News   Apr 03, 2020
From the Editor: A Message to Our Readers
 8.3K     3 
News   Apr 02, 2020
Topping Off March 2020: What's Hot on SkyriseEdmonton
 9.5K     0 
News   Apr 02, 2020
News Roundup for April 2, 2020
 3.1K     0 

Municipal Politics

Gus Haynes said:
Here's the problem that I have with this plan:



If you do not, or cannot, "offer specifics", your plan is not helpful. Identify exactly what you consider to be worth cutting, and then we can debate it.
Click to expand...

Regarding the downtown investment plan, I heard Alex Hyrciw from the Downtown Recovery Coalition say two areas the city can't afford to put money in is Blatchford and the bike lanes ("not a need to have"). She also went on to say $180 million on bike lanes on the Ryan Jespersen Show which is of course inaccurate. Too bad some dt leaders don't understand that nearly 25% of Edmonton adults don't drive and that the money on active transportation is absolutely fair and in proportion given the number of people who walk, bike and roll.
 
TAS said:
Regarding the downtown investment plan, I heard Alex Hyrciw from the Downtown Recovery Coalition say two areas the city can't afford to put money in is Blatchford and the bike lanes ("not a need to have"). She also went on to say $180 million on bike lanes on the Ryan Jespersen Show which is of course inaccurate. Too bad some dt leaders don't understand that nearly 25% of Edmonton adults don't drive and that the money on active transportation is absolutely fair and in proportion given the number of people who walk, bike and roll.
Click to expand...
I realize there were some city councilors who were biking enthusiasts, but I am guessing that many of that 25% figure cited, take transit or walk, rather than bike. So I wonder why more is not being spent, particularly on transit instead.
 
David A said:
I realize there were some city councilors who were biking enthusiasts, but I am guessing that many of that 25% figure cited, take transit or walk, rather than bike. So I wonder why more is not being spent, particularly on transit instead.
Click to expand...

I'd say a good amount is now being invested in transit/lrt.

Screenshot_20241113_135956_YouTube.jpg
 
Yeah the whole "either or" when it came to bike infrastructure or downtown investment is something I'm not a fan of at all. The same detractors of bike investment are almost always the same group who view downtown investment as a waste of money already. I don't think it's wise to try and win some of that demographic over.

I'd even argue that with e-scooters and e-bikes, downtown benefits much more from active transportation than it ever did, and will probably continue to do so.
 
Our biggest infrastructure line item now is transit, especially on the capital side. All our provincial money is going to LRT expansion.

The reality is bike commuting is about 2% of all commuters, give or take if there were a newer census done, maybe 5%. That's about what Councillor Salvador stated is being spent of road renewal as a percentage in a recent post yesterday and makes sense to me.

Like Downtown, bike infrastructure is a used as a pawn in political discussion, right or left leaning. I'm not a fan of that, just what makes good policy and good governance.
 
Last edited:
Greenspace said:
Our biggest infrastructure line item now is transit, especially on the capital side. All our provincial money is going to LRT expansion.

The reality is bike commuting is about 2% of all commuters, give or take if there were a newer census done, maybe 5%. That's about what Councillor Salvador stated is being spent of road renewal as a percentage in a recent post yesterday and makes sense to me.

Like Downtown, bike infrastructure is a used as a pawn in political discussion, right or left leaning. I'm not a fan of that.
Click to expand...

For commuting it's 2%, but more people tend to use their bikes than that figure outside of going to work.

Globally, 60% of all urban trips are less than 5km. A quarter are shorter than 1km and of those, half are travelled by vehicle. So much opportunity to relieve congestion, reduce parking demands and improve health.

My condo neighbour orders skip the dishes for Cactus Club that is less than 2 blocks away. He is not physically limited. "I'm lazy", he says.
 
Greenspace said:
Our biggest infrastructure line item now is transit, especially on the capital side. All our provincial money is going to LRT expansion.

The reality is bike commuting is about 2% of all commuters, give or take if there were a newer census done, maybe 5%. That's about what Councillor Salvador stated is being spent of road renewal as a percentage in a recent post yesterday and makes sense to me.

Like Downtown, bike infrastructure is a used as a pawn in political discussion, right or left leaning. I'm not a fan of that, just what makes good policy and good governance.
Click to expand...
This is what kills me. So called “common sense”, “fiscally conservative”, “do the math”, etc types seem incapable of comprehending that the 25mil/year for 4 years is literally proportional to the data we have on “primary transportation mode being biking” people. This doesn’t include the many more “fair weather” bikers or people who bike once or twice a week in the summer.

The 2% number also isn’t inclusive to kids/youth. They sort of matter too.

So if someone wants common sense spending on bike lanes related to usage, they should be supporting $30+ mil a year actually. Every year, in perpetuity, and likely increasing too. (And none of this would factor in decades of disproportional investment).

Now, as a year round biker, I also think transit is 100% the more important investment. At best we’ll get to 8-10% of our city biking in summers in 15-20 years. But we could see 25-35% on transit easily with the right plan. That should be the focus.

But I’d argue it also is. We’ve spent billions and billions on LRT, new buses, garages, etc. So it’s happening.
 
BILD and DBA are always quick to criticize the City of Edmonton, but when it comes to the UCP? Crickets. It's all political. If they really wanted more support for downtown, they would ask the UCP to give back the $60,000,000 they owe us.
 
trevorhayden said:
BILD and DBA are always quick to criticize the City of Edmonton, but when it comes to the UCP? Crickets. It's all political. If they really wanted more support for downtown, they would ask the UCP to give back the $60,000,000 they owe us.
Click to expand...
The DBA is a local organization so the UCP is typically above their scope, and BILD has a provincial administrative body for provincial politics (BILD Alberta) but they mainly focus on non-partisan issues like building codes. Member-governed community organizations are typically much better off if they don't play sides with political parties.

Except the Calgary Chamber of Commerce, for some reason.
 
EDBA's biggest 'partner' is the City of Edmonton. They deal with them on a daily basis. Also deal with the province in safety and other issues but that might not be as apparent. Lots of lobbying going on always, especially around more money.

I've commented on the $60m before, but the province doesn't pay property taxes, they provide grants in lieu which were reduced in 2019 ($14m/year). However they also provide large capital grants during budget time, which are more targeted based on the City's asks. I believe the mayor and other Councillors continuing to harp on this is counterproductive and a distraction from the overall tax increases, which are almost $500m. $14m is nice to have but not going to fix those structural problems.
 
Last edited:
https://edmontonsun.com/opinion/col...f-commerce-fails-as-advocate-for-edmontonians
The chamber and the commercial developers then added their own wish list for city spending, like more money for our unrevivable Downtown and more affordable housing. Chamber president Griffiths raised that old myth that “investing in Downtown isn’t a cost, it’s an economic strategy that benefits everyone.”
Click to expand...

Personally want to bleach my eyes after reading that, but yeah, the same fiscal hawks decrying bike lanes will be the same fiscal hawks decrying investment in downtown. Genuinely don't see a point pandering to this audience if you're a downtown advocate.
 
Kosy123 said:
https://edmontonsun.com/opinion/col...f-commerce-fails-as-advocate-for-edmontonians


Personally want to bleach my eyes after reading that, but yeah, the same fiscal hawks decrying bike lanes will be the same fiscal hawks decrying investment in downtown. Genuinely don't see a point pandering to this audience if you're a downtown advocate.
Click to expand...
It’s this weird “old power” group of Edmontonians. The sort of people behind Edify. They’re suburbanites who happen to live in Glenora and work DT, but they don’t think about cities and transportation and those things like true urbanites and city builders.
 
Hyrciw is definitely picking some provocative targets, but it's definitely emblematic of a real shitty hand that our city council has to deal with. Stakeholders are actively trying to rob Peter to pay Paul. I don't think it's going to turn out well.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top