News   Apr 03, 2020
 7.3K     3 
News   Apr 02, 2020
 7.5K     0 
News   Apr 02, 2020
 2.5K     0 

Keep 102 Ave closed to vehicles

Edmonton is not Amsterdam, and will never be Amsterdam. Amsterdam also has dead streets, which is fine. If 102 Ave.'s original buildings faced the street then pedestrianizing it would have not have been a problem but the tone was already set over a hundred years ago with brick buildings treating it like service road.
Maybe its time to change the "tone" of the street after a 100 years into something better 😎. Sounds like a way overdue change!

The street that has Calgary's above ground LRT going through downtown is completely devoid of pedestrians, and it has been that way for 40 years.

40 YEARS!!!

Let's learn from Calgary's experience so the city can make the street/organize DT development projects near the street better without suffering the same fate 🤓.
 
You guys call me a negative nelly yet still haven't answered any of my questions, how convenient. In the engineering world, anything is possible if you are willing to pay the price.

How are you going to get the millions of different parts to which some don't fit together well, function as one complete unit? There is a mountain of thing that need to be done to do to make this street a successful pedestrian only street. It is much easier to convert the alleys into a vibrant pedestrian only zone than 102 Ave.. They already have the natural strength of being human scaled where 102 Ave. is not. Old European cities have narrow streets FFS! The video Gronk shows is hosted by a young college student and a rookie councillor. It is fine to have dreams - we all have them, especially when we are young and naive.

If you want to make this work, you gotta solve the millions of problems that come your way. Saying "C'mon guys, let's do this!!! Forget about the problems they eventually will solve themselves out." is downright foolish.

Deep inside, you all know those problems are extremely tough to solve but they need to be solved!
 
I'd like to see proposals about what will be done on a pedestrian only street, including how this road will encourage pedestrians to actually go there. Most importantly how will much will it cost to implement the actions to get people to go there.
 
 
You guys call me a negative nelly yet still haven't answered any of my questions, how convenient. In the engineering world, anything is possible if you are willing to pay the price.

How are you going to get the millions of different parts to which some don't fit together well, function as one complete unit? There is a mountain of thing that need to be done to do to make this street a successful pedestrian only street. It is much easier to convert the alleys into a vibrant pedestrian only zone than 102 Ave.. They already have the natural strength of being human scaled where 102 Ave. is not. Old European cities have narrow streets FFS! The video Gronk shows is hosted by a young college student and a rookie councillor. It is fine to have dreams - we all have them, especially when we are young and naive.

If you want to make this work, you gotta solve the millions of problems that come your way. Saying "C'mon guys, let's do this!!! Forget about the problems they eventually will solve themselves out." is downright foolish.

Deep inside, you all know those problems are extremely tough to solve but they need to be solved!
I won't speak from anyone else, but I don't think anyone is denying the fact that the avenue isn't particularly pedestrian friendly from a street frontage point of view. But with the changes we've taken to reduce a 4 lane car sewer to a one-way vehicle lane flanked by rail transit and a bike lane, this seems like a much easier transition to a fully pedestrian right of way.

But if we're asking questions, here's a few of mine: do we need to wait until we have absolutely ideal conditions of high foot traffic and fine grained, street fronting development before we can pedestrianize a street? How likely is it that major arteries like Whyte will be fully closed to traffic? Is Council particularly risk-taking or likely to close another road that hasn't been emptied of traffic for the last 4 years? Would an alley with few if any business be a more or less likely to become a vibrant pedestrian street than 102 avenue?

Say what you will, but "can't win, don't try" is a crappy way to run a city and I am glad we're at least talking about trying something different.
 
DSC01308.JPG

DSC01309.JPG
 
The street that has Calgary's above ground LRT going through downtown is completely devoid of pedestrians, and it has been that way for 40 years.

40 YEARS!!!
I think the Edmonton's redeveloped 102 Avenue isn’t comparable to Calgary’s 7th Avenue. Much larger train cars pass through 7th Avenue which can appear really high for pedestrians on adjacent sidewalks. It’s not even close to eye level and thus, I think, really creates some poor sight lines especially after office hours. Add into that the block-sized elevated platforms. Lastly, the new low floors are much more quiet and much closer to eye level with pedestrians which is why I think there can be a lot more potential with the pilot.
Here's a photo from a blog showing CTrains beside pedestrians along 7th Avenue:
7th+Avenue+Transit+Corridor%2C+Calgary
 
Keeping things interesting on a narrow strip of downtown street is not that difficult, attracting pedestrians and cyclists...
There are planting possibilities:
1. seats at tree wells...
Screen Shot 2022-06-05 at 1.57.14 PM.png
2. illuminated stumps for sitting -- provides alittle night-time ambiance (especially in winter)...
Screen Shot 2022-06-05 at 1.54.38 PM.png
3. linear planters and benches for people-watching and cycle-watching...
Screen Shot 2022-06-05 at 1.58.35 PM.png
4. loungers, benches and tables...
Screen Shot 2022-06-05 at 2.00.06 PM.png
5. enhancing the entire street...
Screen Shot 2022-06-05 at 2.03.05 PM.png
 

Back
Top