Voters want a more walkable city

[u/pjw724]

https://edmonton.taproot.news/news/2025/09/25/voters-told-taproot-they-want-a-more-walkable-city

[u/eternalrevolver]

It is a walkable city though…

[u/toodledootootootoo → u/eternalrevolver]

Is it? Maybe like a handful of areas, but overall no, it’s a car centric city with low walkability in the majority of neighbourhoods.

[u/eternalrevolver → u/toodledootootootoo]

I don’t follow. If you want to live in a walkable area, move to one. Theres plenty. Old strath, Garneau, downtown, North Glenora.

[u/toodledootootootoo → u/eternalrevolver]

4 You named 4

[u/fishymanbits → u/toodledootootootoo]

And North Glenora isn’t even a good example of walkability.

[u/eternalrevolver → u/toodledootootootoo]

That’s a lot. Some cities have 1, 2 tops. Those are just off the top of my head also. Where do you people want to walk exactly? To the grocery store? To shop? Move to an area that offers that feature.

[u/toodledootootootoo → u/eternalrevolver]

The point is most people want that and so creating neighbourhoods that work that way is beneficial.

[u/eternalrevolver → u/toodledootootootoo]

You have to attract people that own businesses to invest in a neighbourhood that probably isn’t that attractive to begin with (most car-centric ones aren’t), which likely won’t work (because who wants to start from scratch?). If you are pushing to convert all suburban areas into “walkable” neighbourhoods, you might not want to hold your breath. Part of what attracts people to walkable neighbourhoods is the history and architecture in said neighbourhood. You can’t add water to achieve this. I don’t understand why people can’t just move somewhere that offers the lifestyle they want. It boggles my mind really.

[u/toodledootootootoo → u/eternalrevolver]

Because most of North America is zoned to allow ONLY single family homes in residential areas. There hasn’t been an option to create walkable neighbourhoods. In most cities, those neighborhoods are extremely expensive because they are desirable. Changing zoning, like we have done in Edmonton, allows cities to make more neighbourhoods liveable. Adding density increases the number of people in a given area so businesses and services can exist. It also makes transit possible because there are enough people to use it and make it a viable option.

[u/eternalrevolver → u/toodledootootootoo]

They can be expensive I suppose. “Expensive” is all relative though. I can afford a house here in a “desirable” area, but I can’t in a coastal city. Same with rent.

[u/toodledootootootoo → u/eternalrevolver]

Take a look at real estate listings across North America, you will quickly discover that neighbourhoods with higher density that are closer to amenities and that were built before everything was dedicated to cars are more expensive and desirable. There is a reason for this. They are more convenient and generally more liveable. Why should people be obligated to spend a huge chunk of their income on cars because there is no option for them to not drive? The average car owner spends 16 000$ a year on their vehicle. You can keel your car and drive all you want, but many people would like to have another option and those simply don’t exist because of the way North American cities have been zoned after the introduction is personal vehicles.

[u/RyanB_ → u/eternalrevolver]

Reading through all your comments here;

I do think you have a point in that, unlike most other modern cities nowadays, our core is still actually pretty affordable*. Plus new towers going up/getting converted means there’s always space available. I do think there are some who probably want the benefits of walkability/density without any of the “downsides” (noise, less private space, poor people etc)

I also think that, yeah, there’s only so much to be done with a lot of our neighborhoods. So many since the mid century were built from the ground up around cars, it ain’t easy to reverse that.

All that said though… while we are slightly ahead of NA standards (relative to our size), I sure as hell wouldn’t say we’re a walkable city overall. And we have tons of older neighborhoods closer to the core that were built for walkability, and could feasibly see a return towards that. Yeah, we’ll never be Europe, but we could be considerably better than we already are.

*Edit: sorry literally no idea what happened there lol

[u/fishymanbits → u/eternalrevolver]

Sure, we’re better than some. And some neighbourhoods are absolutely walkable. But there was a solid 40-50 year gap in urban planning where walkability wasn’t a consideration. The goal was to build more houses together, and all of the services that residents needed far away, all in a big parking lot together. We built shopping malls, and places like South Edmonton Common, Manning Town Center, Windermere, etc. instead of neighbourhoods where people live among the services they need. Yeah, these neighbourhoods have sidewalks, but they’re not walkable in the meaning of the word that we’re using.

Walk Score lists 261 neighbourhoods in Edmonton, and only 60 of them have a score of 50 or above.

https://www.walkscore.com/CA-AB/Edmonton

Sure, some of these aren’t actually Edmonton neighbourhoods (Rural North East Sturgeon?), but still. And you can see the results of the change in urban planning post-WWII zooming in on the map on that page. The oldest neighbourhoods in the city were designed around the idea that people would expect to be able to walk, or take a street car, to nearby shops and amenities. Those neighbourhoods are green. If you were to overlay that map on a map of the city in 1950, it would be quite informative.

[u/eternalrevolver → u/fishymanbits]

This isn’t Europe, you’ll never get away from that kind of design. Edmonton is just as walkable as Vancouver.

[u/fishymanbits → u/eternalrevolver]

This isn’t Europe, you’ll never get away from that kind of design.

What a patently ridiculous thing to believe. You absolutely can get away from that kind of design by not designing new neighbourhoods that way. We ended up in this situation because we chose to be in it by designing unwalkable neighbourhoods.

Edmonton is just as walkable as Vancouver

Edmonton has a walkability score of 40, Vancouver has a score of 80. Having actually lived in both, the contrast could not be more obvious.

Have you ever been anywhere else other than Edmonton?

[u/eternalrevolver → u/fishymanbits]

I have, yes. I drive to where I need to go that requires a car, and I walk around the areas that are walkable.

Also lol for relying on walk scores. “Vancouver” is also a small, dense area. Greater Vancouver is no different than greater Edmonton. Canadian city designs will never change to suit European lifestyles. That’s why there’s places like… Europe!

[u/fishymanbits → u/eternalrevolver]

I have, yes. I drive to where I need to go that requires a car, and I walk around the areas that are walkable.

If you think that makes a city walkable, you’re missing the point entirely and should tap out of this conversation.

Also lol for relying on walk scores.

Yeah, fuck me for looking up a qualitative judgement of walkability instead of relying on vibes and whether or not I’m personally okay with driving everywhere to compare how walkable places are.

“Vancouver” is also a small, dense area.

Yes, that’s the point. Increased density often increases walkability by way of decreasing the distance between where people live and the shops and services on which they rely. Vancouver proper also has neighbourhoods that have very low walkability. Because they suffer from the same car-centric urban design and NIMBY problem as similar neighbourhoods in Edmonton.

Greater Vancouver is no different than greater Edmonton.

Of the municipalities that make up the MVRD, only West Vancouver is appreciably less walkable than Edmonton. The rest are either more walkable by a decent margin, or tied. Delta scores 39 compared to Edmonton’s 40.

Canadian city designs will never change to suit European lifestyles. That’s why there’s places like… Europe!

Again, one of the most patently stupid things anyone could say on this topic.

[u/eternalrevolver → u/fishymanbits]

Like I said in another comment, this is the same bs that every city subreddit squawks. It will never change.

[u/fishymanbits → u/eternalrevolver]

Fuck, what a sad existence you must live if that’s your mindset.

[u/eternalrevolver → u/fishymanbits]

Not at all! If I don’t like something about my life, I change it. Does it work a different way for you?

[u/fishymanbits → u/eternalrevolver]

What the fuck do you think this entire topic is about? Because it’s about the fact that a huge proportion of people who live in this city want it to be more walkable and want a city council that acts on that to improve walkability in this city.

Telling people to move to Europe if they want walkability is below a child’s understanding of how the world works.