News   Apr 03, 2020
From the Editor: A Message to Our Readers
 9.1K     3 
News   Apr 02, 2020
Topping Off March 2020: What's Hot on SkyriseEdmonton
 10K     0 
News   Apr 02, 2020
News Roundup for April 2, 2020
 3.3K     0 

132 Ave Renewal

TAS said:
I like that he shares the traffic volume data in this great clip - would be nice if Dreeshen could understand the data and facts.

In terms of what to call them, I'm not big on trying to avoid 'bike lane' - don't see a new name gaining much traction.

Click to expand...
I thought about including that in my letter. But instead I've settled for explaining to him what a collector road is (since he's new to the world of transportation planning), and invoking the founder of the all powerful Edmonton bicycle lobby, Major General the honourable William Antrobus Griesbach, Companion of the Order of the Bath, and the Order of Michael and St. George, Distinguished Service Order w/ Bar, Volunteer Officer's Decoration, King's Counsel, Conservative MP and Senator, who will manifest to glare at him like this if he should dare to restrict traditional modes of transport.


William_Griesbach.JPG
 
https://www.reddit.com/r/Edmonton/comments/1kh527x/car_driver_should_have_looked_both_ways_and

A video of a child impacted by a car on Riverbend Road, which is another 4-lane neighborhood collector where cars drive too fast and no child would feel safe biking on on the roadway.

This child clearly felt safest on the sidewalk rather than on the roadway. While the driver is at fault, the design of the road itself is creating these unnecessary conflict points. Would love to see riverbend road get a similar treatment to 132 Ave.

Looking at this incident is a reminder of just how amazing the 132 Ave project is and how it could have avoided a scenario like this.
 
Last edited:
biketime said:
A video of a child impacted by a car on Riverbend Road, which is another 4-lane neighborhood collector where cars drive too fast and no child would feel safe biking on on the roadway.

This child clearly felt safest on the sidewalk rather than on the roadway. While the driver is at fault, the design of the road itself is creating these unnecessary conflict points. Would love to see riverbend road get a similar treatment to 132 Ave.
Click to expand...
There is really no sufficient MUP, the sidwalks are old, and the pavement is crumbling in most places around where the video is from. It'd be nice if there were at least a decent multiuse trail heading towards the dog park as a continuation of the power lines trail, meeting up with Whitemud Road (heading down to the Ft Edmonton footbridge). I'm comfortable riding on the road here but definitely understand why others might not be.

EDIT: here's the route in question. Even better there are minimal road crossings if the path were to be on west side of the road.

Screenshot 2025-05-08 at 5.11.12 PM.png
 
BrettB said:
This is one of those times where it doesn't really matter who was at fault, if the collision were worse, only one of them was risking their life. Glad it didn't turn out too badly.
Click to expand...
I think that close calls like this definitely require we consider who is at fault in order to actually take the steps necessary to prevent this from happening again. I also think that the road design itself needs to be a bigger part of this discussion and can take lots of the blame here.

The city could look at this and have temporary concrete barriers and curb extensions set up in an afternoon if they wanted to.
 
ntt1 said:
There is really no sufficient MUP, the sidwalks are old, and the pavement is crumbling in most places around where the video is from. It'd be nice if there were at least a decent multiuse trail heading towards the dog park as a continuation of the power lines trail, meeting up with Whitemud Road (heading down to the Ft Edmonton footbridge). I'm comfortable riding on the road here but definitely understand why others might not be.

EDIT: here's the route in question. Even better there are minimal road crossings if the path were to be on west side of the road.

View attachment 649811
Click to expand...
Classic example of where a MUP would be in a new suburb. No brainer to add one during renewal.
 
Whenever a great urban project is proposed there are so many people who aggressively fight it - but afterwards people can't imagine going back to how it was.
Paraphrasing from Not Just Bikes episode today.

#completestreets

This is a direct quote/image from the video.
Screenshot_20250525_080648_YouTube.jpg



 
Last edited:
Offworld said:
I appreciate what is trying to be accomplished. However, with the name lifted from Critical Mass in Vancouver, it feels somewhat creepy to use children in any fashion to achieve an objective. Adults using children is not a good look. However, only my opinion.
Click to expand...
Not that deep.

Kidical mass is a global movement. Been around for almost 20 years.

Not sure how calling a kids bike ride kidical is creepy…
 
Offworld said:
I appreciate what is trying to be accomplished. However, with the name lifted from Critical Mass in Vancouver, it feels somewhat creepy to use children in any fashion to achieve an objective. Adults using children is not a good look. However, only my opinion.
Click to expand...

Kidical mass rides are world-wide.
kidsonbike.org

Kidical Mass - Home - Kids on Bike

The Kidical Mass has the vision that all children can move safely and independently by bike and on foot. #KidicalMass #StreetsForEveryone
kidsonbike.org kidsonbike.org

And Critical Mass is not exclusive to Vancouver nor did it originate there.
 
^ My point is that naming a childrens' event eerily similar to an aggressive advocacy group just feels wrong. Keep the two entirely separate, organizational and all. Otherwise, the perception of an advocacy group using children with a thinly veiled association has a creepy feel to it.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top