Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'car'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Real estate projects
    • Proposals
    • Going up
    • Completed
    • Mass Transit
    • Infrastructures
    • Cultural, entertainment and sport projects
    • Cancelled projects
  • General topics
    • City planning and architecture
    • Urban photography
    • Urban tech
    • General discussions
    • Entertainment, food and culture
    • Current events
    • Off Topic
  • MTLYUL Aviation
    • General discussion
    • Spotting at YUL
  • Here and abroad
    • Quebec City and the rest of the province of Québec.
    • Toronto and the rest of Canada
    • USA
    • Europe
    • Projects elsewhere in the world

Calendars

There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.

Blogs


Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


About Me


Biography


Location


Interests


Occupation


Type of dwelling

  1. Pas certain que retirer la gestion de stationnement des arrondissements est souhaitable. Je comprends le vouloir de simplifier les règles du jeu stationnement mais les fuis de trafique, le nombre et genre de commerces (bar, restaurent, boutique), rue résidentielle etc. sont très différents d'un arrondissement a l'autre voir a l’intérieure même d'un arrondissement. This will no doubt tickle Luc Fernandez. http://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/montreal/201512/16/01-4931755-revision-en-profondeur-du-stationnement-a-montreal.php
  2. Quel genre de voiture conduisez-vous ? What kind of car do you drive? 1991 Buick Regal Custom J'aime les voitures américaines.
  3. Ce projet semble déjà bien entamé car on parle d'une livraison en mars 2012. De plus, il y aurait deux phases alors j'irai faire un tour bientot pour voir de quoi il en retourne. http://lefrancoisperrault.com/
  4. Petit projet situé juste en face du métro Charlevoix. Lors de ma tournée la semaine dernière j'ai aperçu le terrain sur lequel sera construit ce petit projet et il est littéralement en face de la station de métro. Je suis estomaqué que l'on puisse construire des stationnements pour un si petit projet alors que le métro est à 30 secondes de marche. Si quelqu'un peut uploader la photo allez-y car je n'y arrive pas. http://www.gcaimmobilier.com/
  5. Nouveau projet dans Verdun. D'ailleurs il est déjà en construction car c'est en me balladant au hasard que je l'ai remarqué. Sur le site web il y a quelques photos mais je n'arrive pas à les ''uploaders''. http://www.lesterrasses3910.com/en/index.php
  6. Le Québec exprime depuis plusieurs décennies son insatisfaction dans l'accord constitutionnel, que l'on pourrait comparer par analogie à un contrat de mariage. Pire en fait, car ce fut un mariage arrangé et non d'amour mutuel. Donc les liens qui relient les deux partenaires n'ont jamais vraiment eu le côté émotionnel nécessaire pour en faire une véritable union heureuse et consommée, cela à aucun moment de son histoire. On pourrait au mieux parler de tolérance. Dans la vie de tous les jours le divorce est devenu monnaie courante. Il ne fait plus vraiment peur et représente le plus souvent la décision la plus raisonnable, pour le bien-être et la sérénité des deux protagonistes. On peut aussi développer d'autres types d'ententes qui peuvent favoriser un meilleur partage des droits et responsabilités, tout en reconnaissant le mérite de conserver des liens plus proches et mutuellement profitables. Dans aucun cas cependant il est justifié de préserver le statu quo, car l'insatisfaction si elle n'est pas répondue de manière adéquate, risque de conduire à des actions unilatérales qui pourraient être dommageables à tout le monde. Alors je pose la question puisqu'on est dans un fil de sondage: Si un des deux partenaires n'est plus satisfait de son union avec son conjoint, que doit faire ce dernier? 1 -Ignorer la partie demanderesse et faire comme si rien n'était, en espérant que ça passe. 2- Reconnaitre l'insatisfaction de l'autre mais exprimer son incapacité à y répondre convenablement. 3- Tenter de négocier des accommodements afin de préserver l'union. 4- Soumettre la partie demanderesse à sa volonté et lui imposer sa solution ou sa vision, quitte a conduire à un divorce déchirant. La situation du Québec et du Canada est exactement face ce genre de dilemme. On n'en fera jamais une histoire d'amour, car le désir pour l'autre n'est basé que sur du matériel et son partage plus ou moins équitable, selon les versions de chacun. Une chose est cependant indéniable: le désir d'autonomie et d'émancipation ne peut pas être refoulé de la part de la partie qui se sent étouffée par le poids du couple. Néanmoins cette dernière pourrait, comme dans les bons vieux couples d'habitudes, reprendre une partie de sa liberté tout en respectant un contrat moins exigeant et dans lequel chacun pourra y trouver son compte. On est ici dans une simple logique qui ne demande qu'une part de sensibilité et d'ouverture. Seuls les noms changent, mais la ressemblance avec la réalité est voulue et intentionnelle. D'autres couples sont passés par les mêmes difficultés, certaines unions ont eu un dénouement difficile, d'autres plus heureux, mais l'issue dans tous les cas a nécessité des actions courageuses et appropriées. Saurons-nous faire partie des chanceux qui auront compris à temps, que les problèmes doivent être réglés avant qu'il ne deviennent pratiquement ingérables? Qu'aucune situation n'est permanente, que tout est mouvement, change et se transforme dans une dynamique qui va du plus petit au plus grand dans l'univers. Lorsque certaines parties refusent cette loi implacable de l'évolution du monde, elles disparaissent ou sont brisées par leur propre inertie. Le Canada vit des problèmes internes parce qu'il refuse de s'adapter aux changements qui se présentent naturellement à lui. Aura-t-il la sagesse de sortir de sa sclérose, ou sera-t-il amputé d'un membre qui ne peut s'empêcher de bouger? La question est posée, j'attends vos réponses.
  7. J'ai vu une affiche sur Cote-des-Neiges aujourd'hui mais je n'ai aucune idée de l'emplacement du futur projet car ce n'est pas mentionné ni sur l'affice et ni sur le site web. http://onyxmontreal.com/
  8. L'avion du futur en mettra plein la vue http://fr.canoe.ca/voyages/nouvelles/archives/2011/06/20110614-124123.html Un modèle unique d’avion vient d’être dévoilé à Londres par l’entreprise Airbus, apprenons-nous sur MailOnline. L’appareil en question, dont le haut est transparent, ne conviendra pas aux voyageurs de 2050 qui ont la peur de l’avion. Ceux qui y monteront vivront un vol hors du commun, car sa conception leur permettra d’admirer l’extérieur, de nuit comme de jour. Cet avion futuriste a aussi été pensé en fonction de la détente. Par exemple, les sections aujourd’hui réservées aux classes affaires et économiques seront remplacées par des zones de relaxation. Des jeux holographiques et d’autres divertissements, tous engendrés par la chaleur du corps, seront aussi proposés aux passagers. © Airbus S.A.S. Ceux qui y monteront vivront un vol hors du commun, car sa conception leur permettra d’admirer l’extérieur, de nuit comme de jour. Si la plupart des technologies qui seront employées pour les fonctions de cet avion sont déjà connues, on ne sait toujours pas les secrets technologiques concernant sa fameuse coque supérieure transparente. On sait malgré tout que la structure de la cabine a été inspirée par l’efficacité osseuse de l’oiseau. Cela permettra la force nécessaire pour soutenir ladite cabine, mais aussi pour intégrer une membrane intelligente qui gèrera les différences de température et permettra la transparence. Le but d’une telle conception est d’offrir aux touristes un voyage en avion qui est aussi enrichissant que la destination en elle-même. Le haut de l'«avion du futur» sera transparent.
  9. Complètement dans l'est cette fois-ci, dans le vieux P.A.T. Un projet qui me surprend car il a de la gueule et les prix sont très accessibles. http://www.legroupephoenix.ca/maisons_modeles/16K_Condominiums.html
  10. Why does montreal have worse roads than any other north american city? If climate really plays a role, why does ottawa or toronto have much smoother roads with a nicer texture and color, other than the newly repaved hwy 40, i don't think there is a single nice road in this city, i am very cautious while i drive around i just never know what's on the way, i own a brand new car which i paid alot for and i keep fealing that these roads will destroy the suspension components prematurely. Will there ever be a solution for this problem? I mean even brand new pavement is usualy wavy and unproportionate and ends up looking just as bad as before after 2-3 years Oh and i'm new here! Hi everyone
  11. En dépit d'un prix du baril à la baisse, l'essence est reparti à la hausse avec une hausse exagérée d'une douzaine de cents depuis ce matin dans la région de Montréal. Et pourquoi croyez-vous qu'on abuse tant? Parce que nous sommes à l'approche d'un long weekend férié et que les pétrolières veulent fêter avec nous, en s'offrant un cadeau dispendieux à nos propres dépends bien sûr. Cette attitude est des plus scandaleuses et bassement mercantile car elles savent que le consommateur est sans recours et qu'elles peuvent le plumer sans risque d'être embêtées par les gouvernements, qui profitent eux aussi d'une hausse de taxe à la consommation, au passage. L'appétit vorace de ces entreprises est encouragé par nos "amis" réformistes-conservateurs qui couchent avec les pétrolières et qui souhaitent en plus les récompenser avec d'autres allègements fiscaux dans leur prochain budget. Pas de doute, nous sommes revenus aux pratiques sauvages d'avant la récession, avec des spéculateurs qui exagèrent nettement les risques de pénurie (puisque le pétrole libyen est compensé par du pétrole saoudien) et rien d'autre dans le monde qui justifie une telle prédation des prix. C'est une nouvelle crise artificielle de l'énergie qui pointe à l'horizon et qui dépassera certainement les hausses de prix qu'on a vu à l'été 2008, avant l'autre crise, créée elle aussi de toute pièce et que tout le monde connait. Nous sommes entrés dans une ère de grande instabilité causée par l'avidité sans limite des grosses corporations et des hauts dirigeants qui siphonnent littéralement les forces vives de la société. C'est un appauvrissement rapide des classes moyennes qui nous guette par un transfert forcé de la richesse vers le privé, et de la dette nationale vers le public. Et qui s'élève contre ces pratiques anti-sociales? Personne, bien au contraire. Pire encore, Harper veut diminuer la fiscalité des grandes entreprises dont profitera directement l'industrie pétrolière, sous prétexte de créer des emplois. Mais ces emplois seront créés de toute façon car le pétrole est devenu l'eldorado qui garantit des profits faramineux à quiconque s'y intéresse de près ou de loin. Ainsi le petit peuple passera deux fois à la caisse: premièrement à celle de la station service qui l'attend pour l'assommer avec son propre porte-feuille, et ensuite indirectement en subventionnant les compagnies qui exploitent des gisements par des baisses de taxes scandaleuses. Cet allègement fiscal enrichira davantage ces ogres financiers qui profitent une deuxième fois de notre argent, mais là sans rien en retour. Est-ce cela que nous souhaitons pour l'avenir de ce pays? Nous pouvons difficilement nous défendre contre les pétrolières, il faudrait une volonté politique énorme pour contrôler la situation et c'est possible avec le temps. Mais nous pouvons immédiatement réagir en mettant le gouvernement Harper à la porte en l'empêchant de donner nos taxes à des bandits en cravate qui, comme eux, n'ont aucune conscience morale ni sociale. Je suis révolté par ces pratiques moyenâgeuses et cette complicité intolérable des réformistes-conservateurs qui ne représentent pas l'intérêt des payeurs de taxes, donc des électeurs, mais de la grande entreprise. Pour reprendre le slogan de Terreneuve lors de la dernière élection en 2008, je propose moi aussi leur formule toute simple, mais à tout le pays: ABC "anyone but conservatives".
  12. Its LIVE Took almost 6 months but its finally in Canada. Take that TomTom GPS unit. Navigation is awesome you can drive around and you get Street View at the same time. Check it out <object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGXK4jKN_jY&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xd0d0d0&hl=en_us&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGXK4jKN_jY&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xd0d0d0&hl=en_us&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="385"></embed></object> One other thing. Google and Ford partnered up it seems so you can sync your Google Map info with your car Navigation system!
  13. http://www.autoblog.com/2009/12/11/report-detroit-three-call-japans-cash-for-clunkers-program-unf/ http://www.autoblog.com/2010/01/07/report-obama-urged-to-push-japan-to-open-its-cash-for-clunkers/ Protectionism in full swing once again in Japan. Why should their cars be eligible for cash for clunkers in the US, if American cars are not there. That is not free trade. Hopefully President Obama puts an end to this nonsense.
  14. 3 étages. Samcon. Rien de particulier. Peut-etre une densification timide du secteur car il y a quelques autres projets terminé récemment ou en cours dans le coin. http://www.samcon.ca/97-condos-a-vendre/Ahuntsic-Le-P40.html
  15. (Courtesy of The Montreal Gazette) WOW I am happy I don`t live on St Pierre anymore. This city has gone to the dogs. I guess its time to really go out and buy a bulletproof vest and armour up my car.
  16. J'avais envi de vous donner une vision du Portugal, principalement de Lisbonne car je trouve qu'on entant rarement parlé du Portugal à par le vin et le soccer et nos bon restaurant ici a Montreal.
  17. Alex Wurz on Montreal Last updated: 3rd June 2008 F1 Drivers Championship 2008 Drivers Championship Raikkonen 10/11 - Lewis 13/8 - Massa 7/2 - Click Here for a full range of markets. Also see F1 forum Live coverage Bet now with Sky Bet Honda's test driver, who finished third in last year's Canadian Grand Prix, describes a lap of the 2.709-mile Circuit Gilles Villeneuve, venue for Sunday's race... "Montreal is a nice Grand Prix. It feels quite similar to Australia in that everyone likes going there and there is a great city nearby that offers good restaurants and a vibrant atmosphere. I made my F1 debut at this race in 1997, so I associate it with the moment when it all came together for me and I like going back to Canada as a result. "Coming straight after Monaco, the cars feel strange to drive in low-downforce trim. They are always sliding around and you have to get your head around the fact that you rarely find a good balance. Tyre graining is also a big issue. "You arrive at Turn 1 in sixth gear and it's one of those corners that invites you to brake too late. You want to use the left-hand kerb as much as possible and if you brake too late, the car becomes unstable and the kerb feels much worse than it actually is. "This corner leads straight into a first-gear right-hander, which is very slippery early on in the weekend but improves as more rubber goes down. "Turns 3 and 4 make up another chicane and as the track improves you can jump the chicanes and be very aggressive. You run very close to the right-hand barrier at the exit, before positioning the car on the left in preparation for the flat-out right-hander. "The next chicane is quite bumpy under braking, but you can still brake very late and use the kerb on the left. You have to be careful not to unsettle the car because you need to be flat through the right-hander, which is followed by a long straight. "Then you go under a bridge and you're into another chicane, which has only one turn-in point. It's very easy to miss the entry point here and every year we see drivers getting it wrong and going straight on. "Next comes the hairpin. It is second or third gear, depending on your gear ratios, and it's very important to have good traction at the exit because the longest straight on the lap follows. You're flat-out for 15 seconds, before stamping on the brakes for the final chicane. "You try to brake later and later into here, but you have to be careful because things can go wrong very quickly. A small mistake and you'll be in the 'wall of champions' before you know it. "The two best overtaking points on the lap are into the hairpin and the last chicane, but it's not so easy due to the marbles off-line, especially late in the race."
  18. Ces risques diminuent en raison car les constructeurs devraient toucher jusqu'à 50 G$ US en prêts du gouvernement américain. Pour en lire plus...
  19. J'aimerais bien vous inviter à ce qu'on détende l'atmosphère sur MTLURB. Il y a des personnes qui prennent les débats trop au sérieux. Or un débat, s'il est fait de façon respectueuse est important et peut apporter des solutions constructives aux problèmes débattus. Je veux continuer à contribuer aux débats sans entraves, sans me faire censurer, mais je ne veux pas qu'on s'indigne inutilement. C'est un forum publique (tout le monde peut le voir) et privé (MALEK en est le propriétaire). Ça cause une ambiguité, car nos discussions sont modérées par MALEK et c'est ce qui donne un peu ce ton trop sérieux, et trop béliqueux (à mon goût). C'est pourquoi je vous invite à décrocher un peu, faire des farces, pas prendre tout ça trop au sérieux... comme si on étais tous autour d'une table entre gars (car il y a pas de filles ici). Friendly, mais avec des débats houleux. Si vous êtes d'accord
  20. Discard your stereotypes: people in the U.S. own fewer passenger vehicles on average than in almost all other developed nations. Americans love cars. We pioneered their mass production, designed iconic autos from the Model T to the Deville to the Corvette, and are a major exporter as well as importer. It's practically a part of the American national identity. But it turns out, according to a new paper from the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace on worldwide car usage, that American per capita car ownership rates are actually among the lowest in the developed world. The U.S. is ranked 25th in world by number of passenger cars per person, just above Ireland and just below Bahrain. There are 439 cars here for every thousand Americans, meaning a little more than two people for every car. That number is higher in nearly all of Western Europe -- the U.K., Germany, France, Spain, Italy, Belgium, etc. -- as well as in Japan, Australia, and New Zealand. It's higher in crisis-wracked Iceland and Greece. Italians and New Zealanders have nearly 50 percent more cars per capita than does the U.S. The highest rate in the world is casino-riddled Mediterranean city-state Monaco, with 771 cars per thousand citizens. America actually starts to look unusually auto-poor when cars per capita is charted against household consumption per capita, which the Carnegie paper explains are two typically correlated variables. That is, countries where household spend more money on average tend to also own more cars. The countries on the right side of the line are where people own fewer cars than you might expect. The developed countries on that side of the graph include the super-dense Asian city states (Macao, Singapore, Hong Kong) where car ownership is tightly regulated to keep traffic down, and the United States. The countries far to the left of the line own more cars than expected: car-crazy Italy, for example, and sparsely populated Iceland. I found this really surprising -- I'd always associated the U.S. closely with car culture, an impression anecdotally enforced by my interactions with non-Americans. So what explains the American outlier? The Carnegie paper explains that car ownership rates are closely tied to the size of the middle class. In fact, the paper actually measures car ownership rates for the specific purpose of using that number to predict middle class size. Comparing the middle class across countries can be extraordinarily difficult; someone who counts as middle class in one country could be poor or rich in another. Americans are buying fewer cars -- is it possible that this is another sign of a declining American middle class? Even if Americans are on average richer than Europeans, after all, U.S. income inequality is also much higher. According to the Carnegie paper, about 9.6 of Americans' cars are luxury cars, an unusually high number; but it unhelpfully defines "luxury" as "Audi, BMW, Mercedes-Benz, and Lexus" (no Cadillacs?), which may help to explain why Germany's "luxury car" rate is 26.6 percent. Still, it's also possible that the answer has less to do with Americans adhering to Carnegie's thesis about car ownership predicting middle class size and more to do with other, particularly American factors. Young Americans are spending less of their money on cars, as Jordan Weissmann explained, as they get driver's licences at lower rates and spend more of their money on, say, high-tech smart phones. Amazingly, Americans still manage to suck up far, far more energy per person than do the people in those Western European nations with so many more cars per capita. Our oil usage per capita is about twice what it is in Western Europe, and here's our overall energy usage: Whatever the reason for America's comparatively low car ownership rate, it may be time to update our stereotypes. The most car-obsessed place in the world isn't the nation of Detroit and Ford and Cadillac. It's Western Europe, the land of Peugeot and Smart Cars and Ferrari, where cars are most common. L'article avec les graphiques mentionnés plus haut: http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/08/its-official-western-europeans-have-more-cars-per-person-than-americans/261108/ L'étude: http://www.carnegieendowment.org/2012/07/23/in-search-of-global-middle-class-new-index/cyo2
  21. https://medium.com/@transitapp/the-mini-villages-of-montreal-s-metro-6900e158b2a The metro is the backbone of Montreal. Besides New York City and Mexico City, Montreal’s annual ridership is higher than every other subway system in North America. It’s a feel-good story if you’re from Montreal. But there are lots of big cities in North America. Why has the STM — Montreal’s transit authority — been so successful in getting us to ride the metro? One big reason: Montreal’s metro stations are incredibly well-integrated within the city’s densest neighbourhoods. Would you take the metro if it took you an hour to get there? Probably not. That’s why when urban planners design transit systems, they try to optimize transit station walksheds: the area around a transit station accessible by foot. Just because your grandpa walked seven miles to school (uphill both ways) doesn’t mean you should. Having a metro station within walking distance makes it more likely that you’ll actually use public transit, and not have to rely on a car. This visualization shows the population that lives within walking distance of each Montreal rail station: Montreal rail station walksheds’ population within 800m of stations. The sizes of the circles and the numbers inside them correspond to the population in 1,000 people (24 = 24,000). How does your station compare? In other words, if you were to shout really loudly outside most metro stations, there are lots of people who will hear you. There are thousands — and often tens of thousands — of people living within 800 metres of Montreal’s rail stations. And this is in a city with almost no skyscrapers! To create this graphic, we found the number of people in Montreal who live within 800 metres of the nearest rail station, which represents a 10 minute walk for a fully-grown human with average-sized legs. The Côte-Sainte-Catherine station has the most people living in its walkshed (about 28,000 people), followed by the Mont-Royal and Guy-Concordia stations (about 26,000 each). Mont Royal metro on the left (26,000 people), Montmorency on the right (6,000 people). Where would you rather live? Funnily enough, the metro station with the most foot traffic (Berri-UQAM) actually has less people living around it than the areas around the adjacent Beaudry, St. Laurent, and Sherbrooke stations. This is because many people going through Berri-UQAM don’t actually live there — they’re just stopping to transfer between the Orange, Green, and Yellow lines. Tweet at us!On the whole though, areas around metro stations are much more densethan the rest of Montreal: the population density within metro walksheds is more than 10,000 people/km², while population density outside of them is a mere 3,700 people/km². By giving Montrealers cheap, rapid, and reliable access to the rest of the city, metro stations encourage people to live nearby. But when people can’t live near stations (due to zoning or other reasons) you don’t see as much development, and neighbourhoods become much more car-reliant and “suburbified”. Consider Montreal’s AMT stations, which generally don’t have as many people living nearby as metro stations. AMT stations are often next to highways and surrounded by a sea of parking, while others are smack-dab in the middle of nowhere. The lack of dense housing nearby is one reason that the ridership numbers for the AMT (80,000 daily trips) pale in comparison to the mammoth numbers of the STM Metro (1,250,000 daily trips). When people live further away from stations, they have to rely on feeder buses or park-and-ride’s. To avoid that inconvenience, many people simply choose to use cars instead of taking public transit. Altogether, we’re proud that Montreal’s car cravings are comparatively light. When stacked up against similarly-sized North American cities, our public transit mode share is very high. Take a look: Originally posted by transit planner extraordinaire Jarret Walker on humantransit.orgLargely because of our city’s metro, over 20% of Montrealers take public transit to work, which is more than double the share in the metropolitan areas of San Francisco, Washington DC, and Seattle. Still, we can do better. In the STM’s Strategic Plan for 2020, one of the primary goals is to reduce the share of car trips from 48% of total trips down to 41%. To make up the difference, they hope to encourage more Montrealers to take public transit. There are many ways to acccomplish this goal: congestion pricing or better parking policies to discourage driving, increased service to boost transit’s convenience, and real-time customer information (iBUS anyone?). In particular, our walkshed graph shows that denser development should be an important part of the STM’s toolkit — notwithstanding the usual political hurdles. Our team at Transit App is also doing its part to make public transit more convenient in Montreal, and in many other cities around the world. From our Mile End office, our team is giving millions of people the flexibility and reliability of a car — without the burdens of actually owning one. Find out how we can help make your transit experience better: You can download Transit App for free on iPhoneand Android
  22. Bienvenue à Montréal! Ils ont été arreté 3 fois dans la meme journée et ils ont recu 2 contraventions http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/ontario-licence-plates-targeted-by-police-couple-claims-1.2564815 Ontario licence plates targeted by police, couple claims A Quebec couple got pulled over three times in one day while driving in a car with an Ontario licence plate CBC News Posted: Mar 07, 2014 9:15 PM ET Last Updated: Mar 07, 2014 9:15 PM ET Caroline Guy and Joey Menscik say they will contest the two traffic tickets they got in the same day. (CBC) A Quebec couple is crying foul after being ticketed twice, and pulled over a third time — all in the same day. Caroline Guy and Joey Menscik say they feel they were targeted for having an Ontario licence plate. The two were driving east on Hochelaga Street Thursday when they suddenly saw the flashing lights of an unmarked police car. “He gives me this ticket for $162. So I say ‘Why is that?’ and he says in Quebec we're not allowed tinted windows,” said Menscik, adding that he told the officer he was from Ontario. The couple has homes in both Ontario and Quebec. The couple got two fines of $162 each in the same day. (CBC) Guy was pulled over a few years ago for the same reason — with a Quebec plate on her car — and said the officer was more understanding. “I was given a warning to have the tint removed, that I'd have to go back to the station to prove that I'd had it removed, which I did and I had no issues with that,” Guy said. They wonder why they weren’t given a warning this time. Montreal police officials say an officer may use discretionary power, but the highway code is clear. “Seventy per cent of the light must pass through the windows that are both to the left and to the right of the driver. That is applicable to all vehicles that pass through the province,” said Sgt. Laurent Gingras of the Montreal police department. Gingras says when drivers take their vehicle into another jurisdiction, they should be aware of the rules and regulations and are expected to conform to them. Stopped twice in 10 minutes After Menscik’s $162-fine for the tinted windows, the couple was stopped again a few blocks away, near the Olympic Stadium, by another officer in another cruiser. “He says to me, 'You coasted through a stop sign,'” Menscik said. They were slapped with a second $162-ticket. Then, as they were about to enter the stadium's parking garage, the same officer intercepted them again for allegedly going through another stop sign. Menscik and Guy insist they respected the traffic signs and they don't think the tickets are coincidences. “I think it went [further] than that, at that point, because of the Ontario plates,” said Menscik, adding that they will contest the fines.
  23. (Courtesy of The Montreal Gazette via. The National Post When will people learn, never leave stuff in your car?!
  24. Salut la gagne! Etant à Vancouver, je vais en profiter pour poster des choses qui pourraient être d'intérêt pour Montréal. Vancouver council considers mandatory installation of electric car chargers City could require 10 per cent of new condo parking spots to include electric car chargers BY JOANNE LEE-YOUNG, VANCOUVER SUNJULY 8, 2009 Vancouver city council will soon decide whether to force developers to install electric car-charging stations in at least 10 per cent of all new condo parking lots -- a proposal that's creating a chicken-or-the-egg debate. If the vote goes through Thursday, Vancouver would be the first city in Canada with such a mandate for residential buildings. In addition to the 10-per-cent requirement for condo parking spaces, it would also see the city install a limited number of public charging stations at its EasyPark lots, eventually expand this to include on-street locations, and develop a strategy for retrofitting existing buildings. "Electric cars are coming. They are in Europe and in Japan," said Mayor Gregor Robertson, echoing observers who see that while Vancouver might lead Canada, it would be playing catch up to many cities elsewhere, such as San Francisco and Paris, which already each have hundreds of charging stations and growing culture for electric car use. "We need to be prepared." City staff estimate that the cost of installing chargers for 10 per cent of parking spaces, with allowance for future upgrades, would cost less than 0.5 per cent of the building cost. They believe that, while this would be a new cost to developers, it would "enable early adoption of EVs [electric vehicles] in our community, allow for later expansion as the market demands, allow the development industry to test the market take-up and introduce limited new costs that are not likely to adversely affect land values." The proposal would include an 18-month grace period for these requirements and support "developers to find possible strategies to offset the new incremental costs associated with this infrastructure." This, however, seems to be of little comfort to developers, who would like to see the ratio for charging stations reduced from 10 per cent to five per cent of parking stalls. In April, city staff made a proposal to the Urban Development Institute, which represents developers, that charging infrastructure would be required for 20 per cent of parking stalls. UDI responded that this ratio was too high, "given the cost of providing the infrastructure, the lack of widespread market penetration of the vehicle technology, and BC Hydro's capacity to deliver the additional power required to charge these vehicles." On Tuesday, Jeff Fisher, deputy executive director of UDI, said the organization is working with the city, but has some specific concerns. "We are always supportive of going green and efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but we want to make sure that this is the right green-car technology. There are a number out there. We have had hydrogen fuel cell vehicles and concepts like the 'hydrogen highway' for some time. We feel it might be premature to mandate this." He added that while 0.5 per cent of the cost of the building is small, "when you look at the cost of other fees that the industry is facing, in aggregate, it is more significant." Fisher said that, for now, UDI would prefer to see a voluntarily or incentive-based approach to making charging stations available. Part of the conundrum is that there are currently fewer than 10 such electric vehicles in the city. A few months ago, the City of Vancouver and BC Hydro signed an agreement with Mitsubishi Motors to use its newly-launched iMiev electric vehicle as test run models for their fleets. It's not clear yet exactly how many vehicles this will involve and exactly when they would arrive, but the hope is that orders would quickly increase. Don Chander, past president of the Vancouver Electric Vehicle Association, which supports the proposal, said that providing infrastructure for charging electric vehicles in all new multi-family residential buildings is increasingly important as density increases. He added that some 18 major automakers have announced electric vehicle models, making it "urgent to start building this infrastructure." The VEVA estimates that the average cost of implementing EV infrastructure at the time of construction is around $1,500 per parking stall. [email protected] - - - Read Joanne lee -young's blog at vancouversun.com/pacificwaves © Copyright © The Vancouver Sun
×
×
  • Create New...
adblock_message_value
adblock_accept_btn_value