady View Post
    I think you should have a bell. We've seen elderly people scared by a bike going far too fast by them, if they had heard a bell, it would have been better.Of course some people on bikes don't think that way, it's all about them!
    Nothing like a car horn at all.
    I've seen elderly people have no conception that they are actually on a multiuse trail and could reasonably expect bikes to be passing them. I've seen enough kids, families, other people be similarly unaware. Multiuse trails are not sidewalks. They are multiuse and also for people with bikes, rollerblades etc none of whom appreciate fellow users with no appreciation that it is a busy use area and with faster modes passing them.

    I use a bell, regularly, because a lot of trail users walking 4 astride and blocking trails like cattle standing around are not properly using the trails. Generally, to be considerate to other users a right hand rule should apply to pedestrians using trails. Stay in right lane except for passing when its safe. Its obviously ignorant, or should be, for people to block the whole trail or be entirely unaware of other trail users.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  15. #715

    Default

    ^ Yep. Dog walkers too, with their leashes stretched over the whole trail.

    It's not difficult to stay to the right, just common courtesy.

  16. #716

    Default

    ^^^The law says you need a bell, and they're sometimes useful, but less often than you might think.

    Dinging a bell doesn't help much if the pedestrian is hard of hearing, as is often the case for seniors.
    To really work like it's supposed to on a multi-use path the bell needs to be rung, and heard, long enough before passing that the cyclist is still well back when the pedestrian inevitably swerves while shoulder checking, and randomly chooses a direction to "get out of the way" they don't cause more conflict.

    There are a lot of places where cyclists just need to slow down to something like a moderate jogging speed when there are lots of people around - but there are also places where pedestrians just need to expect that people on bikes will be passing by all the time.

    edit: also, the best way to reduce conflicts is to separate users going different speeds, or to provide sufficient width to pass. Adding more separated cycling infrastructure is probably the best way to reduce conflicts. Both the separated lanes we're building now that will help coax riders off sidewalks, and separated cycling and walking paths in high-use off-roadway locations or well marked cycling areas within larger mixed use areas.
    Last edited by Highlander II; 24-04-2017 at 09:17 AM.
    There can only be one.

  17. #717
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    9,852

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cumberland View Post
    ^ Yep. Dog walkers too, with their leashes stretched over the whole trail.

    It's not difficult to stay to the right, just common courtesy.
    Dog walkers are a bane on my cycling existence. The worst being the dog walker with earphones on that can't hear the bell and 25 feet leash of random canine attached. Canines are like random molecules. They don't walk in a straight line lets just say. Toddlers as well. Those should come with leashes..
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  18. #718
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,153

    Default

    I find bells worse than useless for the reasons that Highlander presents. I have no directional sense of hearing and I know that different cyclists like to use different protocols when dealing with pedestrians (some expect the walker to step out of their path, believe it or not). So when I hear a bell, I find myself stopping and shoulder checking to see where the cyclists is and what direction he wants to use to pass. Usually they're well past by then. My irritation lingers though.

  19. #719
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,317

    Default

    I expect pedestrians to move when they hear a bell, which is why I generally only use it when they and/or their pets are occupying the entire width of a multi-use trail and there is no room for me to pass if they don't move. Otherwise, I just go around.

  20. #720

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Titanium48 View Post
    I expect pedestrians to move when they hear a bell, which is why I generally only use it when they and/or their pets are occupying the entire width of a multi-use trail and there is no room for me to pass if they don't move. Otherwise, I just go around.
    Best policy may be: Do not not ask for whom the bell tolls, assume the bell tolls for thee.

  21. #721
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,158

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cumberland View Post
    ^ Yep. Dog walkers too, with their leashes stretched over the whole trail.

    It's not difficult to stay to the right, just common courtesy.
    Dog walkers are a bane on my cycling existence. The worst being the dog walker with earphones on that can't hear the bell and 25 feet leash of random canine attached. Canines are like random molecules. They don't walk in a straight line lets just say. Toddlers as well. Those should come with leashes..
    Bikes must rule.! Bike owners are .....

  22. #722
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,158

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Titanium48 View Post
    I expect pedestrians to move when they hear a bell, which is why I generally only use it when they and/or their pets are occupying the entire width of a multi-use trail and there is no room for me to pass if they don't move. Otherwise, I just go around.

    If everyone is sharing,include seniors with walkers,let them know you are behind them, pretty simple

  23. #723
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,158

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cumberland View Post
    ^ Yep. Dog walkers too, with their leashes stretched over the whole trail.

    It's not difficult to stay to the right, just common courtesy.

    I agree. I just don't want someone on a bike to spook them!

  24. #724
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,158

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by howie View Post
    Common courtesy not being very common, unfortunately.
    No, it is not.My dogs are always on a tight leash.those bikes rushing to Grant McEwen, they are going faster than bikes on a road!

  25. #725
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    9,852

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EveB View Post
    I find bells worse than useless for the reasons that Highlander presents. I have no directional sense of hearing and I know that different cyclists like to use different protocols when dealing with pedestrians (some expect the walker to step out of their path, believe it or not). So when I hear a bell, I find myself stopping and shoulder checking to see where the cyclists is and what direction he wants to use to pass. Usually they're well past by then. My irritation lingers though.
    I get perplexed that the rule is not understood. On Multiuse trails there is usually a line painted in the middle. The assumption being to cater to right hand rule and so that any nature of users can use the lanes so as not to run head into each other. So that it should be for all conveyences stay on the right except if you need to pass on the left. Any cyclist expecting the user to move out of the way and out of that lane is confusing the whole purpose of the lanes. Lots of people will state "passing on the left" I thought that that was redundant information and that the bell or Passing should suffice.

    On a bike I'm the faster moving vehicle and can navigate and go in and out of lane much quicker. Why would I expect a pedestrian to do that? All I require is that they contain themselves to the right lane and not take up the whole trail walking abreast. I've seen walkers that walk abreast lining the other trail even so that cyclists upcoming, which they see, actually have to go off the trail to afford the walkers the whole trail. actually this is common. How I deal with people like that when I'm in a mood is come to a complete stop tapping fingers on my handlebar. see it they get it or not..As in your blocking both lanes. I've actually had walkers look at me rude for being on their trail. Even though I'm in the right lane as I should be.

    Should mention here that any user going from Right to left lane should check forwards and backwards before doing so.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  26. #726
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    9,852

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hello lady View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cumberland View Post
    ^ Yep. Dog walkers too, with their leashes stretched over the whole trail.

    It's not difficult to stay to the right, just common courtesy.
    Dog walkers are a bane on my cycling existence. The worst being the dog walker with earphones on that can't hear the bell and 25 feet leash of random canine attached. Canines are like random molecules. They don't walk in a straight line lets just say. Toddlers as well. Those should come with leashes..
    Bikes must rule.! Bike owners are .....
    Its just a comment, no reason to get offended. I was tongue in cheek with that. But as far as dogs they are extremely hazardous to other cyclists. Not to mention the dog. Ever see a dogs chain get caught by a bicycle as its going through? I've seen one lodge on a cyclists crank. The cyclist was severely injured as was the big dog. Dogs are also the bane of people using boards, rollerblades. A dog on a multiuse trail should be properly controlled, on short leash, or otherwise represent a threat to nearly every other user.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  27. #727
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,158

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by hello lady View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cumberland View Post
    ^ Yep. Dog walkers too, with their leashes stretched over the whole trail.

    It's not difficult to stay to the right, just common courtesy.
    Dog walkers are a bane on my cycling existence. The worst being the dog walker with earphones on that can't hear the bell and 25 feet leash of random canine attached. Canines are like random molecules. They don't walk in a straight line lets just say. Toddlers as well. Those should come with leashes..
    Bikes must rule.! Bike owners are .....
    Its just a comment, no reason to get offended. I was tongue in cheek with that. But as far as dogs they are extremely hazardous to other cyclists. Not to mention the dog. Ever see a dogs chain get caught by a bicycle as its going through? I've seen one lodge on a cyclists crank. The cyclist was severely injured as was the big dog. Dogs are also the bane of people using boards, rollerblades. A dog on a multiuse trail should be properly controlled, on short leash, or otherwise represent a threat to nearly every other user.
    I agreed about the dogs/dog owners, I would never let mine go off on a log leash , unless we are in a field

  28. #728
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,153

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by EveB View Post
    I find bells worse than useless for the reasons that Highlander presents. I have no directional sense of hearing and I know that different cyclists like to use different protocols when dealing with pedestrians (some expect the walker to step out of their path, believe it or not). So when I hear a bell, I find myself stopping and shoulder checking to see where the cyclists is and what direction he wants to use to pass. Usually they're well past by then. My irritation lingers though.
    I get perplexed that the rule is not understood. On Multiuse trails there is usually a line painted in the middle. The assumption being to cater to right hand rule and so that any nature of users can use the lanes so as not to run head into each other. So that it should be for all conveyences stay on the right except if you need to pass on the left. Any cyclist expecting the user to move out of the way and out of that lane is confusing the whole purpose of the lanes. Lots of people will state "passing on the left" I thought that that was redundant information and that the bell or Passing should suffice.

    On a bike I'm the faster moving vehicle and can navigate and go in and out of lane much quicker. Why would I expect a pedestrian to do that? All I require is that they contain themselves to the right lane and not take up the whole trail walking abreast. I've seen walkers that walk abreast lining the other trail even so that cyclists upcoming, which they see, actually have to go off the trail to afford the walkers the whole trail. actually this is common. How I deal with people like that when I'm in a mood is come to a complete stop tapping fingers on my handlebar. see it they get it or not..As in your blocking both lanes. I've actually had walkers look at me rude for being on their trail. Even though I'm in the right lane as I should be.

    Should mention here that any user going from Right to left lane should check forwards and backwards before doing so.
    Oh I agree. When I walk on a multi-use trail, I'm on the extreme right of the pavement. You can pass me if you want. Cars pass each other all the time without honking at each other if the rules are understood. What I object to is the occasional cyclist who rings their bell at a short distance *right behind me*. In those cases, muddy shoes are easier to deal with that a collision. They then thank me for getting out of the way. No kidding.

    My most memorable episode was one I witnessed rather than participated in. I was on a multi-use early in the morning in Calgary. Wide trail. There was a guy on crutches making his slow way along. Behind us came a cyclist who then slowed right down, rang her bell insistently until the poor guy went onto the grass so she could proceed on. Are there people who think you've got to *stay* on the right?

  29. #729

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EveB View Post
    Oh I agree. When I walk on a multi-use trail, I'm on the extreme right of the pavement. You can pass me if you want. Cars pass each other all the time without honking at each other if the rules are understood. What I object to is the occasional cyclist who rings their bell at a short distance *right behind me*. In those cases, muddy shoes are easier to deal with that a collision. They then thank me for getting out of the way. No kidding.

    My most memorable episode was one I witnessed rather than participated in. I was on a multi-use early in the morning in Calgary. Wide trail. There was a guy on crutches making his slow way along. Behind us came a cyclist who then slowed right down, rang her bell insistently until the poor guy went onto the grass so she could proceed on. Are there people who think you've got to *stay* on the right?
    The right of way is always the pedestrian's. If you are tall enough, can look determined enough, and can ignore the obscenities about to come your way, you can keep to your walking path until the cyclists go around you. I've done that sometimes. Unfortunately, that is not always an option, as your post shows too well.

  30. #730

    Default

    They should be working on the 103st bike lane now, at least the sign said parking is no longer allowed as of today.

    106 st looked pretty good yesterday, but I really hope that new lights at 104 ave are in the budget. it's not a fun crosswalk as it is.

    I rode the existing lane on 83 ave the other day - still full of winter grit, pretty much had to ride on the line. But at least with no divider I could do that. 106st north of whyte has to be the worst. Completely useless.
    There can only be one.

  31. #731

    Default

    Update on Bike Grid Launch Event - Likely happening late August, to be confirmed. Planning a bunch of events/stations around the grid to get people engaged and exploring the network, as well as education on the new lanes/signals/bike safety. Main launch will most-likely be at the Federal Building plaza (Centennial Plaza). More details to come.

    If you want to get involved somehow, I can point you in the right direction City-wise.
    www.decl.org

  32. #732
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    43,702

    Default

    Time to get the bike tuned up!
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  33. #733
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    43,702

    Default

    Many changes to the configuration of roadways over the last week, PM me with any issues you are seeing.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  34. #734
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    9,852

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Many changes to the configuration of roadways over the last week, PM me with any issues you are seeing.
    Damn potholes...
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  35. #735
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    1,337

    Default

    Ian, unless it's a coincidence it looks to me like they're re-paving the lanes that the bikes will be using. Can you confirm or is it just happenstance that those lanes got re-paved and then turned in to bike lanes?

  36. #736
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    9,413

    Default

    Coincidence. 103 street is not being repaved but has had bike lanes added.

  37. #737

    Default

    I walked long most of the currently under construction routes yesterday, and man they are such a great change. I haven't ridden them yet so I can't speak to that but most of the streets are already much better places simply from being narrowed. Streets that were way too wide are now much more reasonable.

    If the first bit of the network comes in under budget I hope they use the rest for more extensive lanes ASAP. Seeing what they're doing, they should have made a similar lane on McDougall Hill while the foot bridge, the multi-use path up Louise McKinney Park and the stairs below the Mac have all been out of commission.
    There can only be one.

  38. #738
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    43,702

    Default

    ^^
    ^^^

    103st between 102 and 103 ave will be resurfaced. They also reviewed the other roadways to see if repairs or resurfacing was needed.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  39. #739

    Default

    ^ It looks almost done, so if it's not resurfaced before now it's unlikely to be.
    There can only be one.

  40. #740

    Default

    ^Very easy to move bike lanes. It's going to be resurfaced as IanO says.
    www.decl.org

  41. #741

    Default

    Sure, it's easy, but it still doesn't make sense to bother putting in the lines if you're just going to be taking it all off before the lanes are even officially open.

    I really, really, like the "temporary" construction. I think they did a decent job designing the lanes, but the low cost and ease of adjustments is a game changer. I wish they could go back and make the 102ave lane in oliver the same way rather than lock in a path that may be too narrow.
    There can only be one.

  42. #742

    Default

    Is there any maps or pictures of the routes?

  43. #743

    Default

    ^Mandate by Council to get bike lanes installed by June/July. Resurfacing might not be scheduled for same urgency. It was only decided upon during some consultation with stakeholders that expressed concern about that bit of road and how bad of shape it's in. City found some money to do micro resurfacing sometime this construction season.

    I love the temporary too. Such a quick change, can be tweaked.
    www.decl.org

  44. #744

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by barhonda View Post
    Is there any maps or pictures of the routes?
    Google map on City's website. It may change a bit in the next few weeks.

    https://www.edmonton.ca/projects_pla...e-network.aspx
    www.decl.org

  45. #745
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    43,702

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    Sure, it's easy, but it still doesn't make sense to bother putting in the lines if you're just going to be taking it all off before the lanes are even officially open.

    I really, really, like the "temporary" construction. I think they did a decent job designing the lanes, but the low cost and ease of adjustments is a game changer. I wish they could go back and make the 102ave lane in oliver the same way rather than lock in a path that may be too narrow.
    It will be done when with LRT construction paving for 102ave in a couple of years.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  46. #746
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    1,337

    Default

    Awesome, thanks for the responses. I've been riding my bicycle around downtown and have ridden past the bike lanes. I can't wait until I can actually use them!

  47. #747

    Default

    I did a loop along the lanes on my way home yesterday.

    106 and 103 are more notable for taming excessively wide streets than merely providing a safer place to bike.

    -100 ave is going to be a game changer for E-W travel. if there's extra money in the budget somewhere that's the one that needs to be extended ASAP. Keep going west to 116 street where the north-side bidirectional track will be well positioned to continue onto Victoria Promenade, and east too.

    -It's too bad that there won't be a continuous route actually through downtown. 103 ave should be pushed through temporarily until 102 is available.

    -The surface on fancy 96st is really awful. Way worse for cycling than 108st, even if the lane layout and space allocation is way better.
    There can only be one.

  48. #748

    Default

    There's been lots of discussion about 102 Ave/100 Avenue and how to get to Quarters given construction. Unfortuantely no easy solution.

    Oliver is also wanting to see 100 Avenue extended/funded in the not-too-distant future. That should be the next section completed, already identifed in plans.

    It's easy to do north/south connections, there's lot of space on roads for that. What is the game-changer, as you say, is an east/west connection.
    www.decl.org

  49. #749
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    364

    Default

    Downtown bike lanes going in together with all the other construction and lane closures are making for a traffic gong show in the downtown!

  50. #750
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    9,413

    Default

    I haven't noticed much difference, personally. Although I do think that the streets with bike lanes should have periods of "no walk" at the start of the green light sequence. Because most of those streets are now down to a single lane, and with the frequency of people turning either left or right being blocked by pedestrian movement, it's going to make those intersections extremely inefficient for vehicles. It's not uncommon for only a single vehicle to get through on a green light sequence now, because they were turning left or right and could only make that turn on the yellow.

    And before someone chimes in with a THINK OF THE PEDESTRIANS post, the fact is that Edmonton does not have a single pedestrian crossing point that is volume constrained. Having people wander across the intersection for the entire green sequence results in extremely inefficient traffic flow if there's any significant amount of turning traffic, and it's a safety concern as well. Limiting pedestrian movements to the back half or two thirds of the green sequence would result in better and safer traffic flow for everyone.

  51. #751
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    43,702

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by knowitall View Post
    Downtown bike lanes going in together with all the other construction and lane closures are making for a traffic gong show in the downtown!
    Initially, but adjustment of habits, routes and travels will work itself out.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  52. #752

    Default

    It looks to me as though there are still a lot of locations with at least left turn lanes. Where there is an issues I don't think that a delay for pedestrians is much of a solution - it does nothing when it's not the first or second car that needs to turn. Simply shorter light cycles would improve things as much simply by making yellow light turn time come more often, and should make things better for pedestrian to boot.

    The one traffic change that I would like to see besides re-timed lights is a no-right turn on red for traffic that would be turning right across a bike lane onto the street with the lane. That's probably the most dangerous interaction between cars and bike lane traffic - Drivers would now be crossing both the bike lane and the sidewalk against the light to get to the general traffic lane.
    There can only be one.

  53. #753
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    1,941

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    I haven't noticed much difference, personally. Although I do think that the streets with bike lanes should have periods of "no walk" at the start of the green light sequence. Because most of those streets are now down to a single lane, and with the frequency of people turning either left or right being blocked by pedestrian movement, it's going to make those intersections extremely inefficient for vehicles. It's not uncommon for only a single vehicle to get through on a green light sequence now, because they were turning left or right and could only make that turn on the yellow.

    And before someone chimes in with a THINK OF THE PEDESTRIANS post, the fact is that Edmonton does not have a single pedestrian crossing point that is volume constrained. Having people wander across the intersection for the entire green sequence results in extremely inefficient traffic flow if there's any significant amount of turning traffic, and it's a safety concern as well. Limiting pedestrian movements to the back half or two thirds of the green sequence would result in better and safer traffic flow for everyone.
    I would think the opposite is better. End the pedestrian movement sooner. Otherwise cars will perhaps make turns that are unsafe when they don't expect pedestrians. Pedestrians need to respect the no-walk symbols though.

    Here in Ottawa I've seen several lights that have the pedestrian movements start a couple seconds before the green light, likely to prevent those early right turns. And several intersections with bike lanes start with straight green arrows only to start, transitioning to full green lights for all directions a couple seconds later as well.

  54. #754
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    9,413

    Default

    Maybe. But the problem is, pedestrians in downtown Edmonton totally ignore the countdown no-walk phase. They will continue to cross at the end of the green sequence even if they see it count down to zero and then go solid no-walk, so the problem will remain. And I should clarify this is really only a concern where the streets cross Jasper Avenue, given how much of the traffic on the streets will turn left/right on to Jasper.

  55. #755

    Default

    Most urban pedestrians everywhere cross until the bitter end.

  56. #756

    Default

    Surprised big government city hasn't mandated insurance, tax, permit .

  57. #757

    Default

    ^^Thanks for the clarification. Generally, countdowns are not supposed to be turning time and without being able to judge them and walk walking downtown would be much slower - not so much downtown but there are locations where the actual "walk" signal is so short that it's insulting.

    Where there's only one lane, though, it's just as often that you're waiting for opposing traffic, not just pedestrians, and that's something that nothing but conversion to one-way will solve.
    There can only be one.

  58. #758
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    1,941

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    Maybe. But the problem is, pedestrians in downtown Edmonton totally ignore the countdown no-walk phase. They will continue to cross at the end of the green sequence even if they see it count down to zero and then go solid no-walk, so the problem will remain. And I should clarify this is really only a concern where the streets cross Jasper Avenue, given how much of the traffic on the streets will turn left/right on to Jasper.
    Agreed this is a problem. Not sure of the best solution. Scramble intersections? Turn only light phases? Shorter in general lights?

    Maybe with the upgrade to signalling happening along with the bike network, the transportation signal engineers will have more options.

  59. #759

    Default

    ^Ya, I'm waiting to see how the new bike-only signals work as well. Will be interesting.
    www.decl.org

  60. #760

    Default

    Any details on how the 104ave bike path is going to look like? North or south side of 104ave?

  61. #761
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    1,941

    Default

    ^pretty sure that's just extra sidewalk space being designated as a bike also route along 104th ave, vs no bikes allowed on sidewalk currently.

  62. #762

    Default

    ^ It's on the north side, mostly existing sidewalks. just last year a bunch of curb cuts were added to the second sidewalk where it crosses 106, 107 & 108st stubs so either one will be possible, if a obviously compromised bike route. The sidewalk at Rogers place is wide enough most of the time, but the one in front of square 104 is going to be dicey.

    Even without the bike route those street stubs serving 8-15 parking stalls each should be eliminated, or at minimum downgraded to obvious driveways that go up and over the sidewalks rather than the current situation.
    There can only be one.

  63. #763
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    1,337

    Default

    Will they be adding "shared use path" signs to the 104 Ave lanes? And "elephant feet" to indicate to motor traffic that bicycles will be crossing at intersections?

  64. #764

    Default

    ^104 Avenue route details have not been finalized. They are still negotiating with MacEwan and OEG.
    www.decl.org

  65. #765

    Default

    I don't think a shared use path would be a good idea IMO, potential for someone to get hurt would be high during school or events at rogers place.

  66. #766

    Default

    Shared use paths work as longs as cyclists slow down, and most do. The bus stop at 108st will be a major conflict point even with 2 paths.
    There can only be one.

  67. #767

    Default

    There are 33,000 cars per day on 104ave, well within what 2 lanes each way should be able to handle. Actually, they already proved it where rogers place/marriot construction takes up some lane space. It's wouldn't be any kind of traffic disaster to convert a lane to bike lanes, and it would be better than the sidewalk plan. Except politics, I guess.
    There can only be one.

  68. #768

    Default

    The traffic disaster will begin once the slow streetcar bisects downtown IMHO.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  69. #769

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    I walked long most of the currently under construction routes yesterday, and man they are such a great change. I haven't ridden them yet so I can't speak to that but most of the streets are already much better places simply from being narrowed. Streets that were way too wide are now much more reasonable.

    If the first bit of the network comes in under budget I hope they use the rest for more extensive lanes ASAP. Seeing what they're doing, they should have made a similar lane on McDougall Hill while the foot bridge, the multi-use path up Louise McKinney Park and the stairs below the Mac have all been out of commission.
    I agree. I was surprised today how much more urban 103 street feels just from being reconfigured. Well, to be fair, there's been a lot of construction along it as well. But the new traffic pattern clinches it.

  70. #770

    Default

    Another question... do these stay as bike lanes year round?

  71. #771

    Default

    What happen with bikes being able to use a roadway that they need a separate lane now ? Is this lane going be safe for a 2 year old , can I have electric assist ?

  72. #772

    Default

    102 Ave. bike lane construction in Oliver from 111 St. to 124 St. is scheduled to begin mid-May. Construction contract is just being finalized. This should make for a nice connection to the downtown bike grid once completed. I predict a significant increase in cycle commuting traffic from Oliver, Glenora, and Westmount to downtown once completed.

  73. #773
    C2E Bandwidth Hog
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    29,856

    Default

    Not sure if someone asked this, but isn't there already a separation of bike and pedestrian paths between 104 Ave and GMU? I don't remember if they have any signs indicating as such, but I would say they should just do that and most of the work is already done!
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  74. #774

    Default

    There's double sidewalk that was never designed as a bike path, and until last year only one of the two had curb cuts at the mid-campus streets.

    They will probably end up doing what you suggest, but with the bus bus stop at 108, and the one walk dipping down from 106 to 107, and the limited width it's far from an ideal option.
    There can only be one.

  75. #775

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by barhonda View Post
    Another question... do these stay as bike lanes year round?
    Yes, they will be cleared in winter same as the street.
    www.decl.org

  76. #776

    Default

    Downtown Bike Network Meeting this morning. Updates:

    - 104 Avenue route is being relocated to 105 Avenue. This makes more sense I think, will connect to existing infrastructure and less conflict with MacEwan/Rogers. Design is on-going.
    - Paving of sections of 103 Street between 102 and 103 Avenue, plus some sections on 102 Avenue happening next week
    - Might need to be a bit of paving on 105 Avenue, 106 to 109 Street. TBD
    - Hudson's Bay will no longer be able to bring in large tractor trailors to their loading docs. They have agreed to use shorter urban-size delivery trucks.
    - Green intersection/conflict zone markings going in this week. Some were painted on 106 Street yesterday.
    - New traffic signals will start to be installed next week.
    - Sections will open as they are completed.
    - RFP out for new bike racks, possibly larger bike parking areas. New racks going up on 104 Street this spring that will double the amount of bike parking.
    - Property Owners looking at bike facilities for various buildings. Enterprise Square put in 36 new secure stalls for employees. City looking at what kind of secure parking they can provide in their parkades.
    - Update to online resources including Q&A next week
    - Street teams of 8 will be around the grid all summer and into the fall to help educate public.
    - Bike grid team will present to Downtown business crowd at Spring Luncheon of DBA on May 18.

    That's it for now. It's happening fast!
    Last edited by GreenSPACE; 05-05-2017 at 09:52 AM.
    www.decl.org

  77. #777
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    43,702

    Default

    '- 104 Avenue route is being relocated to 105 Avenue. This makes more sense I think, will connect to existing infrastructure and less conflict with MacEwan/Rogers. Design is on-going.'

    A good move IMO and yet another good working group meeting this AM.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  78. #778

    Default

    Yeah, that makes sense.

    If they can do with paint and temporary concrete something like what's supposed to be done in the Columbia Ave plan then this can be a major win for pedestrians too. I'm not sure if there will be less conflict with pedestrians around Rogers Place and MacEwan Station, there's a lot of conflict built into the design of MacEwan Station and not enough room for Cyclists and Pedestrians between the station and Rogers Place.

    Regarding paving, the section east of 109 isn't to bad, it's the part west of 109 that's a disaster. And if they could negotiate with MacEwan to bring the 110st track through the hole in Robbins centre to 105 Ave that would be a massive connectivity improvement.
    There can only be one.

  79. #779

    Default

    So glad to see this happening. The city is starting to get it, in terms of how to build a commuting style bicycle network. I was very opposed to how they were doing it before (ie: a few bits of paint on the road all over the city without any protection/infrastructure). Starting from downtown with proper bike lanes and proper infrastructure will make this a success, and will help expand it beyond the starter downtown network.

    Good job to those involved in the planning of this, with a nod to the city admin for finally getting something right.

    Hopefully these bike lanes will be well maintained. The sloppy work done prior to this was really just slapping some bike logos on the road and calling it a day.
    Last edited by Medwards; 05-05-2017 at 11:23 AM.

  80. #780

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    Yeah, that makes sense.
    ... like what's supposed to be done in the Columbia Ave plan then this can be a major win for pedestrians too... .
    Just has another look at the parts of the Columbia avenue plan that I could find online, and I have to take that back.

    What we're getting downtown is better than the Columbia avenue plan in terms of space allocations and separation from motor traffic. Lets get actual bike infrastructure people to re-do the Columbia avenue plan instead.

    And I'm really looking forward to what they come up with for the bits north of EPCOR/CN/RAM. There's some opportunity there, and some tricky bits. If they manage to pave 3m of the living bridge and the ramp down to 105ave I will be eternally grateful.
    There can only be one.

  81. #781
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    43,702

    Default

    Maintenance will be of a high level, especially with snow removal.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  82. #782
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    1,337

    Default

    So now that it's on 105 Ave is it going to be separate bike lanes? No longer a multi-use trail?

  83. #783
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,354

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    '- 104 Avenue route is being relocated to 105 Avenue. This makes more sense I think, will connect to existing infrastructure and less conflict with MacEwan/Rogers. Design is on-going.'

    A good move IMO and yet another good working group meeting this AM.
    Too bad the 105 Ave trail runs into the Epcor parkade east of 101 Street. Otherwise there would have been a seamless connection to the multi-use trail adjacent to the LRT ROW that starts east of 97 Street.

    As this things stand, cyclists and walkers are forced half a block north into a narrow back lane where they have to dodge folks entering and leaving the George Spady Centre. Terrible planning considering the Epcor Parkade was built after the LRT ROW multi-use trail.

  84. #784
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    43,702
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  85. #785
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    43,702

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mla View Post
    So now that it's on 105 Ave is it going to be separate bike lanes? No longer a multi-use trail?
    They are working on the plans now, separated bike lanes.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  86. #786
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    43,702

    Default

    Exemplifies the reason FOR the protected bike network.


    https://twitter.com/IanOyeg
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  87. #787
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,317

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    And if they could negotiate with MacEwan to bring the 110st track through the hole in Robbins centre to 105 Ave that would be a massive connectivity improvement.
    That should have happened years ago. At least you can get by on the sidewalk now, but MacEwan really needs to make a hole in the concrete barrier with the fence on top.

    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    Too bad the 105 Ave trail runs into the Epcor parkade east of 101 Street. Otherwise there would have been a seamless connection to the multi-use trail adjacent to the LRT ROW that starts east of 97 Street.

    As this things stand, cyclists and walkers are forced half a block north into a narrow back lane where they have to dodge folks entering and leaving the George Spady Centre. Terrible planning considering the Epcor Parkade was built after the LRT ROW multi-use trail.
    That and the failure to put a multi-use trail between the LRT station and Rogers place, and forcing everyone through a way too narrow LRT crossing to get to 105 St. I just use 106 Av instead (and fortunately I normally turn on 101 St so I can avoid the cyclist-unfriendly mess they made of 106 Av between 101 St and 97 St).

  88. #788

  89. #789

    Default

    ^^
    I don't mind the 101 to 97st section at all. Traffic is light enough and slow enough that it's not at all intimidating (to me)

    The horrible pavement conditions further west combined with heavier traffic and really awful signal timing is why I use 105 instead.
    There can only be one.

  90. #790
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    43,702

    Default

    Accessible cycling options coming to Downtown

    May 9, 2017

    Media are invited to an update on the progress of the Downtown Bike Network. Councillor Ben Henderson and the project team will provide an overview of the Downtown Bike Network including the adaptable design, installation and timelines.

    Date: Wednesday, May 10, 2017
    Time: 12:00 pm
    Location: Latitude 53, 10242 106 Street

    The Downtown Bike Network is 7.8 km of protected bike lanes and shared use paths being implemented in Edmonton’s Downtown core. It will provide an all-ages, accessible option for cyclists to travel within Downtown.

    Media contact:

    Kristi Bland
    Communications Advisor, City of Edmonton
    780-495-9904
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  91. #791

    Default

    It's starting to look like a real network.

    Lane markings are up on the 110st stub south of 104ave, 102a ave east from downtown, single-direction paths on 96st between the LRT multiuse path and 103A ave. Really just 102 ave and 105 ave left, plus connections through MacEwan. I really hope MacEwan can be convinced to give up the parking spots on the 106st line, especially on the south side. Just 10 spots take up a huge amount of space and will make it much more difficult to make a really AAA route trough there.

    110st in the middle of Macewan is even more compromised by parking and parking access.
    There can only be one.

  92. #792
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    9,413

    Default

    Seems to me that an error has been made at 103 street and Jasper Avenue. Not in the bike lane, as I haven't had a chance to use them yet (most are still not open, anyways). But the North/South traffic lane realignment at Jasper Avenue makes little sense. Heading North, there is a straight/right lane, and a short left hand turn lane. All good there. Heading South, there is a single lane with no left turn lane. Yet, the Northbound lane on the North side of the intersection is basically two lanes wide, yet only has a single lane. Why in the heck is that space not being used for a Southbound to Eastbound turning lane? There is no need for the Northbound travel lane to be 30 feet wide.

    I'm probably missing something obvious.

  93. #793

    Default

    No, I think you're right, there should be a turn lane rather than an extra entrance lane. They got it right everywhere else, though, that this one is wrong is extra strange.
    There can only be one.

  94. #794
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    43,702

    Default

    New cycling options coming to Downtown this summer

    May 10, 2017

    The Downtown Bike Network is on its way! Construction of 7.8 kilometres of protected bike lanes and shared use paths running throughout Edmonton’s core began in early April with the removal of existing pavement markings, and the installation of new markings, flex bollards, signage and signal phasing.

    The network will provide an all-ages, safe environment for cyclists to be separated from other modes of transportation. It is another way for the City to meet the transportation needs of all our citizens and contributes to building a livable and vibrant city.

    Construction of the network will continue over the next two months, with the majority of the network anticipated to be complete by July. Parking restrictions will be in place along the network during the installation, and all modes of transportation are reminded to watch for continued on-street changes to parking, signs, concrete curbs and signals over the next two months.

    After extensive review, a new East - West connector route was selected resulting in the network moving from 104 Avenue to 105 Avenue. The new design will provide enhanced cycling options, by connecting 105 Avenue from 116 Street to 101 Street on the north side through to Queen Mary Park. Due to this change, this part of the network will open later this summer. A detailed map of the network has been released and can be viewed at Edmonton.ca/BikeDowntown.

    A survey is also now available for individuals to provide feedback. The survey is one part of the evaluation and monitoring program that will determine how adjustments will be made as needed to keep the network a safe and accessible transportation option, while minimizing impacts on other modes of transportation. There will be an evaluation period to determine how the network is operating before any potential changes are considered.

    A public launch party to officially open the grid is planned for August 26. Additional details on this one-day festival will be announced in the coming months.

    In June 2014, Edmonton City Council approved the 2014-2018 Bike Infrastructure Plan, which identified the need to build high-quality bike lanes in core areas of the city, including downtown. The Downtown Bike Network was approved by City Council in October 2016, to be open by summer 2017.

    For more information:

    edmonton.ca/BikeDowntown

    Complete the survey



    Media contact:

    Kristi Bland
    Communications Advisor, City of Edmonton
    780-495-9904
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  95. #795

    Default

    August 26, just as summer is ending?
    I feel in no way entitled to your opinion...

  96. #796
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    43,702

    Default

    That's the party, lanes open early July.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  97. #797

    Default

    The lack of a continuous route between Churchill square and 103st is a big fail, and sidewalks along 104st are a poor substitute.

    103ave would work, for the east-west connection, and 102st north of 103 ave should be the temporary route until 103 is complete. The only limitation is space past the Stantec tower construction site, but if they can make their winter garden exit through the construction site work they should be able to do the same for a lane half as wide and entirely outside the building. The rest of 103ave is wider than it needs to be for the amount of use it gets.
    There can only be one.

  98. #798

    Default

    ^It's been brought up multiple times. So far no solutions from the City.
    www.decl.org

  99. #799
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,354

    Default

    What is happening with Bus Stop #1941 (SB on 107 Street just south of 100 Avenue)? It's a busy stop (especially during peak periods) currently serving 6 different bus routes. Will the bus stop be kept in its current location thereby impeding SB and NB bicycles, or moved over into the traffic lane thereby impeding SB vehicles?

  100. #800

    Default

    I should take some videos at intersections where these bike lanes go through...absolute confusion. And of course Edmonton drivers being Edmonton drivers don't pay attention to signage or road markings...
    The city needs to make it a bit more obvious that you're in a turning lane. I see cars in left turning lane going through and right turning lane going through. And being Edmonton drivers, no one gives the horn, so everyone does the weird stutter dance inside the intersection

    Anyhow here's a photo:


    DSC_1619


    pulling out onto the road will be testing a lot of our drivers

Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 4567891011 LastLast

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
  •