cliffapotamus
Active Member
Trailforks is great for finding fun trails in the River Valley, it’s missing a lot the bike paths etc you’d need to commute, but it’s great for fun detours!
I’ve only commuted by bike casually, ‘commute’ meaning going to or from work, as a opposed to a more casual appointment or time commitment (tbh I used to bike to work when the bus was liable to make me late lol)
That being said, this summer covid has given me the free time to really explore the city by bike. From home in Westmount, I’ve managed to cross the Henday in each corner of the city (NE, NW, SE, SW) and do a lot of exploring within the ring road, from central neighbouroods with bike lanes, to midcentury areas where bike infrastructure is an afterthought, to our (surprisingly very bikeable!) new suburbs. In terms of trying to navigate the entire breadth of the city, ie visiting any destination, not just central urban areas, I have a few observations:
We have an insanely convoluted Bike network: As shown in the image I shared from Global News, the city has a few different categories of bikeable network, with several types of bike lane, and the omnipresent Mixed Use Paths (MUP). The MUPs are the most prevalent by far, especially in suburbs, and in newer areas are decently practical in terms of connecting destinations. The bike lanes are a complete gongshow. Edmonton has tried to follow the latest, safest practices when building lanes. That means every couple years the typical ‘section’ or layout of an on-street bike lane changes. As a cyclist, you gotta learn how to navigate each type, how to handle all the bizarre intersections (downtown bike boxes, pedestrian-only arterial crossings connecting MUPs, etc) and tbh be comfortable riding on the road for a block (or walking on the sidewalk, riding on the sidewalk is a no-no in most cases) to make connections.
MUPs are great, but inconsistent in design: MUPs are everywhere, and if you can work on into your route, they’re awesome. Shared between pedestrians and bikes (anything but cars really) these are the 8’-10’ asphalt paths in new neighbourhoods and the river valley. Bikes can and do use these, even to commute. (people use River Valley Road to commute to the West End year round, it’s wild!) these paths nominally make up almost 1200km of our bike network, but those 1200km are inconsistent. Some older areas (ie NW Mill Woods, a lot of our 1960s-1970s neighbourhoods) have MUPs that are just 7’ sidewalks with MUP signs on them, or worse the little blue bike signs the city used in the 70’s. These paths are pinch points, too narrow to pass a pedestrian politely, but often comprise the links between modern bike lanes and MUPs further out in the suburbs. If you plan on bike commuting to DT from an outer suburb, you’ll run into these awkward paths. Sometimes it’s better to ride on the street. I personally like the idea of MUPs, especially in low-traffic areas. The wide pavement allows for negotiation between users, and they are a great pedestrian facility too. But that being said, figuring out how to use one that is consistent all the way to your destination is tricky.
We have strange maps: CoE is constantly building new lanes/paths, and constantly updating maps as a result. This makes keeping track of the system, and trying to use a wayfinding service like Google Maps Directions tricky at the best of times. CoE also makes the dumb choice of splitting maps of the (completely contiguous) central bike lane network into three. With the DT, WC, and Strath areas considered separate, making wayfinding difficult. This compounded with inconsistent signage on the ground makes it awkward to plan trips to new places, and to actually make the journey.
The new CoE living Map shows the whole network, but is super slow to load, lacks a 'Directions' function, and shows the paths by type, meaning MUPs and every type of bike lane is a different colour, making it hard to discern contiguous routes and plan a trip. it is also a bit buried, harder to find on the CoE website than the pdf maps mentioned above.
Google Can’t keep up: adding to the above point, our bike lane/MUP system is really complex, and poorly presented. Something I’ve run into in my adventures is that Google, in all it’s aggregator glory, can’t make sense of bike routes, and will often route people along roads (riding with cars) rather than on MUPs. I’m not technical enough to know what in the computer world drives all this, but I’ve found you have to turn on satellite view on google maps to double-check the route and find the bike paths to use. An Example: It is possible to ride on MUPs from Mill Woods TC to the Hotel Mac (it takes an hour, not a bad ride actually!) Google offers it’s usual 3 routes, all of which involve a lot of street-riding. Using the 28 ave MUP to 91 ave MUP to the Argyll Velodrome an in down Mill Creek (avoiding street riding entirely) is not presented as an option, despite being shorter than some of the street-riding options. I have tried inputting this and a few other routes into google manually, and it doesn’t recognize a lot of the paths and routes properly. For example, in the above example, Google sends riders through the neighbourhood for several blocks, street riding without so much as a sharrow. The route is parallel and slightly longer than simply using the MUP directly across 63rd Ave from 91st street. I’m not a computer person, but it seems to me that google can’t read our bike route maps properly. This is an issue, because people go to google for directions, and often will not check a normal map and find a route themselves. CoE doesn’t have it’s own bike wayfinding service either.
We have a lot of rules for biking that no one knows: Our crazy Bike network present a plethora of weird traffic situations that reduce safety and create tension. A big one is the MUPs. Most people, especially in DT and where the paths are often busy, walk on the right, pass on the left, etc. but where paths are quieter and/or narrower, people treat them as sidewalks, and although signs say you can bike on them, it is still a confusing situation to navigate passing etc. Our bike lane network is also super varied (see comments about the ‘typical design/section’ changing every couple years) and gives bikes and cars different rules to follow. These setups can also change block-to-block along a corridor (105 Ave between 118 and 116 street, and the 107 street corridor, continuous from Saskatchewan Drive to the Whitemud, but going from shared sidewalk, to separated bike lanes, to painted lanes, to sharrows, both are handy but awkward to use) this situation makes it hard for casual riders and people new to an area to use the system properly, to the ire of pedestrians and cars. CoE has some very basic info on the website of how these setups work, but they do not address each case. Also, no one reads that crap. Living on a bike route, I see cars drive down the (physically separated!) bike lanes, and cyclists ignore things as basic as stop signs, which DO APPLY, AT THE VERY LEAST YEILD TO THE CAR THAT GOT THERE FIRST. Anyways, the rules are weird, poorly explained, and not followed.
Sorry this is so long, I hope it explains a couple things to look into. If you want to bike in the city, casually or commuting, start small and basic. Plot a route on google maps (with satellite on to make sure the path actually exists and google isn’t ignoring a bike path nearby that would be safer) and ride it a couple times. Get used to the path setups and how to navigate the intersections/connections. Branch out as you feel comfortable, and explore when you can. I’m amazed at how well things like the MUP by the NE LRT connect the suburbs with DT, and make travel times comparable to a car.
Lastly, you make a point about commuting in the River Valley. Yes, people do this, I see people doing it often, depending on where you want to go, it can actually be the fastest route. When I say take detours to find new paths, I highly suggest diving down a ravine either paved path from google or dirt from trailforks!) and seeing where it takes you. Ravines in the SW especially get you very close to West Ed Mall and Windermere.
Good luck! Don’t ask about winter. People do it. They’re absolute beasts.
I’ve only commuted by bike casually, ‘commute’ meaning going to or from work, as a opposed to a more casual appointment or time commitment (tbh I used to bike to work when the bus was liable to make me late lol)
That being said, this summer covid has given me the free time to really explore the city by bike. From home in Westmount, I’ve managed to cross the Henday in each corner of the city (NE, NW, SE, SW) and do a lot of exploring within the ring road, from central neighbouroods with bike lanes, to midcentury areas where bike infrastructure is an afterthought, to our (surprisingly very bikeable!) new suburbs. In terms of trying to navigate the entire breadth of the city, ie visiting any destination, not just central urban areas, I have a few observations:
We have an insanely convoluted Bike network: As shown in the image I shared from Global News, the city has a few different categories of bikeable network, with several types of bike lane, and the omnipresent Mixed Use Paths (MUP). The MUPs are the most prevalent by far, especially in suburbs, and in newer areas are decently practical in terms of connecting destinations. The bike lanes are a complete gongshow. Edmonton has tried to follow the latest, safest practices when building lanes. That means every couple years the typical ‘section’ or layout of an on-street bike lane changes. As a cyclist, you gotta learn how to navigate each type, how to handle all the bizarre intersections (downtown bike boxes, pedestrian-only arterial crossings connecting MUPs, etc) and tbh be comfortable riding on the road for a block (or walking on the sidewalk, riding on the sidewalk is a no-no in most cases) to make connections.
MUPs are great, but inconsistent in design: MUPs are everywhere, and if you can work on into your route, they’re awesome. Shared between pedestrians and bikes (anything but cars really) these are the 8’-10’ asphalt paths in new neighbourhoods and the river valley. Bikes can and do use these, even to commute. (people use River Valley Road to commute to the West End year round, it’s wild!) these paths nominally make up almost 1200km of our bike network, but those 1200km are inconsistent. Some older areas (ie NW Mill Woods, a lot of our 1960s-1970s neighbourhoods) have MUPs that are just 7’ sidewalks with MUP signs on them, or worse the little blue bike signs the city used in the 70’s. These paths are pinch points, too narrow to pass a pedestrian politely, but often comprise the links between modern bike lanes and MUPs further out in the suburbs. If you plan on bike commuting to DT from an outer suburb, you’ll run into these awkward paths. Sometimes it’s better to ride on the street. I personally like the idea of MUPs, especially in low-traffic areas. The wide pavement allows for negotiation between users, and they are a great pedestrian facility too. But that being said, figuring out how to use one that is consistent all the way to your destination is tricky.
We have strange maps: CoE is constantly building new lanes/paths, and constantly updating maps as a result. This makes keeping track of the system, and trying to use a wayfinding service like Google Maps Directions tricky at the best of times. CoE also makes the dumb choice of splitting maps of the (completely contiguous) central bike lane network into three. With the DT, WC, and Strath areas considered separate, making wayfinding difficult. This compounded with inconsistent signage on the ground makes it awkward to plan trips to new places, and to actually make the journey.
The new CoE living Map shows the whole network, but is super slow to load, lacks a 'Directions' function, and shows the paths by type, meaning MUPs and every type of bike lane is a different colour, making it hard to discern contiguous routes and plan a trip. it is also a bit buried, harder to find on the CoE website than the pdf maps mentioned above.
Google Can’t keep up: adding to the above point, our bike lane/MUP system is really complex, and poorly presented. Something I’ve run into in my adventures is that Google, in all it’s aggregator glory, can’t make sense of bike routes, and will often route people along roads (riding with cars) rather than on MUPs. I’m not technical enough to know what in the computer world drives all this, but I’ve found you have to turn on satellite view on google maps to double-check the route and find the bike paths to use. An Example: It is possible to ride on MUPs from Mill Woods TC to the Hotel Mac (it takes an hour, not a bad ride actually!) Google offers it’s usual 3 routes, all of which involve a lot of street-riding. Using the 28 ave MUP to 91 ave MUP to the Argyll Velodrome an in down Mill Creek (avoiding street riding entirely) is not presented as an option, despite being shorter than some of the street-riding options. I have tried inputting this and a few other routes into google manually, and it doesn’t recognize a lot of the paths and routes properly. For example, in the above example, Google sends riders through the neighbourhood for several blocks, street riding without so much as a sharrow. The route is parallel and slightly longer than simply using the MUP directly across 63rd Ave from 91st street. I’m not a computer person, but it seems to me that google can’t read our bike route maps properly. This is an issue, because people go to google for directions, and often will not check a normal map and find a route themselves. CoE doesn’t have it’s own bike wayfinding service either.
We have a lot of rules for biking that no one knows: Our crazy Bike network present a plethora of weird traffic situations that reduce safety and create tension. A big one is the MUPs. Most people, especially in DT and where the paths are often busy, walk on the right, pass on the left, etc. but where paths are quieter and/or narrower, people treat them as sidewalks, and although signs say you can bike on them, it is still a confusing situation to navigate passing etc. Our bike lane network is also super varied (see comments about the ‘typical design/section’ changing every couple years) and gives bikes and cars different rules to follow. These setups can also change block-to-block along a corridor (105 Ave between 118 and 116 street, and the 107 street corridor, continuous from Saskatchewan Drive to the Whitemud, but going from shared sidewalk, to separated bike lanes, to painted lanes, to sharrows, both are handy but awkward to use) this situation makes it hard for casual riders and people new to an area to use the system properly, to the ire of pedestrians and cars. CoE has some very basic info on the website of how these setups work, but they do not address each case. Also, no one reads that crap. Living on a bike route, I see cars drive down the (physically separated!) bike lanes, and cyclists ignore things as basic as stop signs, which DO APPLY, AT THE VERY LEAST YEILD TO THE CAR THAT GOT THERE FIRST. Anyways, the rules are weird, poorly explained, and not followed.
Sorry this is so long, I hope it explains a couple things to look into. If you want to bike in the city, casually or commuting, start small and basic. Plot a route on google maps (with satellite on to make sure the path actually exists and google isn’t ignoring a bike path nearby that would be safer) and ride it a couple times. Get used to the path setups and how to navigate the intersections/connections. Branch out as you feel comfortable, and explore when you can. I’m amazed at how well things like the MUP by the NE LRT connect the suburbs with DT, and make travel times comparable to a car.
Lastly, you make a point about commuting in the River Valley. Yes, people do this, I see people doing it often, depending on where you want to go, it can actually be the fastest route. When I say take detours to find new paths, I highly suggest diving down a ravine either paved path from google or dirt from trailforks!) and seeing where it takes you. Ravines in the SW especially get you very close to West Ed Mall and Windermere.
Good luck! Don’t ask about winter. People do it. They’re absolute beasts.
