Cycling and Active Transportation in Edmonton

[northlands]

I have the vaguest memory of a bike sharing program in Edmonton in the late 00s. Does anyone remember the specifics about it?

 

[thommyjo]

I would love to see a bikeshare pilot in Edmonton, especially in the core area of Downtown / wîhkwêntôwin / Strathcona / Garneau area that's all geographically close but not always that well connected by public transit due to the river. As far as I know, BIXI lost money for a solid decade—which is fine from my perspective, as I think it's fine to subsidize these things a bit to avoid the negative externalities of driving—but given the touchiness of budgetary issues at the moment, especially as it concerns cycling, it feels like a political non-starter to propose something similar here.

One of the most annoying problems for BIXI is that everyone tries to get from the Plateau / Rosemont to downtown in the morning and return in the evening, requiring trucks to go around redistributing bikes in midday. Would that be less of an issue for Edmonton, or more?

Yeah. The logistics and flow patterns definitely take some work to sort out. Not sure how we might fair. I could imagine our north south over the river movements might create more balance than many cities experience? Many in Strathcona work downtown or those downtown work/study at the UofA, etc.

The economics of it is for sure a hurdle. I think it would need to be run by ETS and ARC based to sync with transit. Target trips to stations and major destinations to start. Have a monthly “add on” for bike use for ARC. Or let it contribute to your fare capping total.

Our scooter/ebike popularity from private companies shows there’s a market. And our river creates a great need for quick transportation across it. Which transit isn’t great for. And for leisure within in.

Winter of course would be a huge cost/challenge.

 

[constance_chlore]

Yeah, I agree that that core area is polycentric enough that it might not really matter too much. If broadened beyond that, there might be more net movement from residential communities to the core, which isn't necessarily a problem but could get frustrating if the docks in residential communities are always drained by 8:30 AM. I always thought Montréal needed to implement stronger incentives than their current Amis BIXI points program to get people to ride bikes towards areas that need them. I like the idea of having it linked to the ARC card.

The standard BIXI seasonal subscription doesn't cover winter, and the density of stations is reduced, which also frees up some more parking. I think that would be fine for Edmonton, too.

 

[archited]

Bicycling can be used as a metaphor for life in a number of ways, including:
Challenges
Life can be like a bicycle ride, with challenges and triumphs. Overcoming obstacles can help build resilience and inner strength, and each challenge can lead to personal growth.
Second nature
The phrase "just like riding a bike" describes something that should be easy to do because it comes naturally.
Frame of reference
The bicycle frame can represent a person's skills, interests, values, and commitments.
Lenses
The lenses through which we view the world can affect our mood.
Community
Cycling can be a more communal experience than people might expect, with cyclists supporting and encouraging each other.
Brain health
Cycling can help people find inspiration and solve problems, which can lead to creativity and better brain health.
It would be nice to see a Street dedicated to "the bicycle" -- I nominate 106th Street in Edmonton's Downtown and we could change the name to Via Velocipede
A velocipede is a human-powered vehicle with wheels that is propelled by the rider. The modern bicycle is the most common type of velocipede.
The word velocipede comes from the French word vélocipède, which comes from the Latin words vēlōc- and vēlōx, meaning "swift, rapid".
Here are some facts about the history of the velocipede:
The first frame-wheel machine was created in Paris, France in the late 18th century. It was called the celerifere.
In 1817, Baron Karl von Drais invented the first usable "bicycle" in Germany. It was called a Hobby Horse and was made almost entirely of wood.
The Michaux family of Paris reinvented the velocipede in the 1860s. Their version was made of iron and wood, had no springs, and was nicknamed the "boneshaker".
The velocipede was eventually replaced by the safety bicycle, which had a chain-driven rear wheel.
Imagine the retail and entertainment possibilities...
Retail: Bicycle sales shop, skateboard (summer) and snowboard (winter) shop, rollerblade/rollerskate shop, exercise gym and exercise equipment sales, automated bicycle parking structure (especially across from the Warehouse Park), bicycle accessory shop
Entertainment: bicycle bar and eatery, bicycle drive-in theatre (ride up to a heated/cooled seat with overhead weather protection -- otherwise outdoors -- could be a viable alternative for one of Edmonton's famous parking lots), velocipede museum

bicycle challenge course (obstacles and ride challenge factors), Bicycle Rally Headquarters, Pedal Pushers Club Pedal cart vendors could set up along the street and into the Warehouse park -- Ice Cream vendors, coffee vendors, snack carts, etc.
"Oh what fun it is to ride..."
Near to the downtown Universities I think the idea could rapidly gain in popularity and there are soon to be new high-rise edifices along 106th Street there -- imagine it they differentiated themselves from other buildings by picking up on the velocipede theme! -- offering retail and entertainment possibilities. And 102nd Ave that intersects 106th Street downtown is already scheduled to have upscale Bike Lanes.

 

[David A]

I would love to see a bikeshare pilot in Edmonton, especially in the core area of Downtown / wîhkwêntôwin / Strathcona / Garneau area that's all geographically close but not always that well connected by public transit due to the river. As far as I know, BIXI lost money for a solid decade—which is fine from my perspective, as I think it's fine to subsidize these things a bit to avoid the negative externalities of driving—but given the touchiness of budgetary issues at the moment, especially as it concerns cycling, it feels like a political non-starter to propose something similar here.

One of the most annoying problems for BIXI is that everyone tries to get from the Plateau / Rosemont to downtown in the morning and return in the evening, requiring trucks to go around redistributing bikes in midday. Would that be less of an issue for Edmonton, or more?

I only used it once, but I really liked BIXI and wished we had it too. I feel It would encourage a lot more bike use, particularly for those who don't have space for or want to maintain a bike.

I had also heard it lost money, which led to some controversy there, but I don't think transit alternatives are about making money as much as enhancing getting around the city. So I would be ok with a subsidy too.

I don't know if it could be a year round thing and where it would cover would be an issue to, but I would like to see something like this run by the city.

 

[thommyjo]

I only used it once, but I really liked BIXI and wished we had it too. I feel It would encourage a lot more bike use, particularly for those who don't have space for or want to maintain a bike.

I had also heard it lost money, which led to some controversy there, but I don't think transit alternatives are about making money as much as enhancing getting around the city. So I would be ok with a subsidy too.

I don't know if it could be a year round thing and where it would cover would be an issue to, but I would like to see something like this run by the city.

Yeah. I think the goal has to be to reduce losses, but we can’t expect it to make money. The benefits have to be bigger than financial. The question is, how much can it lose and still be justifiable? What’s reasonable for the positive externalities?

Benefit of running it through ETS:

1) integration of payment
2) integration of planning, docks, stations
3) counted within a larger budget with a shared goal/mandate.

The last point isn’t about hiding, but about not letting it be singled out unfairly. Think bike lanes in neighbour renewal and arterial renewal projects vs the big splashy 100mil project.

 

[CplKlinger]

Has anyone heard more about this? This is news to me.

"According to the city, the Government of Alberta plans to create its own legislation relating to cycling infrastructure"

I hope they're not going the Ontario route...

New bicycle regulations approved in Lethbridge

LETHBRIDGE, AB - Lethbridge City Council has approved a series of changes to the way bicycles are regulated.At...

lethbridgenewsnow.com

 

[thommyjo]

Has anyone heard more about this? This is news to me.

"According to the city, the Government of Alberta plans to create its own legislation relating to cycling infrastructure"

I hope they're not going the Ontario route...

New bicycle regulations approved in Lethbridge

LETHBRIDGE, AB - Lethbridge City Council has approved a series of changes to the way bicycles are regulated.At...

lethbridgenewsnow.com

Not surprised one bit and exactly why I’m not supportive of temporary installations. 95% of the time, we don’t need “engagement” and “studies”. There are best practices from around the world to learn from and implement without local research for 2 years being needed (see Victoria promenade).

Get stuff built, with concrete, and move on.

One advantage we have is that so many routes are MUPs or secondary streets (110st vs 109st for example). So we aren’t as exposed as Toronto to losing a bunch of key routes.

 

[trevorhayden]

What the absolute eff. I don't trust the UCP one bit to write any laws about bikes that is in the public interest! If the new law doesn't permit protected bike routes on streets as of right, it should be considered an active safety threat to all Albertans.

 

[trevorhayden]

To be fair, we don't know what is the proposed changes yet. I am not hopeful.

 

[Gronk!]

Has anyone heard more about this? This is news to me.

"According to the city, the Government of Alberta plans to create its own legislation relating to cycling infrastructure"

I hope they're not going the Ontario route...

New bicycle regulations approved in Lethbridge

LETHBRIDGE, AB - Lethbridge City Council has approved a series of changes to the way bicycles are regulated.At...

lethbridgenewsnow.com

Typical Alberta UCP - if it's not run on oil and gas then it's not worth spending money on.
Besides, this is Edmonton's municipality. Why can't the UCP stay in their own lane?

 

[constance_chlore]

One advantage we have is that so many routes are MUPs or secondary streets (110st vs 109st for example). So we aren’t as exposed as Toronto to losing a bunch of key routes.

Are any of Edmonton's existing bike lanes particularly polarizing, to the point that they could become anti-bike lane soundbites—the equivalent of Bloor, Yonge, and University? Or is it just the spending on bike lanes in general?

I recall that during the 2021 Montréal election, Denis Coderre threatened to rip out parts of the Bellechasse bike lane to reinstate parking, but it didn't really drum up much fervor and just ended up sounding a bit ridiculous.

 

[TAS]

Are any of Edmonton's existing bike lanes particularly polarizing, to the point that they could become anti-bike lane soundbites—the equivalent of Bloor, Yonge, and University? Or is it just the spending on bike lanes in general?

I recall that during the 2021 Montréal election, Denis Coderre threatened to rip out parts of the Bellechasse bike lane to reinstate parking, but it didn't really drum up much fervor and just ended up sounding a bit ridiculous.

It's spending on active transportation in general. Edmonton actually has very few 'bike lanes' - most of the infrastructure has been spent of multi-use paths for people who walk, jog, cycle and roll.

Most of the protected bike lanes we do have aren't even visible to most motorists as few drivers use 102 Ave, 83 Ave or 119 Ave as examples.

 

[thommyjo]

It's spending on active transportation in general. Edmonton actually has very few 'bike lanes' - most of the infrastructure has been spent of multi-use paths for people who walk, jog, cycle and roll.

Most of the protected bike lanes we do have aren't even visible to most motorists as few drivers use 102 Ave, 83 Ave or 119 Ave as examples.

102ave, 110st, 83ave etc should hopefully all avoid risks as secondary streets.

95ave on the west end in 2026 should be getting a district connector that will require the removal of a service road (I.e lanes) to make it fit. That would be an example of a route at risk potentially is the UCP follows Ford’s “lane removal” flag

 

[thommyjo]

does anyone understand our snow clearing for active transportation? Why are routes like the 127th street bike lane not done, yet the majority of suburban MUPs are. Any commuter reliant on 127th st today can't use it, but we have arterials outside the henday cleared?

Is this a deployment issue? Prioritization strategy? Equipment restrictions? Map inaccuracy?

Also, 102ave west of 130th street not being cleared continues to piss me off beyond belief. Finish the last 10 blocks to 140th please!!! The vast majority of users of 102ave west of 124th street are entering it from west of 140th. It'd be like randomly stopping snow clearing on the Whitemud at 111st. I've submitted this request to 311 and Knack multiple times the last 2 years. If you care to help, please also send an email.