ville mont-royal Royalmount

[SameGuy]

7 hours ago, vincenzo said:

People drive long distances to Mirabel outlets (so-so retailers), Saint Sauveur, etc,... They'll find a way.

Mr. Wickenheiser won’t find his Hublot Sang-Bleu 21 rubis in Sauveur, and he won’t bother with fighting traffic in the Decarie Circle; he’ll pick it up the next time he passes through any real World City (or its airport, which also has every LVMH boutique — and every Swatch- and Richemont-brand competitor’s boutique as well!). 

[peekay]

10 hours ago, lma13 said:

The problem is not the project. The problem is the decarie. Its traffic jam hell everyday with or without this project.

100% fault of Transport Quebec. 6 lanes (40 est + 15 nord) merge into 3 lanes. This is so completely ridiculous. Also, no emergency lanes. The population of Montreal grew both in numbers and prosperity to a point where a PRIVATE company wants to build a high end retail and residential project and we blame them instead of the real problem.

The issue of lost commute hours on the decarie exchange will not go away. It will get worse simply from population growth regardless of this project. 

[go_habs_go]

42 minutes ago, peekay said:

100% fault of Transport Quebec. 6 lanes (40 est + 15 nord) merge into 3 lanes. This is so completely ridiculous. Also, no emergency lanes. The population of Montreal grew both in numbers and prosperity to a point where a PRIVATE company wants to build a high end retail and residential project and we blame them instead of the real problem.

The issue of lost commute hours on the decarie exchange will not go away. It will get worse simply from population growth regardless of this project. 

Finally! This is the truth regardless of Royalmount being built or not. The Met and Decarie interchange are antiquated beyond belief and the government has turned a blind eye to it. Let's not even talk about the exit/entrance ramps on/off the Met and the insane lane merges along Cremazie.

[mont royal]

Unfortunately, double the access and all you will do is double the traffic.

its a lose-lose tailspin. 

lo

[SameGuy]

Agree. The solution isn’t more automobile access, but a “luxury mall” that depends on transit — at least in North America — will be a mall with no paying customers.

Now they’re talking about some kind of schizophrenic hybrid… is it a luxury goods mall? Or is it a theme park?

[GDS]

1 hour ago, mont royal said:

Unfortunately, double the access and all you will do is double the traffic.

its a lose-lose tailspin. 

lo

Induced Traffic will occur no matter what. Its a question of targeted investment - improving traffic fluidity on the  40/15 is a better investment towards density than building the 19 and continuing sprawl and especially the Quebec-Levis tunnel

[Né entre les rapides]

Il y a 3 heures, peekay a dit :

100% fault of Transport Quebec. 6 lanes (40 est + 15 nord) merge into 3 lanes. This is so completely ridiculous. Also, no emergency lanes. The population of Montreal grew both in numbers and prosperity to a point where a PRIVATE company wants to build a high end retail and residential project and we blame them instead of the real problem.

The issue of lost commute hours on the decarie exchange will not go away. It will get worse simply from population growth regardless of this project. 

True, except for one crucial point: it is not "100% fault of Transport Quebec".  The City of Montreal bears a large share of responsibility.  It is the City that opposed the completion of A-440, which would have allowed through traffic (including commercial/industrial) between Eastend Montreal and the western tip of the Island of Montreal, and further beyond in both directions, leaving the Met play its original, more modest role as an urban artery.  When building the Met (by the City, not the Provincial Government), no space was allowed for subsequent widening/capacity increase.  Only marginal improvements are feasible.  

 

[go_habs_go]

5 hours ago, Né entre les rapides said:

True, except for one crucial point: it is not "100% fault of Transport Quebec".  The City of Montreal bears a large share of responsibility.  It is the City that opposed the completion of A-440, which would have allowed through traffic (including commercial/industrial) between Eastend Montreal and the western tip of the Island of Montreal, and further beyond in both directions, leaving the Met play its original, more modest role as an urban artery.  When building the Met (by the City, not the Provincial Government), no space was allowed for subsequent widening/capacity increase.  Only marginal improvements are feasible.  

 

Good historical context, merci!

[GDS]

8 hours ago, Né entre les rapides said:

True, except for one crucial point: it is not "100% fault of Transport Quebec".  The City of Montreal bears a large share of responsibility.  It is the City that opposed the completion of A-440, which would have allowed through traffic (including commercial/industrial) between Eastend Montreal and the western tip of the Island of Montreal, and further beyond in both directions, leaving the Met play its original, more modest role as an urban artery.  When building the Met (by the City, not the Provincial Government), no space was allowed for subsequent widening/capacity increase.  Only marginal improvements are feasible.  

 

Except that

-The province has been in control since 1960 - there was plenty of room back then to expand the easements.

-The Ministry has the ability to expropriate, a few car dealerships and an abandoned NFB shouldn't be the "roadblock"

-It's actually over 55m wide in most areas. A better use of space allows for 15-18 lanes between highway, connector and city.

-They have had studies and assessments since the mid-90s on ways of improving the infrastructure

-Regardless of the City of Montreal's view of the 440 - it was still a Transport Quebec decision

[SameGuy]

More lanes is never the correct solution.