ville mont-royal Royalmount

[ToxiK]

il y a 9 minutes, montreal67 a dit :

The very problem with this project is precisely that it is a Dubai mall-like project. Thankfully, somebody's moving (for once).

Why should the taxpayers pour billions to reconfigure an interchange when we have far more pressing mobility issues than ensuring an easy access to Carbonleo's parking ? Decarie has been congested for years. Do you really believe a new shiny highway interchange will change anything? There's too many cars. We have to fundamentally change the way we plan this city for people to move around differently and thankfully, that's what we're finally on the verge of doing here.

To change the way people move, we need to give them places to go where they can go in public transit, and this is what Royalmount is doing.  If the commercial part of the project is replaced by a big residential area, people living there will still need to go places, and if the most interesting places can only be reached in a car, then they will use a car.  That won't solve the roblems with the interchange, on the contrary.

[montreal67]

il y a 1 minute, ToxiK a dit :

To change the way people move, we need to give them places to go where they can go in public transit, and this is what Royalmount is doing.  If the commercial part of the project is replaced by a big residential area, people living there will still need to go places, and if the most interesting places can only be reached in a car, then they will use a car.  That won't solve the roblems with the interchange, on the contrary.

1- Du propre aveu du promoteur, la vaste majorité des clients qui frenquenteront son projet le feront en automobile. Les clients viendront de l'ensemble de la région métropolitaine et certainement pas en métro. Si même le promoteur le reconnait, pourquoi pas vous? La part des gens qui viendra en métro sera minime, toute l'équipe de projet le reconnaît lorsque questionnée en commission.

2- Le projet ne doit pas être remplacé par un vaste aire résidentielle, ce n'est pas la position de la commission ni même celle des citoyens qui se sont opposés au projet. Le projet devrait être remplacé par un projet MIXTE et une partie des commerces de destination prévus remplacés par des commerces journaliers, des services et des équipements institutionnels qui permettront de créer un quartier complet, lesquels minimisent les besoins en déplacements, automobile ou autre. It is entirely possible to build a fully functioning residential neighbourhood with interesting places to go.

Le plus drôle dans toute cette situation, c'est qu'un mélange entre commerces de destination (spectacles, grands magasins, boutiques) et commerces journaliers (épicerie, restos, cafés, petits magasins) serait POSITIF pour la rentabilité du projet et sa performance économique à long-terme. Les commerces journaliers se renouvellent facilement et ne seront jamais démodés, comme le deviennent d'autres grands ensembles commerciaux (Fairview, Carrefour, Dix30).

il y a 20 minutes, YMQ a dit :

Poor Montreal, they let the vocal minority ruin it for everybody.

Yeah, I don't think it's a minority. Royalmount somehow managed to get both parties in Montreal to unequivocally agree on something. That's impressive (and a welcome surprise, in my case). 

[Gotti]

31 minutes ago, montreal67 said:

 

Yeah, I don't think it's a minority. Royalmount somehow managed to get both parties in Montreal to unequivocally agree on something. That's impressive (and a welcome surprise, in my case). 

https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Élections_municipales_de_2017_à_Montréal

42.5% taux de participation aux élections municipales de 2017. Pas vraiment un majorité. Et ça n’inclus même  pas Les gens des villes defusionées.

I still don’t understand how it’s ok to change the rules of the game once everything is ready to go and has been approved by the authorities? The time to deal with these important issues was before and during the acquisition of land and planning phases. There will be severe financial and time penalties associated with changing the project to a mixed residential one. While I don’t agree with the project per say, I can’t understand how so many people are willing to change the rules because they don’t like it.

ive heard many here state that in this case an intervention is needed because this is a special case. It’s very easy to make any and all cases special- everyone has an opinion. 

 

Modifié 25 janvier 2019 par Gotti

[budgebandit]

1 hour ago, montreal67 said:

The very problem with this project is precisely that it is a Dubai mall-like project. Thankfully, somebody's moving (for once).

Why should the taxpayers pour billions to reconfigure an interchange when we have far more pressing mobility issues than ensuring an easy access to Carbonleo's parking ? Decarie has been congested for years. Do you really believe a new shiny highway interchange will change anything? There's too many cars. We have to fundamentally change the way we plan this city for people to move around differently and thankfully, that's what we're finally on the verge of doing here.

You said it best, Decarie has been congested for years. We should have "poured" money into this problem a LONG time ago. It has nothing to do with access to the Royalmount parking, but simply with the fact that this project may finally be the kick in the ass that the city/province needs to get things going in this area. Cars aren't going anywhere anytime soon and the 15/40 interchange is vital to our economy.

I agree, we need to fundamentally change the way we plan this city.... which includes re-configuring interchanges that have greatly exceeded their useful lifespans. 

[montreal67]

il y a 3 minutes, Gotti a dit :

https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Élections_municipales_de_2017_à_Montréal

42.5% taux de participation aux élections municipales de 2017. Pas vraiment un majorité. Et ça n’inclus même  pas Les gens des villes defusionées.

I still don’t understand how it’s ok to change the rules of the game once everything is ready to go and has been approved by the authorities? The time to deal with these important issues was before and during the acquisition of land and planning phases. There will be severe financial and time penalties associated with changing the project to a mixed residential one. While I don’t agree with the project per say, I can’t understand how so many people are willing to change the rules because they don’t like it.

ive heard many here state that in this case an intervention is needed because this is a special case. It’s very easy to make any and all cases special- everyone has an opinion. 

 

If you want to make the case that democratically elected governments don't have the legitimacy to speak for the majority (especially when they do so unanimously), then I don't know what to tell you and I don't think I'll change your mind. 

The project has been approved by Ville Mont-Royal only, after a pathetic process during which the promoter has been charged with illegal lobbying. Now that the project needs financial participation from Montreal and the MTQ, let's not act surprised that the administration wants to act responsibly and make sure the investment is the best use of the taxpayers' money. The scale of the project and the inequity of the impacts for the surrounding communities make it a special case, and one worthy of governmental intervention in my opinion.

[alaink]

Malheureusement c’est une des conséquences de l'élection de Valérie Plante et Projet Montréal, un des résultats serait de détruire l’entreprise privée dans la ville au grand complet comme ils ont fait sur la Plateau auparavant. Au pire ils vont remplacer ca par des pistes cyclables. Vivement les prochaines élections!

 

[montreal67]

il y a 3 minutes, budgebandit a dit :

You said it best, Decarie has been congested for years. We should have "poured" money into this problem a LONG time ago. It has nothing to do with access to the Royalmount parking, but simply with the fact that this project may finally be the kick in the ass that the city/province needs to get things going in this area. Cars aren't going anywhere anytime soon and the 15/40 interchange is vital to our economy.

I agree, we need to fundamentally change the way we plan this city.... which includes re-configuring interchanges that have greatly exceeded their useful lifespans. 

If we had poured money in the same solutions (as we did by the way - adding highway and interchange capacity), we would be stuck with the exact same problems. Enlarging highways has never solved congestion, just as loosening your belt does not cure obesity.

You want the city and the government to get things going in the area? That's exactly what's happening. We are finally drawing the line and blocking projects that only reinforce our dependency to the money pit that is automobile infrastructure (that's vital to the economy, far more than any interchange). Cars certainly aren't going anywhere if we don't do this in the first place. 

il y a 6 minutes, alaink a dit :

Malheureusement c’est une des conséquences de l'élection de Valérie Plante et Projet Montréal, un des résultats serait de détruire l’entreprise privée dans la ville au grand complet comme ils ont fait sur la Plateau auparavant. Au pire ils vont remplacer ca par des pistes cyclables. Vivement les prochaines élections!

Par curiosité, pour qui allez-vous voter aux prochaines élections? Les deux grands partis montréalais se sont rangés derrière les recommandations de la commission.

Étonamment, le Plateau est toujours l'arrondissement le plus en demande à Montréal. Une vraie catastrophe ces méchants environnementaux!

[budgebandit]

8 minutes ago, montreal67 said:

If we had poured money in the same solutions (as we did by the way - adding highway and interchange capacity), we would be stuck with the exact same problems. Enlarging highways has never solved congestion, just as loosening your belt does not cure obesity.

You want the city and the government to get things going in the area? That's exactly what's happening. We are finally drawing the line and blocking projects that only reinforce our dependency to the money pit that is automobile infrastructure (that's vital to the economy, far more than any interchange). Cars certainly aren't going anywhere if we don't do this in the first place. 

Par curiosité, pour qui allez-vous voter aux prochaines élections? Les deux grands partis montréalais se sont rangés derrière les recommandations de la commission.

Étonamment, le Plateau est toujours l'arrondissement le plus en demande à Montréal. Une vraie catastrophe ces méchants environnementaux!

The whole point to re-configuring the interchange is to provide a new solution and alleviate the problem.

 And you don't get things going by imposing new restrictions and blocking a project that's already been approved. The city can work with Carbonleo to make adjustments, just as they did with the residential component, in a constructive way. A way that lets other investors know: we are here to nurture your investment.... not to shoot it in the head. 

[montreal67]

il y a 3 minutes, budgebandit a dit :

The whole point to re-configuring the interchange is to provide a new solution and alleviate the problem.

 And you don't get things going by imposing new restrictions and blocking a project that's already been approved. The city can work with Carbonleo to make adjustments, just as they did with the residential component, in a constructive way. A way that lets other investors know: we are here to nurture your investment.... not to shoot it in the head. 

Have you even read the recommendations? That's precisely what it says. The city wants to help Carbonleo reshape its project and ensured all promoters they are willing to do the same with other projects to help them create complete neighbourhoods. The financial participation of the city, that the promoter requires, has never been approved. Unlike ville Mont Royal, the city has done its homework here.

Reconfiguring the interchange is the same solution to an old problem. Building complete communities is a logical solution to the same problem. As ever, the best mobility plan, around Décarie and elsewhere, is a smart land use plan. Thanks to the comission, we might now get it.

[budgebandit]

Tweaking and reshaping a project are not the same thing. Is the city going to compensate Carbonleo for completely reshaping the project at such at a late stage? Definitely not... 

They should have woken up a long time if that was their intention. 

Re-configuring and rebuilding the interchange is necessary, just as rebuilding the Champlain bridge was necessary.