142 Street Pedestrian/Cyclist Bridge - Draft Concept(s)

What is it like to cross over this truss bridge?

This bridge reminds me of the pedestrian bridge over Quesnell Ravine (Quesnell to Laurier Heights). The Quesnell bridge is my least favourite bridge in Edmonton, simply because when I'm crossing it, and another person starts crossing the bridge, I can feel the footsteps (bridge movements) of the other person on the bridge. The vibrations of the bridge are unsettling, especially when crossing over the Whitemud Freeway as a pedestrian. Maybe this design is better and more solid? Maybe its time to replace the Quesnell Pedestrian bridge? For that reason, my preference goes to the concrete bridges presented in options 2 or 3. They are similar to the Terwillegar concrete bridge, which feels solid when crossing it and serves it purpose well by providing a safe, stable route over Terwillegar Drive.

Wider view please (with elevations of bridge to North and South nodes)

Can't comment on the construction of the bridge if you don't provide details of how (and what elevation) the bridge is meeting on both sides of its entry. This is a MAJOR consideration and hasn't been shared to this point.

Beautiful, sculptural bridge design.

This bridge feels very sculptural and has a real presence but doesn't force itself too strongly into the surroundings. It stands out without being loud. Far more pleasing than some of the other options. I'd prefer this design over the other bridges.

You know, I just want whatever bridge is cheapest + well made. Because I just want a bridge. The bridge is probably the most expensive part.

Pedestrian / Cyclist Safety

- It's important for any of the options to be visible along the entire span of the bridge from both the roadway and paths that lead to the bridge. These clear sight lines are important for pedestrians/cyclists/scooters etc which will be intermingling along the bridge. Clear sight lines allow people to adjust speed, path of travel and yield to others thereby enhancing safety. - It's also important that traffic on the bridge can be observed from vehicles traveling on the Whitemud. This reduces the likelihood of unwanted activity occurring on the bridge and enhances safety for those using it. - Lighting will be important for any of the options.

Wider view please (with elevations of bridge to North and South nodes)

Can't comment on the construction of the bridge if you don't provide details of how (and what elevation) the bridge is meeting on both sides of its entry. This is a MAJOR consideration and hasn't been shared to this point.

Ugly and industrial-looking.

Looks nice, would be nice to know cost or have been able to give a ranking 1-4. Low maintenance is important.

This option looks classic. I like it.

Just a big blob in your vision as you drive down the Whtemud

This is my preferred design of the 4 options.

Keep the bridge simple, functional, SAFE (we need a cage), and allow it to blend in with the surrounding concrete freeway below and not stand out on either end where housing exists.

Simple, ticks all the boxes

Allows road and bridge users clean sightlines. I do like that the support pier is outside the road lanes. Would like to know cost/construction timelines for this option compared to #1.

I like the clean lines. Simple and straightforward. Keeps the horizon clean.

This option my favorite

Clean- simple!

Multiuse Path Schedule and Pedestrian Bridge Schedule

It is my understanding that the North side of the Brookview multi use path is scheduled for completion in 2021 and the pedestrian bridge won't be ready until 2025. That's four years of multiuse path to nowhere. The city needs to outline the plan between the two projects more effectively and how they plan to use and maintain these during this time.

Too clunky for this area. Plus how will this look along with the traffic exchange redesign. That isn't shown in any of these options.

Nice, a very elegant and open design! it wouldn't dominate sightlines like the girder options. I'm not sure how practical.....

This option to overstated and looks very costly

Looks nice. Would be valuable to see the cost of this option. As a resident I would like something with a lower profile.

Looks like way more bridge than needed for pedestrian/cyclist bridge. Odd with 2 different arch sizes. Not a spot for a "gateway".