Last month a few playground zones across the city were removed based on some additional analysis of the playground zone guidelines. I’ve been getting a number of questions from people about the playground zone beside Westlawn School on 95th Avenue between 165th and 167th Street.

The report that was presented in December was an analysis of select locations identified by each member of Council. We had the opportunity to highlight specific areas of concern and then the Administration would use the playground zone guidelines to review those locations identified. I asked for the playground zone on 95th Avenue beside Westlawn to be reviewed since I know many people are frustrated by that location. When the report came back, the recommendation by our Admin was to keep the playground zone.

While I understand why the recommendation was made, I put forward a motion to have the necessary bylaw amendments created so that we can have that playground zone removed on 95th Avenue. The reason I believe we should feel comfortable with the removal of that specific playground zone is because that particular stretch of 95th Avenue operates more like a regular arterial road and our current practice is not to have playground zones on our arterial roads. Along with the design of the road, there are full traffic signals at both 165th Street and 167th Street. That ensures that the east/west traffic will have to stop at a red traffic light so that everyone can safely cross the road.

The motion referenced above did pass and so those draft amendments will tentatively be presented on January 30th to our Community and Public Services Committee with all of Council voting on the change a week later. Therefore we could hopefully see the playground zone along 95th Avenue between 165th and 167th removed sometime in February.



  1. Eileen Marano on January 23, 2019 at 3:14 pm

    What about the “playground”0n 95ave between 152street and 153street.there is no equipment there for it to be considered a playground.

    • Andrew Knack on January 28, 2019 at 1:47 pm

      Thank you for the comment. For that one to be considered for removal there would at least need to be traffic signals similar to the ones at 165th Street and 167th Street. The other major consideration for that location is Sherwood School is an elementary school which is not the case with Westlawn School.

      Realistically, it is more likely the school will be closed prior to installing full traffic signals and so, for now, that playground zone would remain. Once the school is closed, then we would revisit that after we create a plan for that future site.

  2. Nick Arscott and Frances Alty-Arscott on January 23, 2019 at 5:07 pm

    Good for you Andrew!! We drive that road pretty much daily and the school/playground zone was totally unnecessary and a real pain. Thanks so much for pushing this.

    Frances Alty-Arscott and Nick Arscott

  3. Loaine A on January 23, 2019 at 6:58 pm

    This is such good news

  4. June McNeil on January 23, 2019 at 8:09 pm

    Good news, Andrew. I hope it passes.
    Now if we could just slow the traffic down on 189 street between 87 ave and 95 ave.
    It’s a residential neighbourhood, not a freeway.

  5. Betty Muzyka on January 24, 2019 at 3:02 pm

    Thank you for your work on this issue!

  6. Shirley Wilcox on January 25, 2019 at 5:45 pm

    I was wondering why the 30 kmh speed limit on 175 St in Summerlea by 92 Ave which is by a playground, but not a school zone, especially when the playground has a low usage rate, is not being considered for a change?

    • Andrew Knack on January 28, 2019 at 1:36 pm

      Thank you for the comment Shirley. When the change was made a few years ago to playground zones instead of school zones, it was done because we have received a lot of public feedback around having slower speeds within our communities on the local roads. While certain parks may not receive as much usage as others, as mature communities start to see new families move in, that should help increase the usage of that space. This could be reviewed at a later time but there would definitely need to be a lot of community engagement as most of the feedback I’ve received is support for those slower speeds in a community. Thanks again for the comment.

  7. David Arnold on February 15, 2019 at 1:52 pm

    Hello Andrew
    I applaud your effort in working on this problem. The 95 Avenue/165Street location has in my opinion been unintuitive and serves only to act as a trap.

    However, I am somewhat confused. The City has now removed the speed restriction signs for those going East but not for those going West. Why is it OK to do 50 on one side of the road and not the other??

    • Andrew Knack on March 7, 2019 at 1:10 pm

      Thank you for the comment and sorry for the delayed reply. I believe the sign was missed but has since been removed. Sorry about that confusion.

Leave a Comment