Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

FAQ: get together

Expand Messages
  • Daren Scot Wilson
    When are we going to get organized, pick a site, and get ... Wish I could provide answers, but all I can do today is elaborate on this question. Maybe we can
    Message 1 of 11 , May 3 5:41 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      When are we going to get organized, pick a site, and get
      >building/rebuilding?

      Wish I could provide answers, but all I can do today is elaborate on
      this question. Maybe we can extract further FAQs from this, and
      organize some ideas on determining good answers.

      This is a personal "FAQ" I often have asked into the empty air,
      because there haven't been many places to aim this question. There is
      Arcosanti (Paolo Soleri's creation, in Arizona) and once in a great
      while I hear an interview on the radio, or an article in a magazine,
      about car-free places (usually just in thought not reality.) But
      where can a real person go to join in?

      My thought: It's going to be very hard to convert an existing city to
      car-free, with most people not aware of the concept, the inertia of the
      mainstream, and massive car-support infrastructure already in place.
      Would it be easier to have a few hundred car-free oriented people just
      get together in one place, start a new town from scratch, and just keep
      it car free forever? I suspect it will take several creative,
      visionary millionaires. Would it be easier to "take over" an existing
      small town?

      I think of certain mass-transit projects -- Detroit's "People Mover", a
      monorail that connects a few building downtown. Unfortunately, never
      any building that I needed to visit. Things like that make a good show
      for political purposes, but do nothing or have fractional effects on
      car usage.
      Converting an existing city is, without doubt, necessary, but it's not
      going to happen until most people, leaders and citizens, see how it
      can be done. That means first, it has to be done somewhere, and for
      real not just for show, even if on a small scale.

      I think of the problems the smaller "third" parties have (Green,
      Natural Law, Libertarians etc) - not enough voters in any one city,
      county or state to regularly get their people in office. If all the
      (for example) Green members decided to all move to one town or county,
      they could take it over by outvoting the "natives". There are some
      towns already with strong numbers of members in particular minority
      parties -- did they develop that way by people moving in, or the
      propagation of memes among the "natives"?

      I am but a lowly physicist; social research is a black art to me. But
      I would like to understand these things, to know what "works" when only
      a small number of people see a better way.

      Rochester, Michigan, and Fort Collins Colorado have bike path along or
      near the main roads. They get used. Still there are thousands of cars
      for every bicycle...but there is something for the drivers to see every
      day, a reminder that bicycles exist.

      Yes, a list of "convergence points" for car-free living, and other
      sustainable living concepts, is VITAL to making things happen.
      Research on how many people would love to be in a car-free area, how
      many would be so committed as to be willing to pick up and move to make
      it happen.

      --
      Daren Scot Wilson
      darenw@...
      darenw.home.pipeline.com
      --------
      A ship in harbor is safe, but that is not what ships are built for.

      -- W. Shedd
    • Rob Hines
      Interesting idea, building a car-free town from scratch. It would set an example for the rest of the world, especially in NA where car-free seems so foreign.
      Message 2 of 11 , May 3 1:43 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        Interesting idea, building a car-free town from scratch. It would set an
        example for the rest of the world, especially in NA where car-free seems
        so foreign. Would it be possible for a certain number of people to
        create their own municipality? Is there a reference design for a single
        district car-free city (of course inter-district metro would not exist
        but interurban rail could be established to a nearby large urban centre)?


        On Friday, May 3, 2002, at 09:41 AM, Daren Scot Wilson wrote:

        > When are we going to get organized, pick a site, and get
        >> building/rebuilding?
        >
        > Wish I could provide answers, but all I can do today is elaborate on
        > this question. Maybe we can extract further FAQs from this, and
        > organize some ideas on determining good answers.
        >
        > This is a personal "FAQ" I often have asked into the empty air,
        > because there haven't been many places to aim this question. There is
        > Arcosanti (Paolo Soleri's creation, in Arizona) and once in a great
        > while I hear an interview on the radio, or an article in a magazine,
        > about car-free places (usually just in thought not reality.) But
        > where can a real person go to join in?

        I believe one needs a degree of some type of education that would be
        beneficial to the community before they would be allowed in; this is the
        case for Arcosanti.

        >
        > My thought: It's going to be very hard to convert an existing city to
        > car-free, with most people not aware of the concept, the inertia of the
        > mainstream, and massive car-support infrastructure already in place.
        > Would it be easier to have a few hundred car-free oriented people just
        > get together in one place, start a new town from scratch, and just keep
        > it car free forever? I suspect it will take several creative,
        > visionary millionaires. Would it be easier to "take over" an existing
        > small town?

        I don't think the car oriented residents would appreciate a take over
        via mass immigration to their town to force them to accept a car-free
        lifestyle.

        > I think of certain mass-transit projects -- Detroit's "People Mover", a
        > monorail that connects a few building downtown. Unfortunately, never
        > any building that I needed to visit. Things like that make a good show
        > for political purposes, but do nothing or have fractional effects on
        > car usage.
        > Converting an existing city is, without doubt, necessary, but it's not
        > going to happen until most people, leaders and citizens, see how it
        > can be done. That means first, it has to be done somewhere, and for
        > real not just for show, even if on a small scale.
        >
        > I think of the problems the smaller "third" parties have (Green,
        > Natural Law, Libertarians etc) - not enough voters in any one city,
        > county or state to regularly get their people in office. If all the
        > (for example) Green members decided to all move to one town or county,
        > they could take it over by outvoting the "natives". There are some
        > towns already with strong numbers of members in particular minority
        > parties -- did they develop that way by people moving in, or the
        > propagation of memes among the "natives"?
        >
        > I am but a lowly physicist; social research is a black art to me. But
        > I would like to understand these things, to know what "works" when only
        > a small number of people see a better way.
        >
        > Rochester, Michigan, and Fort Collins Colorado have bike path along or
        > near the main roads. They get used. Still there are thousands of cars
        > for every bicycle...but there is something for the drivers to see every
        > day, a reminder that bicycles exist.
        >
        > Yes, a list of "convergence points" for car-free living, and other
        > sustainable living concepts, is VITAL to making things happen.
        > Research on how many people would love to be in a car-free area, how
        > many would be so committed as to be willing to pick up and move to make
        > it happen.

        Rob Hines
        robhines@...
        108814008
        100 Riverdale Dr
        Sydney NS B1R 1P4
        Canada
      • powerwalker
        How about Plateau Mont-Royal neighborhoods in Montreal? I ve heard that presently, 60% of households live carfree. Most housing are two or three story lined
        Message 3 of 11 , May 3 9:52 PM
        • 0 Attachment
          How about Plateau Mont-Royal neighborhoods in Montreal?
          I've heard that presently, 60% of households live carfree. Most housing are
          two or three story lined cottages, duplexes or triplexes. Many have access
          to street in front of the residence and an alley behind. There is virtually
          no private car parking, just on-street, and mostly reserved to residents.

          Depanneurs, drugstores, bookstores, hairdressers, and other facilities are
          available within a few blocks.

          You can cycle in 10-15 minutes, or take an half-hour walk, or ride the metro
          or bus to go downtown.

          It's not that far from Mont-Royal: the main park, hiking/picnic/nature
          beauty in the city. Mont-Royal is also across downtown. For students, two
          universities are across the Mont-Royal: McGill and Université de Montréal.
          Car access is much controlled, to the latter, making it a large pleasant
          campus to study and walk in.

          Given that:
          - 60% of households live carfree, meaning a massive majority of individuals
          do not rely on a car.

          - Our new Montreal mayor, Gérald Tremblay, is IN FAVOR of reducing car usage
          in the city (I've heard him promoting transit, cycling, repulsing the threat
          of right-turn-on-red put forward by our former provincial minister,...)

          - Our new provincial transport minister, Serge Ménard, also expresses
          himself in favor of improving transit and reducing car usage.

          - Existing buildings provide few or no facilities to store a car. So not
          much rebuilding would be needed.

          Given the above facts, that almost all car traffic is driven by
          non-residents, and that residents have already complained about too fast
          traffic, I think Plateau Mont-Royal should be a good place to start a
          carfree neighborhood with people from all around the world.

          There are many good points, and a promising future once the grassroots are
          settled, like a tree that grows:

          - Montreal has a low crime rate.

          - It's not far from downtown, so a carfree neighborhood could expand with
          many links to downtown.

          - It's not far from Mont-Royal. There are already many complaints from
          residents to dismantle the arteries next to Mont-Royal park (Parc and Des
          Pins avenues) which is an ugly beast from the 50s that drives heavy suburb
          car traffic between Laval and downtown. People already pretend it's not a
          safe place to walk and denounce the lack safe accesses to Mont-Royal.

          - You'd be in Quebec's multicural metropolis, within Canada, known to be a
          country with high life quality (despite average car usage, I guess). In
          Montreal, it's easy to find a shop, or business, owned by a person natively
          from outside North America. I hear quite often people communicating in a
          language other than French or English. So it's easy to bring your cultural
          legacy; we could implement districts representing cultures from around the
          world (like a ChinaTown for instance). Carfree residents would have the
          pleasure to walk between districts, and may feel like they're travelling
          around the world!

          Maybe there are better neighborhoods elsewhere around the world, but I
          thought it's worth mentioning Plateau Mont-Royal.

          If other know Montreal, and find weaknesses or other strong points, don't
          hesitate to comment.
          Also feel free to describe some other places that would be easy to get
          together and conquer as carfree.


          Louis-Luc Le Guerrier

          > -----Original Message-----
          > From: Daren Scot Wilson [mailto:darenw@...]
          > Sent: 3 mai, 2002 08:41
          > To: carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com
          > Subject: [carfree_cities] FAQ: get together
          >
          >
          > When are we going to get organized, pick a site, and get
          > >building/rebuilding?
          >
        • J.H. Crawford
          ... As it happens, I spent some time as a child in the Town of Mount Royal, a close-in railroad suburb of Montreal and know both McGill and the park somewhat.
          Message 4 of 11 , May 3 11:12 PM
          • 0 Attachment
            Louis-Luc Le Guerrier said:

            >How about Plateau Mont-Royal neighborhoods in Montreal?

            As it happens, I spent some time as a child in the Town of Mount Royal,
            a close-in railroad suburb of Montreal and know both McGill and the
            park somewhat. I'll comment some on this idea.

            >I've heard that presently, 60% of households live carfree. Most housing are
            >two or three story lined cottages, duplexes or triplexes. Many have access
            >to street in front of the residence and an alley behind. There is virtually
            >no private car parking, just on-street, and mostly reserved to residents.

            This is a basically sound beginning condition.

            >Depanneurs, drugstores, bookstores, hairdressers, and other facilities are
            >available within a few blocks.
            >
            >You can cycle in 10-15 minutes, or take an half-hour walk, or ride the metro
            >or bus to go downtown.

            This makes it much better.

            >It's not that far from Mont-Royal: the main park, hiking/picnic/nature
            >beauty in the city. Mont-Royal is also across downtown. For students, two
            >universities are across the Mont-Royal: McGill and Université de Montréal.
            >Car access is much controlled, to the latter, making it a large pleasant
            >campus to study and walk in.

            The park is the icing on the cake.

            >Given that:
            >- 60% of households live carfree, meaning a massive majority of individuals
            >do not rely on a car.
            >
            >- Our new Montreal mayor, Gérald Tremblay, is IN FAVOR of reducing car usage
            >in the city (I've heard him promoting transit, cycling, repulsing the threat
            >of right-turn-on-red put forward by our former provincial minister,...)
            >
            >- Our new provincial transport minister, Serge Ménard, also expresses
            >himself in favor of improving transit and reducing car usage.
            >
            >- Existing buildings provide few or no facilities to store a car. So not
            >much rebuilding would be needed.
            >
            >Given the above facts, that almost all car traffic is driven by
            >non-residents, and that residents have already complained about too fast
            >traffic, I think Plateau Mont-Royal should be a good place to start a
            >carfree neighborhood with people from all around the world.

            I agree that this could be an excellent starting point, especially as
            a large percentage of local residents would probably be strongly in
            favor and might work actively to implement the change. There is one
            significant problem that I see--Montreal has some of the worst winter
            weather of any city in North America. It's much colder than Toronto
            and gets a lot of snow. I know that some people manage to bike through
            this winter, but I doubt if there are very many people who are willing
            to do this. Those living in the area who are now dependent on cars for
            getting to work are going to resist this change strenuously. Solutions
            will have to be found for them, which will entail either providing good
            public transport alternatives or findng a parking place for them on
            the edge of the carfree area.

            >- It's not far from Mont-Royal. There are already many complaints from
            >residents to dismantle the arteries next to Mont-Royal park (Parc and Des
            >Pins avenues) which is an ugly beast from the 50s that drives heavy suburb
            >car traffic between Laval and downtown. People already pretend it's not a
            >safe place to walk and denounce the lack safe accesses to Mont-Royal.

            I seem to recall Parc as a six-lane thoroughfare that was the way
            we got to downtown when we drove (mostly we took the train). The
            problem with cutting this is that it's going to affect a lot of
            people who are just passing through on their way downtown, as
            Louis-Luc says. This is where the fight will come (and probably
            also with Des Pins, which I don't recall). It boils down to the
            right of inner city neighborhoods to be free of all traffic,
            including that of suburbanites. It will be a real struggle. One
            possible solution is to get people to park their cars farther out
            and take the train or metro on into town. Another approach would
            be a daytime access charge of $5-10 such as is being proposed by
            Ken Livingstone for London.

            >Maybe there are better neighborhoods elsewhere around the world, but I
            >thought it's worth mentioning Plateau Mont-Royal.

            So, what are you going to do next? As it happens, I think we have
            several people on this list from Montreal.

            Good luck!






            -- ### --

            J.H. Crawford Carfree Cities
            mailbox@... Carfree.com
          • J.H. Crawford
            ... Ken Avidor has developed a plan for an isolated small city of about 30,000 people. There s a very small sketch of it in Carfree Cities. It s similar to the
            Message 5 of 11 , May 3 11:16 PM
            • 0 Attachment
              Rob Hines asked:

              >Is there a reference design for a single
              >district car-free city (of course inter-district metro would not exist
              >but interurban rail could be established to a nearby large urban centre)?

              Ken Avidor has developed a plan for an isolated small city of about
              30,000 people. There's a very small sketch of it in Carfree Cities.
              It's similar to the reference district in many ways, with, of course,
              the necessary transport changes, in this case a light-rail system that
              would connect with an Amtrak station.



              -- ### --

              J.H. Crawford Carfree Cities
              mailbox@... Carfree.com
            • powerwalker
              ... Yes. I know Town of Mount Royal, which is also a nice place to live carfree, but it s not the same as Plateau Mont-Royal neighbourhoods. Anyways, both are
              Message 6 of 11 , May 5 9:58 PM
              • 0 Attachment
                > >How about Plateau Mont-Royal neighborhoods in Montreal?
                > As it happens, I spent some time as a child in the Town of Mount Royal,
                > a close-in railroad suburb of Montreal and know both McGill and the
                > park somewhat. I'll comment some on this idea.
                >
                Yes. I know Town of Mount Royal, which is also a nice
                place to live carfree, but it's not the same as
                Plateau Mont-Royal neighbourhoods. Anyways, both are
                not that far from each other and neighbourhoods near
                the train station where you mention could also become carfree. I think it
                would be a bit harder though since it's less dense than Plateau.
                The best thing to do is to convert the easiest places first, and then expand
                outwards.

                > This is a basically sound beginning condition.
                >
                As it is presently, lineups build up at the front door of "Apartment For
                Rent" signs, and it's the worst place to choose if you are car-dependant.
                This means places where you can easily live carfree are in demand. Imagine
                what will happen should these neighbourhoods become carfree.

                > The park is the icing on the cake.
                >
                Yup. You don't have to drive our of the city to nature places to escape city
                noise; just climb up the mountain!


                > I agree that this could be an excellent starting point, especially as
                > a large percentage of local residents would probably be strongly in
                > favor and might work actively to implement the change. There is one
                > significant problem that I see--Montreal has some of the worst winter
                > weather of any city in North America. It's much colder than Toronto
                > and gets a lot of snow. I know that some people manage to bike through
                > this winter, but I doubt if there are very many people who are willing
                > to do this. Those living in the area who are now dependent on cars for
                > getting to work are going to resist this change strenuously. Solutions
                > will have to be found for them, which will entail either providing good
                > public transport alternatives or findng a parking place for them on
                > the edge of the carfree area.
                >
                Yes. Improving public transport is always the solution. We should implement
                more trams/buses to ensure a fast link to the metro, hence a fast link to
                the underground network. Once you enter the metro, you don't face bad
                weather until you pop out at your destination station. Or better, if your
                workplace or school is linked to the Underground Network, then you don't see
                bad weather until you're back out of the metro after the day.

                A solution would be to put more year-round bike parking (for hard core
                cyclists), and locker facilities for skis (or skates, scooters...) at the
                concerned metro stations. Once cars are gone, snow could be removed on only
                half of the street (reduce snow removal costs) to allow wheeled devices to
                travel and easy walking, and the other half could keep its natural snow
                cover to allow skiing (faster than walking) as a transportation mode.

                Another solution could be to build a couple more metro stations, and/or
                extending the underground tentacles of existing ones. The ones near Plateau
                only have one or two exits, so they could be improved with several tunnels
                running several blocks, like the ones downtown, hence reducing necessary
                outdoor walking.

                If we can get people to walk no more than 5 minutes outdoor (at worst 10?)
                to the nearest metro entrance, then the problem would be somewhat handled.

                And turn another ugly wide fast artery in the periphery into a parking strip
                for residents and visitors?

                > I seem to recall Parc as a six-lane thoroughfare that was the way
                > we got to downtown when we drove (mostly we took the train). The
                > problem with cutting this is that it's going to affect a lot of
                > people who are just passing through on their way downtown, as
                > Louis-Luc says. This is where the fight will come (and probably
                > also with Des Pins, which I don't recall). It boils down to the
                > right of inner city neighborhoods to be free of all traffic,
                > including that of suburbanites. It will be a real struggle. One
                > possible solution is to get people to park their cars farther out
                > and take the train or metro on into town. Another approach would
                > be a daytime access charge of $5-10 such as is being proposed by
                > Ken Livingstone for London.
                >
                Good ideas. Maybe, in each direction, one lane for a train, one for cars
                with the access charge, and one
                for cycling and/or buses...

                > >Maybe there are better neighborhoods elsewhere around the world, but I
                > >thought it's worth mentioning Plateau Mont-Royal.
                >
                > So, what are you going to do next? As it happens, I think we have
                > several people on this list from Montreal.
                >
                > Good luck!
                >
                Since our mayor showed up in favor of reducing car use, Montrealers on this
                list could gather and present such a project to him and brainstorm about
                solutions.
                Or better: inform the residents about this possibility.


                Louis-Luc
              • J.H. Crawford
                ... Sorry, I didn t mean to nominate Town of Mount Royal for carfree status--the plateau sounds much better (although TMR is a reasonable candidate for the
                Message 7 of 11 , May 5 11:11 PM
                • 0 Attachment
                  Louis-Luc replied:

                  >Yes. I know Town of Mount Royal, which is also a nice
                  >place to live carfree, but it's not the same as
                  >Plateau Mont-Royal neighbourhoods. Anyways, both are
                  >not that far from each other and neighbourhoods near
                  >the train station where you mention could also become carfree. I think it
                  >would be a bit harder though since it's less dense than Plateau.
                  >The best thing to do is to convert the easiest places first, and then expand
                  >outwards.

                  Sorry, I didn't mean to nominate Town of Mount Royal for carfree
                  status--the plateau sounds much better (although TMR is a reasonable
                  candidate for the future).

                  >As it is presently, lineups build up at the front door of "Apartment For
                  >Rent" signs, and it's the worst place to choose if you are car-dependant.
                  >This means places where you can easily live carfree are in demand. Imagine
                  >what will happen should these neighbourhoods become carfree.

                  If the change become permanent, it would probably be possible to
                  build new housing in the middle of the streets.

                  >> Those living in the area who are now dependent on cars for
                  >> getting to work are going to resist this change strenuously. Solutions
                  >> will have to be found for them, which will entail either providing good
                  >> public transport alternatives or findng a parking place for them on
                  >> the edge of the carfree area.
                  >>
                  >Yes. Improving public transport is always the solution. We should implement
                  >more trams/buses to ensure a fast link to the metro, hence a fast link to
                  >the underground network. Once you enter the metro, you don't face bad
                  >weather until you pop out at your destination station. Or better, if your
                  >workplace or school is linked to the Underground Network, then you don't see
                  >bad weather until you're back out of the metro after the day.

                  Can you post a map of the area, with existing metro and tram (?) routes,
                  as well as the distance and direction to the park & downtown?

                  >A solution would be to put more year-round bike parking (for hard core
                  >cyclists), and locker facilities for skis (or skates, scooters...) at the
                  >concerned metro stations. Once cars are gone, snow could be removed on only
                  >half of the street (reduce snow removal costs) to allow wheeled devices to
                  >travel and easy walking, and the other half could keep its natural snow
                  >cover to allow skiing (faster than walking) as a transportation mode.

                  There's a problem where the streets cross, in that a 3-4 meter wide
                  strip of bare asphalt would have to be crossed on skis ever block.
                  But it's a reasonable suggestion, I think. Perhaps short strips of
                  Astroturf would allow both skiers and pedestrians to cross.

                  >Another solution could be to build a couple more metro stations, and/or
                  >extending the underground tentacles of existing ones. The ones near Plateau
                  >only have one or two exits, so they could be improved with several tunnels
                  >running several blocks, like the ones downtown, hence reducing necessary
                  >outdoor walking.

                  Perhaps, although these tunnels, if they are to be equipped with stores,
                  require a lot of foot traffic to support. I'm not saying that enough
                  foot traffic wouldn't be available, but it has to be considered.

                  >If we can get people to walk no more than 5 minutes outdoor (at worst 10?)
                  >to the nearest metro entrance, then the problem would be somewhat handled.

                  What I don't recall from my time in Montreal is how windy it is in
                  the depths of the winter. I seem to recall that temperatures of
                  -20 C are common and that it gets even colder. If it's windy, then
                  walking 10 minutes or more outdoors can really be a problem.

                  >And turn another ugly wide fast artery in the periphery into a parking strip
                  >for residents and visitors?

                  This is a really tough issue, in fact. It will be almost impossible
                  to see the carfree plan if you FORCE everybody to give up the car.
                  I think some provision will have to be made for residents to own
                  cars and keep them at the edge of the carfree area. This could bd
                  done in a way that made it very expensive, so as to discourage that
                  and maybe encourge a modest amount of carsharing, but I don't see
                  it as being possible any other way. This doesn't necessarily mean
                  more street traffic and parking in the surrounding areas than now
                  exists. If you give residents in the adjacent areas exclusive
                  rights to use available street parking (by way of stickers), and
                  provide only multi-level underground garages (with steep rental
                  rates) for residents of the carfree area, then you've pretty well
                  handled the problem. Traffic should be down, not up, since there
                  will be fewer people driving to and from the area than now.

                  >Good ideas. Maybe, in each direction, one lane for a train, one for cars
                  >with the access charge, and one
                  >for cycling and/or buses...

                  The issue of commuters to downtown using Parc will require very
                  serious attention. I don't know that we have a solution yet.

                  >Since our mayor showed up in favor of reducing car use, Montrealers on this
                  >list could gather and present such a project to him and brainstorm about
                  >solutions.
                  >Or better: inform the residents about this possibility.

                  Start with local groups, I think. Keep the mayor's office informed
                  as soon as you have 100 members or so, but don't look for much
                  help from there until the movement is large (although you might
                  be pleasantly surprised).

                  Regards,



                  -- ### --

                  J.H. Crawford Carfree Cities
                  mailbox@... Carfree.com
                • powerwalker
                  ... I ll see what I can find. Grossly, it s between metro stations Berri-UQAM and Jean-Talon on the Orange line. The STM (Montreal Transport Society) site is
                  Message 8 of 11 , May 6 8:28 PM
                  • 0 Attachment
                    >
                    > >> Those living in the area who are now dependent on cars for
                    > >> getting to work are going to resist this change strenuously. Solutions
                    > >> will have to be found for them, which will entail either providing good
                    > >> public transport alternatives or findng a parking place for them on
                    > >> the edge of the carfree area.
                    > >>
                    > >Yes. Improving public transport is always the solution. We
                    > should implement
                    > >more trams/buses to ensure a fast link to the metro, hence a fast link to
                    > >the underground network. Once you enter the metro, you don't face bad
                    > >weather until you pop out at your destination station. Or better, if your
                    > >workplace or school is linked to the Underground Network, then
                    > you don't see
                    > >bad weather until you're back out of the metro after the day.
                    >
                    > Can you post a map of the area, with existing metro and tram (?) routes,
                    > as well as the distance and direction to the park & downtown?
                    I'll see what I can find. Grossly, it's between metro
                    stations Berri-UQAM and Jean-Talon on the Orange line.
                    The STM (Montreal Transport Society) site is www.stm.info. The suburban
                    train Montreal/Deux-Montagnes (the one that stops in TMR) passes under the
                    Mount-Royal in a tunnel. I imagine adding a station in the tunnel, with a
                    stairway up into the park! That would make a link from Underground downtown
                    into the nature...

                    >
                    > >A solution would be to put more year-round bike parking (for hard core
                    > >cyclists), and locker facilities for skis (or skates,
                    > scooters...) at the
                    > >concerned metro stations. Once cars are gone, snow could be
                    > removed on only
                    > >half of the street (reduce snow removal costs) to allow wheeled
                    > devices to
                    > >travel and easy walking, and the other half could keep its natural snow
                    > >cover to allow skiing (faster than walking) as a transportation mode.
                    >
                    > There's a problem where the streets cross, in that a 3-4 meter wide
                    > strip of bare asphalt would have to be crossed on skis ever block.
                    > But it's a reasonable suggestion, I think. Perhaps short strips of
                    > Astroturf would allow both skiers and pedestrians to cross.
                    >

                    > >Another solution could be to build a couple more metro stations, and/or
                    > >extending the underground tentacles of existing ones. The ones
                    > near Plateau
                    > >only have one or two exits, so they could be improved with
                    > several tunnels
                    > >running several blocks, like the ones downtown, hence reducing necessary
                    > >outdoor walking.
                    >
                    > Perhaps, although these tunnels, if they are to be equipped with stores,
                    > require a lot of foot traffic to support. I'm not saying that enough
                    > foot traffic wouldn't be available, but it has to be considered.
                    Ah. I thought more about bare tunnels first, then with time spaces along
                    could be rented for stores where there is enough foot traffic. Two sources
                    of revenus (with taxes) to the city Council: one at surface, and one
                    underground!

                    I know some businesses opened up in some downtown tunnels which were bare
                    several years ago. Downtown, some shops stay a year or two, they move
                    elsewhere and leave the place for a new one, etc....


                    >
                    > >If we can get people to walk no more than 5 minutes outdoor (at
                    > worst 10?)
                    > >to the nearest metro entrance, then the problem would be
                    > somewhat handled.
                    >
                    > What I don't recall from my time in Montreal is how windy it is in
                    > the depths of the winter. I seem to recall that temperatures of
                    > -20 C are common and that it gets even colder. If it's windy, then
                    > walking 10 minutes or more outdoors can really be a problem.
                    >
                    Yes, it often windy, sometimes the temperature gets to -20 or colder, but
                    the occurence have been more scarce in the past few years. 10 minutes is my
                    walk for home to train, but I know not everyone is willing to do this in bad
                    weather. So we still have the tram/bus solution for these cases, with heated
                    shelters?

                    > >And turn another ugly wide fast artery in the periphery into a
                    > parking strip
                    > >for residents and visitors?
                    >
                    > This is a really tough issue, in fact. It will be almost impossible
                    > to see the carfree plan if you FORCE everybody to give up the car.
                    No. I meant there car parking for residents and visitors. I envisioned
                    turning a 6-fast-lane artery into, maybe 1 lane in each direction, and
                    perpendicular parkings on each side (twice more parking than "standard"
                    parallel street parking). I don't know if it's a good idea, as there might
                    be some conflicts between traffic on the lane and people getting in or out a
                    parking space.

                    > I think some provision will have to be made for residents to own
                    > cars and keep them at the edge of the carfree area.
                    The above facility would be at the edge, or between two major carfree
                    neighborhoods.

                    This could bd
                    > done in a way that made it very expensive, so as to discourage that
                    > and maybe encourge a modest amount of carsharing, but I don't see
                    > it as being possible any other way. This doesn't necessarily mean
                    > more street traffic and parking in the surrounding areas than now
                    > exists. If you give residents in the adjacent areas exclusive
                    > rights to use available street parking (by way of stickers), and
                    > provide only multi-level underground garages (with steep rental
                    > rates) for residents of the carfree area, then you've pretty well
                    > handled the problem. Traffic should be down, not up, since there
                    > will be fewer people driving to and from the area than now.

                    >
                    > >Good ideas. Maybe, in each direction, one lane for a train, one for cars
                    > >with the access charge, and one
                    > >for cycling and/or buses...
                    >
                    > The issue of commuters to downtown using Parc will require very
                    > serious attention. I don't know that we have a solution yet.
                    I know this one is difficult, but if some places become totally carfree next
                    to it, then people will see the contrast in environment. Thus more residents
                    will require reduction in the traffic flow on Parc Avenue.

                    Louis-Luc
                    >
                    > >Since our mayor showed up in favor of reducing car use,
                    > Montrealers on this
                    > >list could gather and present such a project to him and brainstorm about
                    > >solutions.
                    > >Or better: inform the residents about this possibility.
                    >
                    > Start with local groups, I think. Keep the mayor's office informed
                    > as soon as you have 100 members or so, but don't look for much
                    > help from there until the movement is large (although you might
                    > be pleasantly surprised).
                    >
                    > Regards,
                    >
                    >
                    >
                  • J.H. Crawford
                    Louis-Luc replied: From the map links you provided, it s evident that this is a larger area than I had realized--it encompasses half a dozen metro stops. ...
                    Message 9 of 11 , May 7 4:24 AM
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Louis-Luc replied:

                      From the map links you provided, it's evident that this is a larger
                      area than I had realized--it encompasses half a dozen metro stops.

                      >> Perhaps, although these tunnels, if they are to be equipped with stores,
                      >> require a lot of foot traffic to support. I'm not saying that enough
                      >> foot traffic wouldn't be available, but it has to be considered.
                      >Ah. I thought more about bare tunnels first, then with time spaces along
                      >could be rented for stores where there is enough foot traffic. Two sources
                      >of revenus (with taxes) to the city Council: one at surface, and one
                      >underground!

                      Problem is you have to dig the tunnels on the basis of stores or no stores.

                      >Yes, it often windy, sometimes the temperature gets to -20 or colder, but
                      >the occurence have been more scarce in the past few years. 10 minutes is my
                      >walk for home to train, but I know not everyone is willing to do this in bad
                      >weather. So we still have the tram/bus solution for these cases, with heated
                      >shelters?

                      It would depend on circumstances. Perhaps yes.

                      >> This is a really tough issue, in fact. It will be almost impossible
                      >> to see the carfree plan if you FORCE everybody to give up the car.

                      >No. I meant there car parking for residents and visitors. I envisioned
                      >turning a 6-fast-lane artery into, maybe 1 lane in each direction, and
                      >perpendicular parkings on each side (twice more parking than "standard"
                      >parallel street parking). I don't know if it's a good idea, as there might
                      >be some conflicts between traffic on the lane and people getting in or out a
                      >parking space.

                      Angle parking is the worst for cyclists, as they are invisible to
                      cars backing out.




                      -- ### --

                      J.H. Crawford Carfree Cities
                      mailbox@... Carfree.com
                    • Rob Hines
                      ... Commuters from Laval are going to have to be forced on mass transit. I think that is the only viable solution. They can t be kept from traveling downtown
                      Message 10 of 11 , May 7 8:03 PM
                      • 0 Attachment
                        >> No. I meant there car parking for residents and visitors. I envisioned
                        >> turning a 6-fast-lane artery into, maybe 1 lane in each direction, and
                        >> perpendicular parkings on each side (twice more parking than "standard"
                        >> parallel street parking). I don't know if it's a good idea, as there
                        >> might
                        >> be some conflicts between traffic on the lane and people getting in or
                        >> out a
                        >> parking space.

                        Commuters from Laval are going to have to be forced on mass transit. I
                        think that is the only viable solution. They can't be kept from
                        traveling downtown and moving traffic to another artery will only move
                        the problem.
                      • Bijan Soleymani
                        ... No matter how bad the weather gets in montreal I can testify from personal experience (walking around) that it is technically possible to walk about 30-40
                        Message 11 of 11 , Oct 26, 2003
                        • 0 Attachment
                          "powerwalker" <exqmtl@...> writes:

                          >> What I don't recall from my time in Montreal is how windy it is in
                          >> the depths of the winter. I seem to recall that temperatures of
                          >> -20 C are common and that it gets even colder. If it's windy, then
                          >> walking 10 minutes or more outdoors can really be a problem.
                          >>
                          > Yes, it often windy, sometimes the temperature gets to -20 or colder, but
                          > the occurence have been more scarce in the past few years. 10 minutes is my
                          > walk for home to train, but I know not everyone is willing to do this in bad
                          > weather. So we still have the tram/bus solution for these cases, with heated
                          > shelters?

                          No matter how bad the weather gets in montreal I can testify from
                          personal experience (walking around) that it is technically possible
                          to walk about 30-40 minutes =~ 3kms. Now I don't expect everyone to do
                          something like this, but that's what is possible.

                          On a side note. I don't know many people who own dogs, but I think
                          they walk them year-round regardless of the weather (or at least they
                          do if they care about their dog).

                          Bijan
                          --
                          Bijan Soleymani <bijan@...>
                          http://www.crasseux.com
                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.