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

RE: [carfree_cities] FAQ: get together

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 11 , May 3, 2002
    • 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 2 of 11 , May 3, 2002
      • 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 3 of 11 , May 3, 2002
        • 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 4 of 11 , May 5, 2002
          • 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 5 of 11 , May 5, 2002
            • 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 6 of 11 , May 6, 2002
              • 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 7 of 11 , May 7, 2002
                • 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 8 of 11 , May 7, 2002
                  • 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 9 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.