Oversized passenger vehicles are becoming increasingly common, and so has the danger they pose to those not sitting inside one, argues a letter sent to the province by pedestrian safety partners. 

On Aug. 12, the Coalition to Reduce Auto Size Hazards, commonly referred to as C.R.A.S.H., spearheaded the movement by sending a letter to the province’s independent body, asking it to investigate whether large trucks and cars contribute to threats to civilian safety.

The request comes as pedestrian fatalities and serious injuries continue an upward trend across Alberta. Pedestrian deaths in Calgary, for example, reached an 11-year high in 2025, with 15 people killed by a vehicle.

Local police confirmed this past spring that there have been more than 10 pedestrian deaths so far this year, and that the city is on track to reach 40, consequently surpassing last year’s total.

Citing research conducted in the United States, the letter argued that as the front-end size of vehicles on urban roads grows, the risk they pose to the safety of individuals on sidewalks and crosswalks increases by 22 per cent, especially for women, children, and seniors.

“Specific design features make pickups and large SUVs more dangerous and distinguish them from cars,” read the letter from C.R.A.S.H.

“These vehicles have significant driver blind spots, are much larger and heavier than sedans, and are built with a high, blunt front end.”

The letter urged that an evaluation be performed of the risks related to the Alberta case and recommended that all levels of government work together to limit vehicle front-end sizes, establish new driver’s license requirements for large vehicles, and reduce the size of city-owned service trucks.

‘First step in getting the ball rolling,’ says local advocate

LWC emailed the provincial Ministry of Justice for comment but did not receive a response by the deadline. Should a statement be provided at a later date, this article will be updated accordingly.

The letter addressed the Chief Medical Examiner directly, who, it is important to note, cannot conduct public inquiries itself, as these are instead conducted by a separate body called the Fatality Review Board. 

This process differs from the Coroner’s system used in most provinces of Canada, like Ontario, British Columbia, Saskatchewan, and Quebec. These are appointed public officials who can call an inquest into safety conditions causing systemic deaths.

In Alberta, the Fatality Inquiries Act states that interested parties may request that an individual death be reviewed by writing to the Chief Medical Examiner, who must obtain approval from the board before the Minister of Justice can finally order the inquiry.

Advocacy groups are considered interested parties, as is the case in the letter sent by C.R.A.S.H., which is not a guaranteed request but rather a step toward gathering more information, which is exactly what one partner hoped to achieve when signing off.

“If there are real safety issues that should be understood and addressed, then we’d like to have an objective discussion about that,” said Doug Clark, president of Bike Calgary. 

“We’re really excited to help collect that data and actually understand what might be happening.”

Regardless of whether it’s a cyclist or a pedestrian, Clark said the safety of civilians travelling along the city’s roads has been deteriorating. He said that learning more about the connection between people and vehicles is why they decided to endorse the letter.

“Any interaction with a multi-ton steel vehicle — it’s always the cyclist or the pedestrian that is on the losing end of that,” said Clark. 

“We’d like to understand: Is there a relationship between the vehicle style or weight or whatever factor might be involved and increased risk of injury or death with users?”

Safety as a blind spot in vehicle marketing

Brandon Kwong, board chair at Paths for People, an Edmonton-based volunteer group advocating for protected and accessible personal transportation options, described one of its efforts as dispelling myths about modern transportation. 

“Safety is such a huge part of how vehicles are marketed, rightfully so, but perhaps overly so for the occupants inside the vehicle,” he said. 

“We know that safety is a big part of purchasing decisions, and that many people want to buy the car that is the safest for them inside the vehicle, and that’s kind of where the thinking maybe stops.”

Kwong empathized with why families and businesses prioritize taking home the safest vehicle on the lot, but said that oftentimes this means choosing the largest vehicle, which shifts the hazard to those outside its doors.

“We know that beyond the shadow of a doubt that it is much less safe for everybody outside of that vehicle,” he said.

“Other people in other vehicles, other people riding motorcycles, on scooters, walking, pushing strollers, riding bikes — everybody outside of that vehicle is worse off.”

Across Alberta, these larger vehicles have been the most commonly registered, compared to smaller ones like cars and motorcycles. Last year, SUVs and trucks accounted for 47 per cent of all registered vehicles.

Kwong acknowledged that these types of vehicle bodies are likely favourable for everyday residents when travelling the province’s vast road system or for people in agriculture or oil and gas who require the ability to haul tools, supplies, and livestock. 

But those living in rural Alberta and employed by these industries are not the focus of the letter, he said. Kwong clarified that they are targeting the use of cargo-capable, blunt-fronted vehicles on city streets, which he said is seemingly unnecessary.

“A lot of passenger vehicles, and more so people in yours and my cities, are choosing to buy these bigger SUVs and trucks, and frankly, using the cup holder more than they’re using the hitch,” said Kwong. 

“Given more choice, a lot of people would choose vehicles that don’t have such a high blunt front end and still have the same utility, or even greater utility, for them and their families.”

Everyone uses the sidewalk, he said, and the letter does not intend to eliminate these types of vehicles from the roads entirely, but rather to investigate the role they may be playing in hindering residents’ safety.

“This isn’t a war against truck owners. No one’s calling for a buyback on trucks,” said Kwong. 

“We’re here for a choice, and we’re here for more data to inform our decisions in the bigger culture because we’re all outside of a car — we’re all pedestrians at one point in our day.”