Updates from September, 2017 Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Kate 19:31 on 2017/09/16 Permalink | Reply  

    Prince Arthur’s pedestrian zone has officially reopened. I walked through it the other day. Not sure the blockages in the middle of the street, forcing walkers to move to the sides, is revitalizing in the way they seem to mean.

     
    • ste.ph 19:43 on 2017/09/16 Permalink

      If I can’t walk in the middle of the street, it’s NOT a pedestrian zone.

    • Chris 21:21 on 2017/09/16 Permalink

      I’m sure they did it to stop the cyclists from going through, a perennial complaint.

    • ant6n 21:35 on 2017/09/16 Permalink

      Then add a proper bike path.
      Or add one on Pine (wink).

    • David S 22:08 on 2017/09/16 Permalink

      Chris, it did not work. There are still many cyclists going through.

    • JoeNotCharles 22:13 on 2017/09/16 Permalink

      It seems like a popular place to hang out and drink on Friday night. So it’s got that going for it.

    • Chris 22:15 on 2017/09/16 Permalink

      ant6n: indeed they should. Prince Arthur *is* a bike path until St. Laurent, a dangerous busy street. the safe & rational choice for a cyclist is to continue on Prince Arthur. They should have put a bikeway there until St Dominique, then a bikeway on St. Dom until Pine.

    • Ephraim 09:02 on 2017/09/17 Permalink

      The bikes on Prince Arthur are now more dangerous than ever before. The police should just randomly come out and hand out the tickets. And the worst part is the far end, where the people from the readaptation centre walk.

    • Kate 11:38 on 2017/09/17 Permalink

      ste.ph, if I could star comments here, I would star yours.

    • Alex L 13:49 on 2017/09/19 Permalink

      I like the redesign. The trees and plants in the middle of the road help retain water instead of sending it all in the sewers. Think of it as a plaza instead of a street, like in many european or french cities where you have tables, chairs, benches, trees in the middle of an open space. The goal is to retain people for a while, not only have them pass through, I think it may work.

      That said, they obviously need to put a bike path on Saint-Laurent / Pine avenue. As pro-cyclist as I can be, I don’t think it would mix well on Prince-Arthur.

  • Kate 19:29 on 2017/09/16 Permalink | Reply  

    A man who attacked three women in the Plateau last year on top of a previous record may be declared a dangerous offender, a formal status under law that means he can be put away indefinitely.

     
    • MtlWeb39 21:05 on 2017/09/17 Permalink

      Predator.

  • Kate 07:47 on 2017/09/16 Permalink | Reply  

    Team Coderre has woken up to the power of cyclist clout, saying it wants a massive increase in bike use by 2032 and promising money. The gesture is being seen as pure electoral politics by some. Gazette link plays video.

    Meantime Projet is promising to make things easier for businesses along streets under excavation and construction.

     
    • Chris 12:20 on 2017/09/16 Permalink

      Humbug.

      They claim to want to go from our current pathetic 2.5% mode share to 15% by 2032. They only talk of money for the next 5 years though. Not clear if they mean $30 M per year more, or total. Either way, they seem to expect mode share to grow much much faster than their $ expenditure, so I call BS.

      It’s easy for them to promise, but it’s not like they haven’t already been in power for the last 4 years. What have they done? I should dig up numbers and graph mode share over time and expenditure over time. I’m sure this promise won’t fit at all.

    • Jack 13:39 on 2017/09/16 Permalink

      Coderre drives an SUV, so does his wife. They own and operate two automobile tanks any talk of cycling safety falling out of his mouth is BS. Any hope for cyclist lies in voting for Projet Montreal it’s that simple.

    • Tim 13:56 on 2017/09/16 Permalink

      @Jack: are you saying that an SUV driver is not capable of driving in a safe and respectable way towards cyclists? I don’t follow your logic.

    • Chris 14:18 on 2017/09/16 Permalink

      Tim: Ferrandez and most/all of the Plateau borough councillors bike regularly, Coderre does not. Having personal experience with something, or not, makes a difference.

    • Kevin 14:21 on 2017/09/16 Permalink

      The high flat front of an SUV is inherently more dangerous if it hits a pedestrian or cyclist.
      Instead of hitting a person’s legs, with the torso rolling onto the hood and the head smacking the windshield or hood of a car, the individual hit by an SUV gets the full impact in the chest.

      Not to mention the decreased visiblity from the driver’s seat. I’m surpised Escalades don’t have convex mirrors hanging above the front wheels.

      Last time I checked the mortality rate was twice as high for people hit by SUVs

    • steph 14:42 on 2017/09/16 Permalink

      Did he complete the tour-de-l’ile in 2015? http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/denis-coderre-weight-loss-making-progress-1.2981074

      Did he ever reach his healthy weight goal of 225 lbs? /s

    • Dhomas 16:10 on 2017/09/16 Permalink

      I ride my bike every weekday, at least 30km/day, to get my 2 kids to daycare in the bike trailer, then to get to work. On weekends, I drive my SUV (Nissan Murano) to go about some errands/visits. I think I’m pretty in tune with cyclist safety. Driving an SUV does not make you a bad person…

    • Chris 19:04 on 2017/09/16 Permalink

      So I’ve just read the ‘Montreal, Ville Cyclable’ document, and, Kate, you should strike the “massive increase” from your summary. :)

      The mot de maire has a serious typo: “Nous souhaitons augmenter de 15 % la part modale du vélo dans les quartiers centraux, d’ici les 15 prochaines années.” English document likewise says “by 15%”. Which is of course very different than “to 15%” which the rest of the document makes clear is what they mean. Sloppy!

      More importantly, they are talking about “les quartiers centraux” only!!!

      The linked Metro article falls for this trick summarizing: “Ce plan-cadre vélo vise principalement à hausser à 15% la part des déplacements à vélo dans les 15 prochaines années, contre environ 3% actuellement.”

      If you trust Velo Quebec’s numbers (probably the best source, despite their biases):

      http://www.velo.qc.ca/files/file/expertise/VQA_EDV2015_fr_lr.pdf

      page 15 has a summary of today’s modal share:

      Grand Montréal 1,5 %
      Île de Montréal 2,5 %
      Quartiers centraux 4,0 %
      Plateau Mont-Royal 10,8 %
      Villeray 6,4 %

      Coderre’s document talks about getting to 15%, but they never say what they consider the current rate is, nor do they define where exactly the ‘central neighbourhoods’ are. So they could mean going from 4 to 15, or 10.8 to 15. And over 15 long years! So hardly a massive increase any way you slice it. I gotta dig up a graph of car growth as comparison. :)

      Still, it’s progress that they are stating increasing modal share as a goal, instead of just km of bikeways.

    • Jack 23:07 on 2017/09/16 Permalink

      @Tim and Dhomas, I don’t know either of you and I do hope you are both good humans. If you are reading and engaging in this blog I know you are smart and curious. I want to be very clear as to what I am saying. If in 2017 you are driving a 5000 lb pound metal vehicle, fuelled by a know carcinogen that contributes to a planet that is obviously burning, then you and I don’t have the same values, its that simple. I’m arguing that Denis Coderre waking up , getting into his SUV and turning that key to go to City Hall is somebody who could care less about cycling or our planet.

    • dhomas 00:34 on 2017/09/17 Permalink

      @Jack: I’m not absolving Coderre of any wrongdoings with my comments (I actually am quite opposed to most of what he does) and if I could live entirely without my vehicle, I would. I simply try to avoid painting with too broad a brush, and I encourage others to consider individual circumstances, as well.

      This reminds me of an argument I often have with my brother-in-law, who says I’m a hypocrite by being pro-environment yet still taking my car to get to his house when I visit on weekends. I tell him that, yes, I take my car on weekends and not my bike or public transit because it is not feasible to do otherwise today. It’s an 18 minute car ride vs 1h15 by transit, or about 50 minutes by bike. With a family in tow and all the responsibility that comes along with that, it is additional time that I cannot afford to spend. However, my response is that simply because this is the case today, does not mean that we should stop fighting to improve the situation in the future. I hope that someday I can get to his house by public transit in less than 30 minutes; I would gladly leave my car at home if that were the case. I also hope that my next vehicle will be powered entirely by renewable sources without producing any emissions. However, until recently, there were no such viable options (there were no real EVs in 2009, when I bought my 2006 Murano). I’m also not convinced that buying an EV would offset the damage to the environment of me trashing my existing car.

      In essence, I’d like to think that the fact that I own and occasionally drive an SUV does not detract (too much) from my efforts as an environmentalist. And for the record, my car weighs about 4000 lbs. ;)

    • Tim 14:23 on 2017/09/17 Permalink

      At the age of 40 last year, I became a first time car owner when my retired parents downsized from two to one cars, coincidentally in advance of my first child. It’s a Carolla that is used primarily to run errands on the weekends, similarly to @dhomas.

      Prior to that, all of my transportation needs were met by transit, walking, cycling and car sharing.

  • Kate 06:33 on 2017/09/16 Permalink | Reply  

    Police found a bomb in an alley in Villeray Friday night and defused it. No data yet on who or why.

    CBC’s description “alley between Villeray Street and Des Érables Avenue” is odd: these streets intersect, they don’t have a between. CTV says police diffused the device (later corrected; my invoice is in the mail).

    Update: Cops now say the “bomb” was a firework.

     
c
compose new post
j
next post/next comment
k
previous post/previous comment
r
reply
e
edit
o
show/hide comments
t
go to top
l
go to login
h
show/hide help
shift + esc
cancel