In part 1 of this series I looked at the problematic design of the intersection of Saskwatchewan Drive, 109 Street, Walterdale Hill, and 88 Avenue and examined how cyclists use it. The conclusion was that, as a major part of Edmonton’s cycling network, this intersection should be reimagined to achieve a better balance for all modes. Following are a list of interventions that would improve this intersection for cyclists without unduly affecting other modes. There is a mix of minor changes that would be relatively easy and cheap to implement and major changes that would require investment and political commitment. They could be implemented in any combination, and indeed some of them would remove the necessity for others, or change the form they would take. Any of them would improve the intersection to some degree. Improve signage and other visual cues

One of the simplest and most cost effective means to improve this intersection would be to improve signage and other visual cues to direct cyclists where they want to go in a safe, comfortable manner, and make other modes aware of their presence. This would also increase the predictability of cyclist movements, reduce cyclist stress by clearly defining their space, and increase visibility of potential conflict zones.

Shared-use signs should be clearly posted on areas of sidewalk that cyclists use when waiting to cross and on paths that are designated for their use. Pavement treatments (like coloured paint) could also be used to make it even clearer to pedestrians and cyclists that the space is shared. The two areas most in need of this are the southeast and northwest corners. To encourage cyclists to not use sections of sidewalk that should not be shared, and to help users unfamiliar with the intersection to navigate it, better (i.e. any) wayfinding should be provided. Directional signs pointing the way to major destinations and showing how to continue in certain directions should be posted. Signs and pavement markings should also clearly mark which routes cyclists should take across the intersection to avoid conflicts with pedestrians and drivers. Examples of how a complex intersection like this one could be signed are provided in the above and following images from Translink’s Wayfinding Guidelines for Utility Cycling in Metro Vancouver.

To increase awareness that the crossings are used by both cyclists and pedestrians, Edmonton could adopt Calgary’s approach and mark shared-use crosswalks with “elephant foot” markings and warning signs for approaching traffic.

In addition, either dedicated bicycle signals or signs advising cyclists to use pedestrian signals should be installed, like the one below in Montreal (bonus – proof they exist in winter cities!).

A sign also should be installed directing northbound cyclists using the bus-taxi-bike lane on 109 Street onto the curb if they wish to cross the High Level Bridge using the shared-use paths or to cross 109 Street onto the short westbound cycle track. The current lack of signage is confusing and dangerous.

Adjust signal timing

The long wait to cross this intersection given the signal timing – especially when crossing in directions which require you to make a 2-stage crossing (i.e. waiting for the signal to change twice) - is a problem. As a result, crossing occasionally requires you to linger on the small traffic island. The signal sequence could be adjusted to change more frequently, to avoid long waits, or it could regularly incorporate a “scramble” phase, where cyclists and pedestrians could cross in all directions – as was recently implemented on Jasper Avenue and 100A Street.

OR expand size of island

As the subtitle says, an (inferior) alternative to the above would be to expand the size of the traffic island to make it a space that feels safer and more pleasant to wait on.

Widen multi-use trail and connect it with cycle track

The shared-use trail along Saskatchewan drive is a paltry 1.8 m wide, in contrast to the 3 m standard required by City design standards. I would suspect it was not originally intended to be used as a shared use trail given its width and absence of dividing line down the middle. Now that it is a well-used shared-use trail though, it should be upgraded to the recommended width, or even wider. The intersection also could be altered to provide better connectivity between the path and the cycle track along 88 Ave.

One option (as shown below) would be to create a new dedicated bike crossing which continues straight from the cycle track to the southeast corner of the intersection. The median could be removed in this area to allow cyclists to pass through without a grade change. Curb ramps could be widened at the bulb to allow for easier cyclist and pedestrian access, or the bulb could be removed and a marked waiting area for cyclists turning, like the one shown in the following picture, added. To ensure drivers did not cut across this area bollards or other barriers should be put in place. A new bike crossing from the southwest to northwest corner could also be added. This intervention would not remove conflict areas entirely, but would provide dedicated crossings for the majority of cyclists using this intersection and clearly mark where cyclists and pedestrians mix. Providing a clearly superior route through the intersection would encourage predictable behaviour from cyclists and improve the quality of their journey. Other changes shown are clearly marking which crossings are shared use, and closing the very narrow west sidewalk to bicycle traffic, as there is a superior alternative in the form of a shared-use trail that parallels the sidewalk just meters away.

Another option (shown below) that would potentially be better in terms of reducing conflict between cyclists and pedestrians (but certainly more controversial) would be to remove the parking lane (or a traffic lane and retain parking) on Saskatchewan Drive and construct a cycle track along the south edge. This would have the benefit of not requiring cyclists accessing Saskatchewan Drive from the south to cross the road to get to the shared-use path, instead they could just turn right or left and continue on their way. It might get more complicated when it reaches the bridge over Fort Hill and the intersection with 104 Street – but creative minds could certainly come up with a solution! The shared-use path could then be reserved for pedestrians and kept at its narrow size.

Put barrier in cycle track to prevent vehicle use

I have on a number of occasions seen vehicles driving through or stopped in or in front of the cycle-track (even Google Earth has evidence). That is one of the few spaces reserved for cyclists in the city and should be protected. A barrier to prevent access by motor vehicles was in place several years ago and one should be reinstalled that allows easy access for snow clearing.

Widen east High Level Bridge approach

The eastern approach to the bridge is a tight squeeze – a very narrow, uneven sidewalk with a concrete barrier on one side and a wooden fence on the other. Pedestrians and cyclists going in both directions share this space, which is at a fairly steep incline and curves, meaning that you can’t see what is ahead of you for much of it. Understanding that it is built on a slope, the possibility of widening this approach should be investigated, as it is an accident waiting to happen.

Improve connections from south

While the focus of this piece is on the intersection itself, the lack of easily accessible bike routes south of it is an issue which probably contributes to the decision of to ride on the sidewalk for most cyclists coming or going in that direction. The 109 Street corridor is currently being reimagined by the City through the 109 Street Corridor Area Redevelopment Plan (ARP). While the ARP focuses primarily on issues of development and zoning, the Transportation department should take this opportunity to redesign the street to be more pedestrian, bike and transit friendly. This could mean widening sidewalks, providing dedicated bike lanes in both directions, clearly directing people towards alternative north-south bike routes within 1 or 2 blocks, or simply adding a southbound bus-taxi-bicycle lane.

Maintenance

With or without changes, maintenance, including snow clearing, should be a priority at this intersection. 88 Avenue is essentially paved with filled potholes and could use a complete repaving. Snow clearing is sometimes an issue here, as elsewhere in Edmonton. Care should be taken to leave space in windrows to allow cyclists and pedestrians to cross at this intersection and shared-use trails should be cleared as soon as possible after snow or freezing rain.

Wrap Up

The solutions offered here are not exhaustive and would certainly need to be further fleshed out before any were implemented, however something must be done to improve this intersection for cyclists given its importance in the central network. The main purpose of this article was to bring attention to a problem and stimulate thinking about how it could be improved with a focus on people on bikes.  I welcome any critiques of my analysis and other solutions that I may have missed. I’m sure many readers have passed through this intersection by bike and have formed their own opinions of it. I hope to eventually perform similar analyses on other problem areas for cyclists in the city, so if you have any that you would like to see a post on, please comment!

This post is written by Michael O'Neill. Michael is a proud Edmontonian currently based in Montreal while he completes his Master of Urban Planning at McGill University. He rides bikes for fun and as his main way of getting around, but also walks, takes transit, and drives. He's thrilled to have the opportunity to write about cycling issues in Edmonton, and hopes that even if you disagree with his ideas, it will get you thinking about how improvements can be made. You can leave a comment on this post with any questions, or you can contact him directly via email at [email protected]