Subscribe to On Forum Statements From Forum Participants
Get on forum statements in your RSS reader or emailed to you as a daily digest.
A statement is on forum if it is claimed, verified and civil:
- It is claimed if its author has claimed the statement by signing in before or shortly after submitting the statement.
- It is verified if it is claimed and its author has provided their street address in their registration and verified their email address by clicking the verification link emailed by Open Town Hall.
- It is civil if it is verified and it meets the guidelines for civility.
If any of these conditions are not met, then the statement is off forum.
You can subscribe to off forum statements here.
Statements are emailed at most once per day (in the morning).
Check out some recent On Forum Statements from forum participants
Name not shown inside Edmonton May 14, 2015, 11:08 AM
It would be great if input from communities and people was listened to as much as requests from corporations and the business community.
Joe Rollheiser inside Edmonton April 21, 2015, 10:50 AM
It seems that bike lanes take priority over the residents that actually LIVE in the neighborhood. The bike lane on 102 ave which will make it a one way street will be a major inconvenience and disruption to EVERYONE who lives in this neighborhood and access their HOME from 116 str and 102 ave. WE pay HIGH taxes and will now have LIMITED access to our own homes that we have lived in for 20+ years for a few cyclist for a couple of months a year. I have noticed that many of the roads that have bike lane that cyclists are STILL riding on the sidewalks. Bike lanes through a residential neighborhood such as Oliver are NOT needed. The traffic is not so great that in is a THREAT to cyclists. Any city counselor that allows a bike lane to DISRUPT and entire neighborhood will not get my vote in the next election
Name not shown inside Edmonton April 20, 2015, 3:29 PM
I have driven 102 Ave for the last 4 years and have seen 1 bike compared to the couple of thousand cars I see each day. I have yet to see any bicycles on Stony Plain Road during the 102 Ave bridge construction.
Making bike routes in a city which has 6 months of winter and 6 months of pothole repair and road construction is illogical!
Brent Dysart inside Edmonton April 17, 2015, 3:32 PM
Each of us are very myopic with our concerns. Many of the larger forward thinking plans involve large $ for what appear to be fringe groups numbers wise without considering the legacy it might create.
Name not shown inside Edmonton April 17, 2015, 1:43 PM
My experience is City staff GIVE information but don't want to get information. Get defensive if you disagree with them.
Matt Bouchard inside Edmonton February 4, 2015, 10:29 AM
I went to one engagement about the 109st re-zoning. I enjoyed very little of it. I realize that this is quite subjective and may be unhelpful, but you've asked for feedback...
1) The whole thing felt like a snowjob. It wasn't a way for the public to change what was going to happen it was simply a notification of what was going to happen.
2) The materials provided were marketing materials, again to sell me. What I wanted were technical materials to answer specific questions.
3) In a similar vein, all of the people there on behalf of the City were politicians or bureaucrats who were unable to answer specific questions.
If this was an introductory visit to tell us their plans, a high-level, marketing-driven presentation would make sense. However, this was at least mid-point in the process as we were told nothing could really be changed at this stage. I, and many others, supported including specific guidelines for any new buildings as we all felt that the zoning laws were WAY too vague. For instance, no one wanted any bars to be built. There are plenty on Whyte ave and there are a few neighbourhood spots that are under-utilized already. But under the then-current plan, there was no way for us to express that as zoning laws don't prohibit it. There was a vague suggestion that a committee would decide what would actually be built but there was little information on
a) the formation and makeup of that committee
b) if we could bind that committee to our recommendations. For instance, we will not agree to the re-zoning UNLESS the following binding rules are in place.
None of these concerns were addressed. Then it descended into a few vocal citizens expressing VERY specific (to them only) concerns. That seems predictable for a public forum, but I felt that the City representatives were actually relieved that we moved on to irrelevant topics.
In summary, it was a very frustrating experience, and I question the value of attending future events.
Ralph Varney inside Edmonton February 4, 2015, 8:22 AM
On frustration, without doubt posting opinions. For example, the first, and only option is a button to "Post my statement". I HAVE NOT YET MADE ONE.
So I make one, next is to submit or preview. Preview works as one expects, edit gets back to here. So submit. Where one is then greeted with a "show name, don't show or send via a PDF. WTF
Okay, I will select to show my name.
Where then I am then greeted with a "use your email" to sign in or use one of several social media. I do not know if my comment will go (or want it to go) to social media. So, I will select, this time my email. I have tried social media before.. only to get my message lost.. someplace.
Another gothca.. I needed to be registered with a password. An option exists to join. But I will try the social media approach. I am soon getting to a point where I may have sent this.. or have it lost, so if it terminates abruptly..
My computer remembered me having registered with the Google (good thing because I don't) so I moved ahead.. to almost have this posted, but I selected to edit to add this.. and will submit yet again.
Name not shown inside Edmonton September 24, 2014, 7:17 PM
I enjoyed it. I think there should have been maps of the local area, as well as a mini roundabout somewhere. Maybe a bit longer of a journey, maybe 114 St to 99 St, where there is a share use path and bike lane connection would have been preferable. More types of traffic calming would be useful. Bike signals, speed tables. A roundabout could be a marked circle and a sign saying stay right of the divider. Partial closure, raised centre island, pinch-points, and diagonal dividers, maybe a few other ideas. All the different options. Cycle tracks could have been better emphasized with blocks of precast concrete, not just orange pylons. It could have been on for longer, to experiment on traffic during the weekday. It could have been on the news more, and maybe have the volunteers running it have more information to me, especially timelines.
D.L. Darnell inside Edmonton September 22, 2014, 11:38 AM
Nice! I drove across this area twice on Saturday (how I learned of it happening), and then rode part of it on my bike (though only after some of the lane had already been dismantled). Looks to me like a design that would work very well, though the auto traffic clearly demonstrated that it will take some time for people cutting through on 83 Ave. to figure out new patterns. (I have seen other communities where traffic calming and bike boulevards have led to increased property values and very happy residents in the long run.) In the end I suspect this plan will make residents of 103 Ave. happier with their quieter, calmer street. And this will increase overall carrying capacity to Strathcona businesses (mostly thanks to reduced parking demands from people like me who would bike instead of driving). Best of all we will finally have a reasonably safe East-West route for cycling in this area, with good access where a lot of people obviously want to go by bicycle: farmers market, library, and the many shops on 82 Ave.
Name not shown inside Edmonton September 20, 2014, 8:01 AM
Given the amount of "road" that the city seems to want to dedicate to bikes and its policy of user pay, time to start selling licenses for those users.