heere

5 hours ago, _mtler_ said:

That parking lot looks monstrous and out-of-place. Are there any plans to redevelop that lot as of right now?

13 hours ago, MARTY said:

Like it or not highways are here to stay. Gas cars will be replaced by electric cars. No flying cars are possible at this time. The subway going north south on Pie ix is redundant and expensive. Instead let's get a new bridge to the south shore and a surface tram on Pie IX. Imagine a new link to the south shore that crosses the island and connects to both the north and south shores. Relief for the tunnel and the Jacques Cartier. Remember a lot of traffic is caused by transport trucks. These thousands of vehicles cannot be replaced by the Metro. Roads are required to be updated, Notre Dame East is a project that has to be completed. The intersection of Dickson and Notre Dame looks like a  scene from a Mad Max movie. We have dozens of half finished projects that had been planned for the last 30, 40 or 50 years. This is a shame and continues to haunt us today. Cote de Liesse is an embarrassment to the entrance to Montreal from PET airport.

Pollution is only one of the main issues of cars. The other major one is inefficiency. In a metropolitan area of 4 million people, failing to invest in public transport in favour of highways is just catastrophic. Any self-respecting city strives for less cars and more people using public transport. Why? Because cars take way too much space. They're just that inefficient. You can demolish entire neighbourhoods for 16-lane highways and you'd still have traffic if you don't invest in public transport. It's common knowledge in urban planning that widening highways will ease traffic in the very short term but in 4 years, you'll have the same amount of congestion as before because people who used to take other means of transportation would've switched to using their cars and people in inner neighbourhoods would've moved into farther-flung car-dependent neighbourhoods. It also doesn't take much people to switch from biking or taking the bus to driving their car to cause traffic because, once again, cars are just that much space-inefficient compared to other means of transportation. That we invest in maintaining current infrastructure, sure, but let's not destroy neighbourhoods and promote suburban sprawl by building gigantic expressways. And we need to stop subsidizing cars by adding tolls to bridges/highways and we should reinvest that money on more efficient means of transportation.

13 hours ago, MARTY said:

She has no fkn clue, all she keeps on bitching is for is the pink line. Screw that...that is a waste of billions. Let's finish the blue line. Let's get working on a replacement for the the Metropolitan asap...this scar is one of the biggest inhibitors of Montreal's progress. Let's think  Big. Get  the Beltway finished, the 440 the 640, the 19, let's replace the Mercier bridge, let's get the ball rolling for a new  stadium downtown, let's make the tunnel LaFontaine into a 6 lane in both directions by adding a new  tunnel beside the existing one. Montreal is unduly choked by 2 and 3 lane "expressways"

 

Please tell me this is a bad joke. Investing on a new necessary metro line is a waste of billions so we should invest in highways instead? I thought it's common urban planning knowledge by now that widening and building highways don't solve traffic due to induced demand? I'm okay with the Royalmount project as long as they manage to find ways to add more residential units and to improve the site's connection to the metro, but to insinuate that we should be investing massively in highways but not the metro apart from the measly 5-station blue line extension is just ridiculous.

16 minutes ago, joaosax said:

Where is the pink line??? 

With a CAQ government? In Mayor Plante's dreams... A few years from now, the eastern wing of the orange line is going to have the same problem that Toronto is facing today in their subway's Yonge segment, if we aren't already there yet.

I like the idea as long as we'll get something really distinctive. I don't really see the point of the height limit since the mountain is blocked by tall buildings like the PVM and the tour de la bourse from the south looking north anyway. The said 200m buildings also already block the view of the horizon from the lookout looking south as well.

What's up with the random provocations in this thread?

Montreal's economy is definitely doing great, but it's still lagging compared to other international metropoles (metropolises?) of the same calibre. We need to make sure we'll still be doing well 5-10 years into the future in order to catch up. We can celebrate our current success while keeping in mind that we're still behind and need to improve more instead of resting on our laurels. The two are not mutually exclusive.

Je me demande ben comment ça va se passer entre Trudeau qui veut augmenter l'immigration canadienne de 310k en 2018 à 340k en 2020 et Legault qui veut le diminuer de 53k à 40k au Québec. Je crois que le poids démographique du Québec au sein du Canada va diminuer beaucoup plus vite que prévu dans ce cas. Legault a déjà dit qu'il est prêt à baisser considérablement la quantité d'immigrants économiques pour atteindre le seuil de 40k si le fédéral ne veut pas baisser les chiffres pour les réfugiés/familles. Je le crois pas quand il dit que c'est une mesure temporaire. C'est assez étrange de l'entendre s'autoproclamer premier ministre de l'économie tout en priorisant les questions identitaires, pas ben ben pro-économie d'ailleurs, dans ses premières sorties comme PM désigné.