Photo credit: globalnews.ca
Alberta’s transportation minister has called for the removal of bike lanes in critical areas of the province’s two largest cities, eliciting strong reactions from critics who argue that the government is unnecessarily escalating tensions over city planning. Devin Dreeshen contends that bike lanes contribute to traffic congestion and hinder infrastructure development necessary for accommodating Alberta’s expanding population.
In a recent interview, Dreeshen emphasized that while provincial funds are allocated towards expanding road infrastructure, he expects municipalities to reciprocate by maintaining and expanding vehicle lanes. “When we see that municipalities are doing the opposite and are reducing and eliminating driving lanes for bike lanes, that obviously has the opposite effect of being able to accommodate for traffic growth across our two major cities,” he stated.
As part of his initiative, Dreeshen expressed a desire to meet with city councillors from both Edmonton and Calgary to discuss the financial aspects of bike lane construction. The minister’s remarks coincided with a social media posting where he addressed an Edmonton councillor, formally requesting the cessation of a multi-year bike lane development plan on 132 Avenue, citing concerns that the project would adversely affect the provincial road network by sacrificing two lanes of vehicle traffic.
Although the province did not financially back this nearly $96-million project, Dreeshen asserted that the United Conservative Party government should still influence such municipal road developments due to its overall funding role for other local road projects.
In his video commentary, Dreeshen questioned the necessity of bike lanes, suggesting that they are underutilized and detract from traffic space allocated for drivers, buses, and emergency services. “Reducing road capacity on major corridors isn’t responsible planning,” he remarked, adding that it leads to traffic delays and gridlock.
While Dreeshen provided no specifics about which bike lanes he would like to see eliminated in Calgary, he mentioned four lanes in Edmonton that he believes should be reconsidered, specifically in the downtown area and in zones west and north of downtown.
As the conversation surrounding bike lanes progresses, Dreeshen indicated his hope for “goodwill” from city leaders in delaying or canceling ongoing projects as the construction season picks up. “I hate to anticipate anything beyond that, but let’s just gauge where we’re at with that first step and go from there,” he said. Ultimately, he asserted, the goal remains improving residents’ quality of life by minimizing time spent in traffic.
Dreeshen also suggested that Alberta might emulate a recent Ontario law, which mandates that any new bike lane instituted after the removal of a vehicle lane requires provincial approval. This law also empowers the provincial government to compel municipalities to reinstate traffic lanes where bike lanes have been introduced. However, parts of the Ontario legislation are currently facing a charter challenge.
The minister’s proposals have drawn swift criticism from various biking advocates and the Opposition NDP, who accuse the government of overreach. The non-profit organization Bike Edmonton asserted that Dreeshen should refrain from interfering in municipal planning decisions and focus on his responsibilities at the provincial level, arguing that such interventions could misallocate taxpayer resources.
NDP municipal affairs critic Kyle Kasawski echoed these sentiments, suggesting that the government is exaggerating the situation. “I don’t know what problem the minister has with kids riding bikes to school,” he remarked.
Concerns regarding the potential replication of Ontario’s legislation also arose from cycling advocacy groups. Aaron Budnick, a volunteer with the Edmonton Bike Coalition, emphasized the importance of accessible transportation options, stating, “People should be free to get around however is convenient for them, whatever modal choice that looks like.” He added that since everyone pays property taxes and contributes to infrastructure funding, it is only fair that all modes of transportation receive equitable consideration in city planning.
Source
globalnews.ca