Why Edmonton’s Ban is Misguided

Edmonton’s Public Spaces Bylaw (Bylaw 20700) reinforces a long-standing ban on sidewalk cycling and increases fines for those who violate it. The justification? The city claims sidewalk cycling is unsafe because drivers don’t expect cyclists at intersections and that cyclists should be riding on the street instead.

However, this argument is deeply flawed, selectively applied, and contradicted by the city’s own infrastructure policies. In reality, sidewalk cycling should be legalized in situations where there is no safe infrastructure, bike lanes are unusable due to snow and ice, or road conditions pose a greater danger than sidewalks. Instead of addressing these safety concerns, the city is doubling down on a ban that punishes cyclists for prioritizing their own survival while failing to hold dangerous drivers accountable.

🚨 What’s Changing: The New Fines and Rules for Cycling in Edmonton

The Public Spaces Bylaw (Bylaw 20700) introduces significant changes to fines and restrictions for cyclists, including higher penalties and new infractions. While some of these rules already existed under other bylaws, others are entirely new additions that further criminalize cycling behaviors—often without providing safer alternatives.

🔺 Increased Fines for Existing Offenses

Some cycling fines were already part of older bylaws, but Bylaw 20700 increases penalties significantly:

• 🚲 Riding a bicycle on the sidewalk now carries a $250 fine—up from $100 under the Traffic Bylaw.
• 🚉 Riding a bicycle in a transit space was already prohibited under the Conduct of Transit Passengers Bylaw, and the fine remains at $250. 

These fines are not applied equitably, as enforcement has historically targeted Indigenous and unhoused individuals at much higher rates than other cyclists. A 2024 report from cycling advocates shows that these sidewalk fines disproportionately affect marginalized communities rather than commuters or recreational riders. (source)

🚳 New Infractions That Did Not Exist Before

Bylaw 20700 introduces entirely new cycling-related fines that were not previously covered in Edmonton’s laws:

🚨 These offenses were not covered in previous bylaws, meaning cyclists are now being fined for actions that were not previously regulated.

• 🚫 Cycling in indoor public spaces (e.g., shopping malls, recreation centers) is now an enforceable offense. This should be left to private property owners to manage and enforce.
• 🏞️ Cycling off designated paths in parks, including dog parks, is now a fineable offense. 

Although these fines, and the unsafe behaviour they are seeking to reduce, are not unreasonable, they do not seem comensurate to the potential harm. For example, if a driver parked on the path in a dog park, they would only be fined $50.

⚠️ A Pattern of Unfair Enforcement

The new and increased fines further criminalize cycling behaviors without addressing infrastructure failures that make safer options inaccessible. Worse, the city’s own enforcement data suggests that these rules will disproportionately impact marginalized communities:

• Indigenous and unhoused cyclists are ticketed far more often than other groups, even when many Edmontonians ride on sidewalks for safety.
• The city is cracking down on cyclists while ignoring dangerous drivers who park in bike lanes, roll aggressively toward pedestrians, or fail to yield at intersections.
• Fines of $250 are excessive—especially when many infractions occur due to a lack of safe cycling infrastructure, poor snow removal, or hazardous road conditions.

🚦 What Edmonton Should Do Instead

Rather than increasing fines and creating new cycling infractions, Edmonton should:

✅ Legalize sidewalk cycling when bike lanes are missing or unusable
✅ Improve intersection safety to reduce conflicts with drivers
✅ Ensure enforcement is equitable and does not target vulnerable populations
✅ Focus on dangerous driver behavior rather than minor cycling infractions

Bylaw 20700 penalizes people for trying to stay safe while cycling in a city that has not provided adequate infrastructure to protect them. Instead of increasing fines, Edmonton should be investing in safer roads, better winter bike lane maintenance, and fair enforcement practices.

🚴 Why Sidewalk Cycling Should Be Allowed in Certain Conditions

1. The City is Forcing Cyclists into Dangerously Designed Streets

• Edmonton’s bike network is fragmented and inconsistent, forcing cyclists to choose between unsafe roads and breaking the law by riding on the sidewalk. Of the more than 12,000 km's of road network, only 1,147km have bike infrastructure of any kind, and of that, only 27km meets the high comfort definitions according to the Can-BICS standard.
• Many major roads have no dedicated cycling infrastructure, meaning cyclists are expected to mix with high-speed, multi-lane vehicle traffic—an unrealistic and dangerous expectation. It is no suprise that only the most experienced and confident cyclists choose to bike in these conditions.
• If cyclists are forced into dangerous conditions, they should be legally allowed to use the sidewalk as an alternative when it is safe to do so.

2. Poor Winter Maintenance Makes Bike Lanes Unusable

• Edmonton has one of the worst winter cycling climates in Canada, but bike lane maintenance is not prioritized in the city’s snow-clearing strategy.
• Many bike lanes are covered in snow, ice, or debris for months at a time, making them completely impassable.
• If the city cannot guarantee safe winter cycling routes, then cyclists must be allowed to use sidewalks as a fallback.

3. If Sidewalk Cycling is Unsafe, Then So Are Multi-Use Paths (MUPs)

• The city argues that drivers don’t expect cyclists on sidewalks and can’t see them at intersections. But these same risks exist on multi-use paths (MUPs)—which the city actively promotes as safe cycling spaces.
• Both sidewalks and MUPs run parallel to roads, cross intersections, and place cyclists in spaces where drivers may not expect them. 
• If the real concern is intersection safety, then MUPs should also be banned—but that would be absurd. Instead, the city should improve intersection safety rather than restricting where people ride.

4. High-Traffic Areas with Low Pedestrian Volumes Are Ideal for Sidewalk Cycling

• Certain corridors have heavy vehicle traffic but few pedestrians, making sidewalk cycling a low-risk option.
• If pedestrian-cyclist conflicts are the concern, then the city should allow sidewalk cycling where pedestrian volumes are low but vehicle traffic is dangerously high.

5. Banning Sidewalk Cycling Without Fixing Infrastructure is Just Bad Policy

• If the city wants fewer cyclists on sidewalks, it needs to provide safer alternatives. Currently, less than 0.3% of Edmonton's roadway network features protected cycling infrastructure. 
• Simply banning sidewalk cycling without addressing infrastructure failures is punishing cyclists for bad city planning.
• Legalizing sidewalk cycling where infrastructure is missing or unusable is the logical, safety-first solution.
• The majority of the bike parking in Edmonton is located on sidewalks. It makes sense for cyclists to ride to/from these parking locations when it is safe to do so.

📊 The Data is Biased: How Cycling Collision Statistics are Misinterpreted

The city often claims that sidewalk cycling is more dangerous than street cycling because collision data shows more injuries happening on sidewalks and at intersections. However, this argument ignores selection bias in cycling safety data.

1. High-Injury Cycling Collisions Happen on Major Roads

• The most severe cycling crashes almost always occur on arterial roads, where vehicle speeds are higher.
• Since cyclists on arterial roads are more likely to ride on sidewalks, this skews the data to make sidewalk collisions appear more frequent.

From the Safe Mobility Strategy Crash and Equity Analyses Technical Report:

2. The Lack of Data on “Near Misses” and Undetected Incidents

• When a cyclist is hit by a car on the street, it’s reported and documented.
• When a cyclist avoids a dangerous driver by riding on the sidewalk, that safety decision is not counted in any dataset.
• This creates the illusion that riding on the street is safer when, in reality, many cyclists ride on sidewalks precisely because they are trying to avoid injury.

3. Where Cyclists Ride Determines Where Collisions Happen

• On major roads, cyclists are more likely to be on sidewalks—so recorded crashes in these areas will naturally include more sidewalk incidents.
• On low-speed residential streets, cyclists tend to ride on the road, so reported crashes there are more likely to involve street riding.
• This does not mean sidewalk cycling is more dangerous—it just reflects where people feel safer riding.

4. If sidewalk riding is actually less safe for cyclists, then so are the Multi-Use paths being built by the City right now.

• Most multi-use paths are basically just wide sidewalks, with some basic signage. 
• The images provided by the City to highlight how sidewalk riding is unsafe could easily be a picture of the multi-use path in Glenora, on Stony Plain Road, or in any number of other such pathways around the city:
  

READ MORE: 

🚗 The Real Safety Issue: Cars vs. Cyclists, Not Sidewalks vs. Roads

One of the biggest flaws in the city’s argument against sidewalk cycling is that it treats pedestrian-cyclist interactions as equally dangerous as car-cyclist collisions—which they are not.

1. A Cyclist Hitting a Pedestrian is Not the Same as a Car Hitting a Cyclist

• The vast majority of pedestrian-cyclist collisions result in minor or no injuries.
• A cyclist can stop, maneuver, and slow down far more easily than a car.
• Meanwhile, a cyclist hit by a car at 50 km/h is five times more likely to die than at 30 km/h.
• If safety is the goal, preventing car-cyclist crashes should be the priority—not sidewalk bans.

⚠️ Unfair Enforcement: Who is Really Getting Ticketed?

1. Indigenous and Unhoused Cyclists Are Disproportionately Targeted

• Recent reporting has shown that Edmonton’s sidewalk cycling fines are almost exclusively given to Indigenous and unhoused people (source).
• The city is not ticketing office workers commuting downtown on bikes. It is disproportionately fining the most vulnerable people.
• This creates a criminalization cycle, where fines are issued to people who cannot pay, leading to escalating enforcement.

2. The City is Cracking Down on Cyclists While Ignoring Dangerous Drivers

• Drivers who block bike lanes, park in crosswalks, and intimidate cyclists face little to no enforcement.
• If pedestrian safety is truly the concern, then drivers should be fined at least as much as cyclists for blocking sidewalks, endangering crosswalk users, or failing to yield.

🚦 What Edmonton Should Do Instead

Instead of punishing cyclists for avoiding danger, Edmonton should:

✅ Legalize sidewalk cycling where bike lanes are missing or unusable
✅ Prioritize winter bike lane maintenance to reduce sidewalk use
✅ Improve intersection safety for both MUPs and sidewalks
✅ Focus on dangerous drivers instead of criminalizing vulnerable cyclists
✅ Ensure enforcement does not disproportionately target Indigenous and unhoused individuals

🚴‍♂️ The Bottom Line: Fix the Infrastructure, Not Just the Rules

If Edmonton truly cares about public safety, it must stop blaming cyclists for trying to stay alive and start fixing the dangerous road conditions that force them onto sidewalks in the first place.

Until bike lanes are continuous, safe, and well-maintained year-round, the city must allow sidewalk cycling in areas where riding on the road is unsafe. Anything less is a failure of governance, a failure of equity, and a failure to build a truly bike-friendly city.