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

How so? You can only drive on 102 ave, not park. Making it less pedestrian friendly will improve access... not sure how that works.
Here is how it works - a grid system such as our downtown has provides access via a variety of streets rather than bottle necking traffic on a few busy or congested streets.

Also for instance, someone exiting a parkade in on 102 Street could make two right turns and be on 101 Street instead of having to make a left turn onto Jasper Ave.

The sidewalks on 102 Ave are already fairly wide (although hardly anyone uses them because there is nothing there) and there is also a bike lane. It is not a pedestrian unfriendly area. It is just an area that has nothing to go to.
As one city councilor said, there are no stores along that stretch of 102 Ave. If you want vitality, focus on areas like 104 St or Rice Howard Way.

In this case, making this section pedestrian only just makes access to nearby buildings and streets, which is already difficult, even worse.

Once lrt construction resumes on 102 Ave, won't people be accessing the YMCA and The Helm and any other businesses on those streets the same way they have been doing so the past 4+ years - from Jasper Ave only?
Its my understanding that 102 Avenue will not be able to be used from 107 street to 102 street unless they are going to try and keep it open to a car lane, which they didn't do with the previous construction.

Or will eastbound vehicle traffic coming from 109 street be able to drive all the way through the construction zone on 102 Avenue?
There is no reasonable explanation why this one lane without parking space has to be open to cars.

It all comes down to conspiracies, “they are taking cars off the road” and other ridiculous statements.

But let it be, the design of this ave is so unwelcoming to cars that I predict no one would even want to use it anyway.

And once LTR begins operations, people will come.
The whole thing is mostly a distraction from real progress and projects at this point. Let’s move on and hopefully the city is just prepared to take this road back from cars in a decade once there’s more storefront activation and a clear value proposition for 109st to 101st being mostly pedestrianized along 102ave.

Too early can do damage too (remember when Iveson wasted millions painting bike lanes in every suburb? Then removing them or letting them slowly fade…). Building a well thought out grid did us a lot better a few years later.

A well executed 104st would “win” people over more than a lame 102ave to pedestrian streets (still a new idea in Edmonton!)
I'm 100% in favor of a pedestrian-only 4th St Promenade although I would like to know the drawbacks. How will the local businesses, residents in the highrises, delivery drivers, garbage collectors, emergency vehicles and such react? What if an alleyway has to close for paving? How will this pedestrian-only street interact with the Valley Line West LRT when it opens?
And I'll bet that a walkable 104th would be successful because closing that road permanently would require actual planning and foresight from administration and business owners. If it took more thought then leaving up a barricade we might actually get something good out of it.

I really hope the lesson planners took from 102 Ave wasn't car free street bad, but we can't just close a road and expect people to show up.
Given that the bike lane had absolutely no bicycle traffic and the driver might have been from out of town, or new to driving. It is not unreasonable to assume that the driver thought the bike lane was meant for cars.
I agree that they need to install a bollard in the middle of the bike lane to prevent this stupid shit from happening.
Last edited:
Same thing used to happen south of 103Ave on 103st until they put a middle bollard.
Screen Shot 2023-02-25 at 11.44.42 AM.png

Interesting how the sidewalk is in the middle of the street instead of on the sides. This is the first time I have seen this, I wonder why they had that set-up?

This goes to show that the street wasn't very pedestrian friendly a hundred years ago.