logo
Transportation minister says Alberta is 'actively reviewing' bike lanes

Transportation minister says Alberta is 'actively reviewing' bike lanes

Yahoo13-07-2025
Alberta's provincial government is "actively reviewing" bike lanes that draw the ire of local residents.
Devin Dreeshen, provincial minister of transportation and economic corridors, said the province is reviewing bike lanes that draw concern from residents. He said the reasoning behind the move is to continue Alberta's work to build a "safe, efficient road network."
"Alberta's government supports active transportation, but we're concerned when municipalities use taxpayer dollars to reduce road capacity at a time when our province is investing billions to expand it," said Dreeshen via an emailed statement.
"While we fund major infrastructure projects, like the Deerfoot, to improve traffic flow and reduce congestion, some local decisions are moving in the opposite direction removing driving lanes."
When asked, earlier this week, whether the province is planning to review both active and future bike lane projects, and if any current bike lanes are already under review, Dreeshen's office did not reply.
The minister's statement follows a June 27 letter he addressed to Calgary Mayor Jyoti Gondek where Dreeshen said he was concerned about bike lanes being built at the expense of road capacity, and with how this work affects provincial road capacity.
Gondek's response in a July 3 letter invited Dreeshen to a meeting on how to best support Calgary's transportation needs.
Calgary currently has roughly 290 kilometres of on-street bikeways and cycle tracks. City council approved $56 million for Calgary's network of pathways and bikeways in 2023, and its long-term transportation plan looks to expand the network more throughout the next 60 years, including several ongoing projects to build further bikeway connections around the city.
In April, Dreeshen also voiced opposition to Edmonton's planned bike-lane expansions. He said the province supports bike lanes "when they make sense," but won't support "tax dollars being used to reduce road capacity." In the past, Calgary residents have raised concerns about some of the city's bike lane projects, arguing they add more traffic congestion.
The purpose and process behind a provincial review of bike lanes is unclear, said Ward 8 Coun. Courtney Walcott in an interview with CBC News.
The infrastructure isn't under provincial jurisdiction, and within Calgary's central neighbourhoods, the lanes are far removed from the provincial road network.
"The provincial networks are highways. We're not talking about the Beltline. [From] the Beltline, it takes three different roads to get to a provincial road essentially, in many cases. And none of them will have cycling tracks on them," Walcott said.
When it comes to congestion, Walcott argued research has shown more lanes of traffic doesn't effectively tackle this problem. But alternative modes of transportation like bike lanes and public transit can ease congestion.
Regardless, when Walcott hears complaints from his constituents about bike lanes, typically it has more to do with parking than road capacity. For example, the pathways on 11th Street and 15th Avenue S.W. have drawn complaints for removing parking spaces or interfering with loading zones.
In some cases, Walcott said the city can respond to improve accessibility for all of a pathway's users. But he added that less on-street parking is sometimes a tradeoff the city makes to make space for cyclists, buses or pedestrians.
"That's what it means to share the road a little bit differently," said Walcott.
"These issues seem very beneath the minister."
Walcott added he was frustrated to have conversations around the value of bike lanes, after the recent death of a cyclist.
Calgary police said a man using an electric bike in a designated bike lane on 26th Avenue S.W. in Killarney died after colliding with a dump truck. Walcott noted the collision occurred in an unprotected, painted bike lane that's slated for construction to become a lane separated and protected from cars.
"The reality is [bike lanes are] good for the city, it's good for the health of the individuals using them, it's good for reducing traffic on the road, it's good for the environment, and it's really cost-effective," Walcott said.
Francisco Alaniz Uribe, an associate professor at the University of Calgary's school of architecture, planning and landscape, said the political nature of urban planning debates has been seen more often in Canada lately, noting a similar ongoing issue in Ontario.
The Ontario government passed a bill last year that allows it to remove major bike lanes in Toronto, despite the city's objections. Under the bill, cities also must now seek provincial approval to install new bike lanes that cut into vehicle traffic.
A temporary injunction in April halted Ontario's plans to remove three Toronto bike lanes until a judge rules on a Charter challenge by cycling advocates. On Wednesday, an Ontario court dismissed the province's attempt to appeal the court order.
Alaniz Uribe said Calgary's approach to creating a cycling network has involved extensive consultation, but that urban planning debates are always highly political because they involve discussing how we use shared spaces in our cities.
Cars have dominated streets for decades, Alaniz Uribe said, adding that urban planning now often involves carving out space for cyclists, wider sidewalks, public transit or more trees, which usually faces pushback.
"We're trying to change a value set where for a long time our value set has been the private automobile. And now, we're trying to get some of that space back for something that is not the automobile," Alaniz Uribe said.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

EDITORIAL: Justice system not above criticism
EDITORIAL: Justice system not above criticism

Yahoo

time11 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

EDITORIAL: Justice system not above criticism

A country where the decisions of judges and prosecutors can never be criticized is a country that is not a democracy. Every Canadian citizen — not just politicians and media commentators — has the right to publicly agree or disagree with decisions made by judges and prosecutors. As long as they do not threaten their safety and are critical of their decisions, as opposed to personal attacks on those delivering them, they are legitimate forms of public expression and debate. Last week, the president of the Ontario Crown Attorneys' Association said 'attacks' by 'politicians, media and members of the public' in the context of two high-profile criminal cases were 'affronts to the rule of law.' This was in reference to the Crown's submissions for sentences for Freedom Convoy organizers Tamara Lich and Chris Barber on mischief charges, and the fallout from the acquittal of five former junior hockey players on charges of sexual assault. No doubt many agreed with Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre, who tweeted on X in response to the Crown's submission to sentence Lich and Barber to seven and eight years respectively: 'Let's get this straight: while rampant violent offenders are released hours after their most recent charges and antisemitic rioters vandalize businesses, terrorize daycares and block traffic without consequences, the Crown wants seven years prison time for the charge of mischief for Lich and Barber.' Poilievre's tweet failed to note the final decision on sentencing will be made by a judge. Others will argue his argument is misguided. But it was hardly an attack on the rule of law. A similar controversy erupted in the wake of the decision by Ontario Superior Court Judge Maria Carroccia to acquit five former junior hockey plays of sexual assault in the Hockey Canada trial. Her ruling prompted public reactions from high praise to scathing criticism for the judge — much of it from lawyers — but all of it fair comment, as long as it did not stoop to threats or attacks on the judge's character. In our view, robust public debates about the decisions made in our courtrooms do not undermine the rule of law in Canada. To the contrary, they contribute to how our laws evolve over time and are a measure of our commitment to democracy. LILLEY: Crown seeks to make Convoy organizers political prisoners Conservative MPs publicly support 'Freedom Convoy' organizers ahead of sentencing GUNTER: Cancel culture dealt a blow with Hockey Canada sex assault trial verdict

Department of Veterans Affairs looks to end certain abortion services for veterans
Department of Veterans Affairs looks to end certain abortion services for veterans

CNN

time13 minutes ago

  • CNN

Department of Veterans Affairs looks to end certain abortion services for veterans

The US Department of Veterans Affairs is proposing to end certain abortion services to veterans, rolling back a Biden-era move to expand abortion rights. In a proposed rule filed Friday, the department said that it is seeking to revoke access to abortions and abortion counseling for veterans and the beneficiaries of the Civilian Health and Medical Program of the Department of Veterans Affairs. 'We take this action to ensure that VA provides only needed medical services to our nation's heroes and their families,' the department said in the filing. Under the Biden administration's rule, the department currently provides access to abortions when a pregnant veteran's life or health is at risk if their pregnancy were carried to term, or if the pregnancy was the result of rape or incest — regardless of state laws. The proposed rule would allow abortions in cases where 'a physician certifies that the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term,' which, according to the filing, had been permitted even before the 2022 expansion. The Biden-era rule was part of the administration's efforts to expand abortion access after Republican-led states pushed ahead with restrictions in the wake of the 2022 Supreme Court ruling that eliminated the federal right to an abortion. The VA argued at the time that it was necessary to give veterans access to abortions, saying, 'As abortion bans come into force across the country, veterans in many States are no longer assured access to abortion services in their communities, even when those services are needed.' But on Friday, President Donald Trump's VA slammed the Biden administration's rule, calling it federal overreach. 'The stated reason for (the expansion) was a reaction to a Supreme Court decision, Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization … that itself was intended to prevent federal overreach and return to States control over the provision of abortion services,' the filing states. 'Yet, the last administration used Dobbs to do the exact opposite of preventing overreach, creating a purported Federal entitlement to abortion for veterans where none had existed before and without regard to State law.' Twenty states have banned or limited access to abortion. States where abortion is limited report higher rates of maternal and infant mortality, as well as greater economic insecurity. The proposed rule will now be open for public comment for 30 days starting Monday. In his first term, Trump made good on campaign promises and appointed Supreme Court justices who helped overturn Roe v. Wade. Since that ruling, Trump has been keen to leave regulations over the issue to state governments. The Trump administration has overall been quiet on the issue of abortion in his second term. However, in June, the US Department of Health and Human Services and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services moved to rescind a 2022 federal guidance to health care providers specifying that people should be able to access an abortion in the event of a medical emergency, even if state laws restrict such procedures. CNN's Veronica Stracqualursi and Jen Christensen contributed to this report.

Trump stakes reputation as dealmaker with tariff policy
Trump stakes reputation as dealmaker with tariff policy

Yahoo

time40 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump stakes reputation as dealmaker with tariff policy

Donald Trump is staking his reputation as a tough negotiator and slick dealmaker -- that has served him well throughout his life -- with his ultra-muscular, protectionist tariffs policy. On Friday, the White House released a picture of the US president seen with a smartphone pressed to his ear, with the caption: "Making calls. Making deals. MAKING AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!" Every trade deal announced by the president, who is convinced that tariffs are both a tool and manifestation of America's economic might, is celebrated by his supporters as a show of his negotiating prowess. This week's flurry of rate changes was no different. On Thursday, with the stroke of a black marker, the former real estate developer slapped fresh tariffs on dozens of US trade partners. They will kick in on August 7 instead of August 1, which had previously been touted as a hard deadline. The Republican leader's backtracking, frequently setting trade deadlines only to rescind or extend them -- he most recently granted Mexico a 90-day extension -- has given rise to the mocking acronym "TACO" ("Trump always chickens out"). The jokes implying Trump is all talk and no action on trade have previously struck a nerve for the president. - 'Not chicken' - But analysts believe there will be no going back this time. Trump has "not chickened out," according to Josh Lipsky, an international economics expert at the Atlantic Council think tank. Lipsky told AFP the president is "following through, if not exceeding" what he vowed during his campaign in respect to tariffs. Matthew Aks, a public policy analyst at Evercore ISI, said he did not anticipate a "massive shift" on the latest order, aside from some economies like Taiwan or India striking deals during the seven-day buffer. Following crunch negotiations leading up to the tariffs announcement, Trump struck a series of compromises, notably with the European Union, Japan, and South Korea, setting varying tax rates and touting high investments in the United States. The details of these agreements remain vague and leave the door open to key questions: Are exemptions possible? What will become of key sectors like automobiles, pharmaceuticals, semiconductors? And what of China? The US president and leaders of other countries "have reasons to avoid going into detailed agreements" explained Aks, allowing all sides to present the deals in the most positive, or least negative, way possible to their public. The ability to conclude deals -- often with or without crucial detail -- is, for the 79-year-old Republican, an integral part of his political signature. - 'Art form' - In his book "The Art of the Deal," the billionaire wrote: "Deals are my art form. Other people paint beautifully on canvas or write wonderful poetry. I like making deals, preferably big deals. That's how I get my kicks." Trump explained in his book that he always "protects" himself "by being flexible." "I never get too attached to one deal or one approach." But despite comments about his trade policy reversals, Trump has hardly budged from his trade strategy, and that could prove politically painful. In a survey conducted by Quinnipiac University published in mid-July, only 40 percent of respondents said they supported the president's trade policy, while 56 percent criticized it. The latest employment figures bear the marks of Trump's protectionist offensive, according to experts. Job creation in May and June was revised sharply downward, falling to levels not seen since the Covid-19 pandemic. aue/aks/sla Sign in to access your portfolio

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store