A group of Edmonton residents asked Alberta's government to stop bike lanes and traffic calming measures supported by the Edmonton city council. (www.ctvnews.ca)

submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by dwazou@lemm.ee to c/canada@lemmy.ca

27 comments fedilink hide all child comments

“I see no need for it” said a local man named Tom Ogonoski.

“The only people riding bikes around here are the ones stealing your stuff in the middle of the night” he added.

“We want the Alberta government to interfere and protect us” said resident Kimberlee Dawn.

top 27 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 20 points 1 day ago

Selfish assholes detected.

[-] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 32 points 1 day ago

I wish this report made mention of the fact that all the residents on the affected roads have their own garages and special access road to those garages behind their homes.

They are against bike lanes because they are selfish individuals who want to park on public property instead of on their own property.

They'd rather have this:

Instead of using this:

There should be zero need to have on-street parking on both sides of a residential street, when garages and driveways remain empty! If they end up cancelling these bike lanes, the city should be charging for parking at a rate of $100 per day per resident.

Traffic calming measures, also being opposed by the residents

This makes no sense. At all. No matter how big of an asshole you might be.

[+] Hastur@lemmy.ca -13 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

There should be zero need to have on-street parking on both sides of a residential street, when garages and driveways remain empty! If they end up cancelling these bike lanes, the city should be charging for parking at a rate of $100 per day per resident.

I guarantee you most garages are not empty, even if not used for vehicles people store stuff in them. And filling the driveway with a car in the garage is dumb because then you have to shuffle vehicles if you need to use the one in the garage.

Those "traffic calming" measures suck donkey balls. Unneccesary concrete islands and out juttings that prevent people parking, and the city expect the homeowners to mow/shovel those spaces

Also, why don't the cyclists use the alley ways? There is little car traffic there.

[-] HikingVet@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 day ago

They have driveways and garages. The street isn't a fucking parking lot.

Why don't you just get the fuck out the way?

[-] snoons@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 day ago

what if my garage is full of crap and i can't park my car

what if i have more then one car and i can't park my car

what if i can't park my car right in front of an intersection

cyclists should use the shitty alleyways meant for parking cars because the people that own cars don't park there

Why don't drivers park in the alleyways? There's little car traffic there.

Also, the alleyways in Edmonton rarely connect to anything as they are meant for... parking cars.

[-] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 day ago

I guarantee you most garages are not empty, even if not used for vehicles people store stuff in them.

Their storage problem shouldn't be everyone's problem, though.

When I look, I see garages + driveways, and the driveways are empty. Also, how many cars would each of those homes have? The residents are all apparently elderly and/or disabled, so it would be unbelievable to me that they would have 3 - 5 cars per home.

Regardless, public roads are NOT the place for them to be parking on a permanent basis.

And filling the driveway with a car in the garage is dumb because then you have to shuffle vehicles if you need to use the one in the garage.

Again, this is a self-created problem. The personal inconvenience of one shouldn't be the inconvenience of all. If front-entry parking is needed, the homeowners should be allowed to convert their lawn into a driveway (via by-law).

Those “traffic calming” measures suck donkey balls. Unneccesary concrete islands and out juttings that prevent people parking, and the city expect the homeowners to mow/shovel those spaces

Funny, because this would have come up during the city's extensive public consultation rounds, and alternatives would have been provided for feedback.

Also, why don’t the cyclists use the alley ways? There is little car traffic there.

Those alleys are designed for residents to be able to access their parking area, and not as a road for transportation. While I'm sure you could take a detour through those alleys on a bike, it would be inappropriate to assign them as "bike lanes". Also, it would create conflict for people who actually want to visit the front of homes, forcing them to use the road anyway. Not ideal for anyone.

[-] ikidd@lemmy.world -5 points 1 day ago

You'll just be adding to the cost of things like basement suite rentals, exacerbating urban densification efforts, because those rentals wouldn't include a parking space, typically.

[-] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 day ago

because those rentals wouldn’t include a parking space, typically.

All the more reason to flesh out the cycling and public transportation network.

The point is, taxpayers should not be paying for these residents to have on-street (public) parking, while they leave their (private) garages and driveways empty.

For residents that absolutely "must have" parking at the back and front of their property, by-law provisions should allow them to be able to create a second driveway on their front lawn.

Just the sight of those streets with cars lining both sides of the curb just screams entitlement.

[-] snoons@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago

Your comment is a great example of a car-centric mindset, in that everyone has or wants to have a vehicle which is not true at all.

If bylaws require supplying parking lots for each suite/tenant, then that extra cost of buying the land (and more often removing land because the lots have to go underground) is tacked on to the total rent.

So you're comment is factually untrue and honestly makes no sense.

[-] HikingVet@lemmy.ca 35 points 1 day ago

Why do people hate bikes and bike infrastructure so much? These cunts makes shit up.

[-] Kichae@lemmy.ca 34 points 1 day ago

Because they see bikes as things ridden by teens and the poor, and they hate both of those groups.

[-] TheFeatureCreature@lemmy.ca 18 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

This. It is largely a class divide issue that is inflamed further by certain political groups. (Getting people to hate bike lanes makes for a great political distraction - see Ford in Ontario for a great example of this)

The street I live on connects to a larger stroad that recently underwent a renovation to add in (protected!!) bike lanes, which meant the speed for cars was dropped and the lanes got narrowed a smidge. Naturally, many drivers acted like they were being violated and like their life was literally ruined and they complained and complained and complained.

Now I'm a cyclist so I love those new protected lanes and they really do feel safer. But I do also drive and I have driven on that stroad before and after they made the changes... and it feels exactly the same. In fact, cyclists make basically no difference in my driving no matter where I am in the city except for when they have no dedicated lane and so they have to ride in the driving lanes. Funny that.

The amount of time drivers actually spend interacting with cyclists is miniscule. This is very much a non-issue.

[-] thanksforallthefish@literature.cafe 2 points 1 day ago

Not being argumentative but how is it not noticeable to cars if the speed limited got reduced ? I mean that's usually pretty noticeable unless it's a "traffic at walking pace" mess

[-] TheFeatureCreature@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 day ago

Because most streets and roads here are way too wide and most people exceed the posted speed limit. Even after they made changes to the stroad people have continued to speed. There is basically no enforcement so the reduced speed limit hasn't really changed anything for drivers.

But even if they did follow the limit - it still wouldn't change much. A 10kph reduction hardly impacts arrival times.

[-] streetfestival@lemmy.ca 16 points 1 day ago

I assume all anti-bike stuff is essentially astroturfing funded by big money interests that want to maintain the status quo and keep the public focus off of climate change and our failure to respond to it, the affordability crisis, and widening inequality. And they're able to trot out a few people who have nothing better to do with their time and who are too stupid to know what's really going on

[-] TheFeatureCreature@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago

Bingo.

[-] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 day ago

It's why we need anti-car advocacy at all levels of government. Otherwise only the grumps get a say.

[-] toastmeister@lemmy.ca -2 points 1 day ago

Anti-car advocate of Edmonton would be rare. Theres not exactly great transit, especially at -30.

[-] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 day ago

Good point. The province should tax oil and gas companies to fund the construction of good public transit.

[-] isVeryLoud@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Heated bus stations, for starters.

[-] snoons@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 day ago

"but then it'l fill with the riff-raff and other undesirables"

-some self entitled asshole probably

[-] altasshet@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 day ago

That's already an argument against using the lrt in winter. Not saying it's not a problem - smoking meth in the entrance of lrt stations is not cool. But using that as an excuse to not provide services for everyone is peak conservatism. So yeah, they would totally use that.

[-] altasshet@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 day ago

I know the area. The proposed bike lanes make a lot of sense because they fill in gaps in the existing network. I also don't understand why people insist on Street parking when they have a garage. The neighborhood is quiet and low traffic, perfect for a 30 zone. Plus all the consultation happened already, it's a bit late to complain now. I really hope the city stands its ground. The province has no business meddling here.

[-] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 day ago

I also don’t understand why people insist on Street parking when they have a garage.

I'm in Ontario, and can't begin to tell you how many people will keep their driveway and garage empty so they can park on the street. It's like their own personal problems manifest in some bizarre parking territory claim.

[-] jaemo@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 day ago

The only people ruining your planet and fucking up your financial future are conservative cunts driving around in their oil boomermobiles ANY TIME OF THE FUCKING DAY.

I say open goddamn season on these fucks.