budgebandit

18 août 2018 PS Saw someone taking pics with a drone when I drove by... was wondering if it was someone from MTLURB ???

Luc! Franchement... ?

Concordia isn't actively shopping the VA lot but there are many promoters that are VERY hungry for the land. On the other hand, Concordia is actively looking for space elsewhere though... I say 2 years gros max before we hear some (great) news!

merci!

I don't remember seeing or hearing an announcement by the Plante administration that they support this project (in Anjou). The last I heard was that they were evaluating it within the context of their Parc Nature project. In business, that's very far from a vote of confidence...

Article in today's Gazette: https://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/mount-royal-pilot-project-having-an-impact-on-safety-group-says Mount Royal pilot project 'having an impact on safety,' group says "Accessibility is reduced (and) communications are somewhat confused," says Les amis de la montagne's director. JASON MAGDER, MONTREAL GAZETTE Updated: August 10, 2018 A project to ban through traffic on Camillien-Houde Way "did not provide for road safety enhancement by any other means than by removing cars," says Helene Panaioti of Les amis de la montagne. ALLEN MCINNIS / MONTREAL GAZETTE Inadequate communication, bad planning and a lack of public transit have resulted in an overall loss of accessibility to Mount Royal, says a group charged with promoting and protecting the mountain. “Accessibility is reduced, communications are somewhat confused and the pilot project is having an impact on safety,” said Helene Panaioti, the director of communications, advocacy and community engagement for Les amis de la montagne. Since June, cars can drive up Camillien-Houde Way or Remembrance Rd. and park either at Beaver Lake or Smith House. They are not permitted to drive between the two parking lots, except when guided by security guards when one of those lots is full. Buses, pedestrians and cyclists can travel between the two sites. The ban is part of a pilot projectthe city has embarked on from June to October in an effort to improve safety at the site. Panaioti said Les amis de la montagne believes the pilot project may not have improved safety on the mountain, and has even created some new problems. “The presumption that eliminating cars will make the place safer — I don’t think you can draw that conclusion, because it takes one bad driver or cyclist who doesn’t observe safety rules, (and) that makes it one accident too many,” Panaioti said. “This pilot project did not provide for road safety enhancement by any other means than by removing cars.” She said motorists disregard the signs that ban transiting traffic, even though police presence on the site has been beefed up. When the Montreal Gazette visited Mount Royal last Friday, 14 cars drove through the no-enter signs in the span of an hour, some driving by a police car with lights flashing to do so. Having cars driving through an area where they are not expected is dangerous, Panaioti said. She said there are more conflicts caused by Belvédère Soleil, a new wooden structure built near Smith House with hammocks and a western view to admire sunsets. Even though there is a protected pedestrian walkway with plastic poles to get there from Smith House, the signage isn’t clear, and some cyclists have been using that path, thinking it is a protected bike lane. The new lookout point also encourages people to walk to the traditional lookout on Camillien-Houde, which is a problem, Panaioti said. “It’s 100 metres away, and yet it’s one of the most unsafe parts of the street for cyclists and pedestrians sharing the road with cars and buses. It’s not clear that it is essentially dangerous, so a lot of people are walking there. Buses and cars go through there, and it’s very narrow. “The Belvédère Soleil also looks like a wonderful place to stop, so cars have been stopping on the side of the road in order to go and enjoy the view. They’re not allowed to do that, and it causes safety issues.” Panaioti added that her group has heard from dozens of people who were not able to access the mountain by bus, because the No. 11 bus is often full and drives by potential passengers waiting at a stop. Although the city added service to the 711 bus that also stops at the mountain, that service is still inadequate. Cyclists are also causing problems. There are many more of them now on the mountain, and they often disregard the road safety rules, Panaioti said. She fears that cyclists descending the mountain at high speeds could come into conflict with pedestrians or cars. She added the rules that have been set up for the pilot project are not clear, nor are the city’s objectives, and there is not enough enforcement to ensure people are following those rules. “When you set rules that are difficult to follow, and then there is no one there to make sure they are followed, it creates a culture of confusion,” she said. “Especially in a situation where cohabitation is more challenging.” She said Les amis de la montagne is in favour of coming up with a global plan for the mountain and its access routes for all modes of transportation. “We need to be able to reflect upon where we want to take our city more globally than just, you know, cutting transit for six months,” she said. “Montrealers deserve more, and we need a higher-level process than the one a pilot project can afford us in this situation.” The pilot project is being studied by the city’s public consultation office. Another public session is planned for Nov. 8, after the road is reopened to all traffic. Panaioti said Les amis de la montagne has been passing on its observations to the city during the project and will present its findings during the information session. When asked for comment, executive committee spokesperson Youssef Amane said Valérie Plante’s administration has made its views about the pilot project clear and had no other comments to make. He said the project is being improved thanks to comments made by groups like Les amis de la montagne.

Pomerleau will be building the new brasserie

Thought I'd share some of my skyline/urban pics from my recent trip to Japan. A beautiful country with amazing people and a wonderful culture. A must-visit if you have the chance Tokyo: Kyoto: Osaka:

Interesting idea, I think it would be worth looking at more intensely. But the link absolutely needs to reach Boul. Pierrefonds and, ideally, Boul. Gouin

No one is angry, Bob. Just passionately debating a subject that's close to home (literally). Doesn't mean I wouldn't go out for a beer with you guys ! That being said, I obviously understand the arguments against allowing passenger vehicles to use the access road but I just don't find it logical at all to purposely amputate the network in the hopes that people will change their ways (they moved to the suburbs for a reason after all). As I previously mentioned, if there is no further development in the area then there will not be a net increase in traffic on the road network, it will simply disperse the existing traffic (should have been done 10 years). By not building the boulevard but placing the REM station at Jean-Yves, you are creating a new terminal for many vehicles which will all be using several already over-capacity arteries to get to their destination. We've been talking a lot about Chateau-Pierrefonds and Antoine-Faucon but people living on Henri-Daoust, Brunswick, a small section of Houde and Elkas are going to severely negatively impacted.

I lived in the area for 20 years, it's not my opinion. Chateau Pierrefonds is a through street, not a collector street. Boul. Pierrefonds is a collector street, and to a lesser extent, Antoine-Faucon (and it is already way over capacity). You didn't demonstrate anything, you simply presented a hypothesis. And based on my experience, I will take my hypothesis over yours any day, including the fact that the buses on Antoine-Faucon west are going from 0 to 20/hr. Unfortunately you have the same problem as Mme Plante if you think people that live on a residential street in Pierrefonds want a bus to pass by their house every 3 minutes. They want their kids to be able to play hockey and basketball in the street and take their dogs for a quiet walk around the park. And therein lies the problem, you just don't understand what the people want, and the solution is not to force your utopic vision of things upon them.

It's a collector street out of circumstance, because there only two ways for people in that area to go east (which is already a problem in itself); 1. They take Boul. Pierrefonds directly to St- Charles or 2. They take Chateau-Pierrefonds to Antoine-Faucon to St-Charles. To really understand the situation, you need to break up Antoine-Faucon into east/west sections. East = east of Chateau Pierrefonds and West = west of Chateau Pierrefonds. The bus traffic on Antoine-Faucon east will not increase but there will be a DRAMATIC increase on Antoine-Faucon west, as well as on Chateau-Pierrefonds. As is stands there are 0 buses on Antoine-Faucon west, which is a very residential area. How can you argue that the boulevard should not connect to Gouin and Boul. Pierrefonds to limit/mitigate and disperse this traffic for local residents? There are also several bus routes from Pierrefonds Boulevard that used to go east toward Fairview that will now be going west towards the REM station.

The guardrails don't even cover the side of the balconies.... Serious derogation by the CNESST if a worker is out there and not attached to anything

Are you serious lol? Just because the lanes are wide and there's parking on both sides of the street doesn't mean it's not a residential street. The 201 doesn't go past Henri-Daoust The 401 and 468 do not go past Chateau-Pierrefonds It's important for the urban boulevard to go all the way to Gouin to minimize bus traffic on Chateau-Pierrefonds and Antoine-Faucon

Chateau Pierrefonds is one lane in each direction.... BOULEVARD Pierrefonds is 5 lanes

I don't find it funny at all because the issue here isn't "a single street". This boulevard may not exist, but it has been necessary for at least 10 years. At 7:40AM, whether you're in a bus or a car, it still takes 20 minutes to get from the corner of Antoine-Faucon and Chateau-Pierrefonds to St-Charles. As I said earlier, the REM itself will significantly increase public transit ridership in the West Island. And given the location of the Kirkland station at the Colisee and not at the corner of St-Charles and the 40 service road, this boulevard becomes indispendable. Promote the bus and bike lanes but car access is a must (from Gouin to the 40).

Ca prend un traitement anti-graffiti sur les premiers +/- 12 pieds

In my opinion the addition of the REM in itself will contribute greatly to a change in habit amongst West Islanders. As the saying goes, "Build it and they will come"....but at the same time, you have to help them get there! The new boulevard must go all the way down to Gouin and it must be car accesible. Anything else would be a short-sighted mistake. I would absolutely love to see a modern boulevard with nice wide sidewalks, protected bike lanes and reserved bus lanes on each side... but also with 2 lanes of car traffic. Ideally, I would like to see a linear park integrated between the two sides of traffic. So, sidewalk, bike lane, bus lane, 2 x car lanes, park, 2 x car lanes, bus lane, bike lane, sidewalk. After personally living through numerous attempts (with many being successful) by Kirkland to cut off accessibility in Pierrefonds West, this move just stinks of more dirty politics.

If you do not increase the residential offering then there are only a very limited number of vehicles that could potentially be added during rush hour (and even then, the total number of vehicles will not change). And if that increase is due to people driving to the REM station, isn't that what we are trying to achieve in the first place? Get those cars off the highway altogether and have those people take public transit into the city. Nobody that presently leaves their car at home to get to work is going to decide to drive all the way to work because their is less congestion between their house and the highway. They will use it to get to the REM and that's it. I think the point that people are missing here is that this is a public transit access in the suburbs. I fully endorse prioritising bus and bike access but you can't do that by completely denying car access. How stupid is it that a parent that wants to drop off their child at the train station on their way to work will have to do a major detour on ultra-congested streets just to get there?

No, there aren't new cars being added to the road network, it would simply split the traffic between St-Charles and the new boulevard. Right now St-Charles is overcapacity... by a lot. As I mentioned earlier, this boulevard is necessary to alleviate the current traffic situation, not for any future growth. PS Reserved bus and bike lanes would be an absolute must

^^ ??‍♂️? Unless you've lived in the area, you cannot truly understand the existing circulation problems. It's very, very bad. The urban boulevard isn't needed for the potential future development of Cap Nature but rather the current residents in the area. The fact that this decision was taken without even consulting the mayor of Pierrefonds is so backwards and sneaky.

2000 parking spots eliminated... the park and ride is being highly discouraged. What I'm saying is there will be no net increase in the amount of cars. Whether they're going to the REM station, Beaconsfield train station or somewhere else, those cars will be on the road network regardless.

Fil à déplacer

This project isn't for the people of Kirkland, much less the people of Sainte-Anne-de-Bellevue. It doesn't affect their lives in any way if it never gets built. This project is for the residents of Pierrefonds-Roxboro that live through traffic hell on a daily basis. Now they are finally getting a viable public transit solution, but we are impeding their access to get to it. It honestly does not make any sense. As for the Cap Nature project, I could care less whether it gets built or not; but that is not what we are talking about here. When electors voted for Helene Dupont and Justine McIntyre in the last election, the urban boulevard project was already on the table and seemed to have wind in its sails. Just because people were against Cap Nature, doesn't mean they are against the new boulevard. Ce n'est pas un projet abordable, ni rentable pour la STM (à moins que les bus passent aux 25 minutes comme c'est le cas présentement).

Aeriel view of central Montreal: Aeriel view of Pierrefonds Ouest and Kirkland: As you can see, the West Island is already very green. Also, there is no shortage of green space available to create urban parks and protected areas, which can be added to the existing offer: Cap St-Jacques (north of Gouin), Angell Woods in Beaconsfield and Parc Nature du Bois-de-l'Ile Bizard. There is no need to create another park along this corridor. A big argument against the urban boulevard seems to be that it will lead to an increase in car traffic. If there is no additionnal development in Pierrefonds north of the 40 then this is completely false. It will simply alleviate traffic on the existing arteries to create a more fluid circulation (for everyone, buses and bikes included). This adminstration is starting to get a reputation for imposing their will without consulting the citizens that will be affected by their decisions. Plenty of space for a modern, urban boulevard with reserved bus lanes, bike paths and car lanes. The goal here is to help people get to the future REM station, not hinder them. And of course, Martin Coiteux is the MNA for Nelligan (aka Kirkland) so he doesn't care if residents of Pierrefonds will be hemmed in for the rest of eternity. Note: just the fact that the current proposal doesn't go all the way to Blvd Pierrefonds shows how short-sighted and out-of-touch it is. The 68, 470 etc. would have to make detours on residential streets (Chateau Pierrefonds and Antoine-Faucon) to get to the new access road, instead of continuing straight on Pierrefonds and accessing it directly. ?