Updates from June, 2022 Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Kate 08:41 on 2022-06-23 Permalink | Reply  

    The decline in oil heating and the closure of a big east‑end refinery have reduced the city’s overall output of greenhouse gases since 1990, but the transportation sector pushes in the opposite direction, with the number of vehicles on the island up 25% since 1990 even though the population only grew by 11.3%. Solid Le Devoir piece by Jeanne Corriveau.

    I still don’t know why we have to licence an unlimited number of vehicles. A second vehicle at any address ought to cost ten times as much to licence, and more than two ought to be forbidden.

    • Meezly 09:21 on 2022-06-23 Permalink

      Totally agree with the 2nd license being more expensive. Two vehicle households seem to be the norm and minimum in many suburban households because it’s so hard to get around without a car. If your dream is to own that big suburban lot with two-car garage, yard, pool etc. that uses up a lot of footprint and resources, you gotta pay the price.

    • Kevin 09:45 on 2022-06-23 Permalink

      I suspect the rise in the number of vehicles correlates with the rise in the number of dual-income households.

      In 1976, more than 7 out of 10 Quebec families had a stay at home parent. In 2015, it was less than 3 in 10.

      And while I always advocate living close to your workplace, when you’ve got 2 or 3 or 4 workers under the same roof it’s not possible.

    • Blork 09:58 on 2022-06-23 Permalink

      Living close to your workplace is a nice privilege, but it’s just that; a privilege. Many people change jobs every few years, and the jobs are all over the place. You’d be a fool to pull up stakes and move house every time you change your job.

    • walkerp 10:55 on 2022-06-23 Permalink

      And yet the growth is since 1990. I think there is another factor here and that is massive advertising, cheap credit and a pro-vehicle government controlled by the car lobby. How many of those second (and even third vehicles) are truly necessary?

    • Ephraim 12:03 on 2022-06-23 Permalink

      @Kevin – And not to the move to the suburbs, where you need a car to do anything…. like buy a carton of milk?

    • Meezly 12:36 on 2022-06-23 Permalink

      The system does make it “easy” to own multiple vehicles. Not to mention the foundation of suburban design since the beginning has been based solely on the motor vehicle. With recent trends of urban exodus, WFH, inflation, rising gas prices, etc. perhaps this will change suburban planning to become less car-centric.

    • Kevin 12:45 on 2022-06-23 Permalink

      I just did some quick checking and it seems like the populations in the West Island agglo cities has been pretty flat over the past 20 years. That indicates the actual population growth is elsewhere on the island.

      So in the confines of this analysis which is only looking at the island of Montreal, I think the changing nature of working life matters more.

    • Tim S. 13:15 on 2022-06-23 Permalink

      I tend to agree with Kevin and think that if we do make a second car more expensive, we’ll just be punishing families where two people need to work. Let’s increase public transit, increase housing density near transit, and then start to punish people for their choices. If only we had governments capable of making 10-year plans that people could actually take into account in their life planning.

      I’ve said it before, I can only afford to live in NDG because others chose to live in the suburbs. If they all move back, I’m screwed.

    • Meezly 14:08 on 2022-06-23 Permalink

      How would we increase public transit when the infrastructure is quite minimal in less dense areas? Improving public transit infrastructure would be a massive undertaking that would require oodles of funding… which has to come from somewhere, not to mention the years it would take for this to come to fruition.

      Not everyone is making conscious choices to reduce their carbon footprint and there’s a climate emergency enfolding in real time. In this context, why is making the ownership of a second car seen as “punishment”? It’s not really empathy for dual income suburban families that’s driving your argument but rather you actually don’t want the suburbanites to return to the city as they’d drive up your cost of living?

    • walkerp 14:22 on 2022-06-23 Permalink

      And do these underprivileged, struggling suburbanites needs gigantic trucks with king cabs and beds they never load anything with except their daughter’s mattress when they are dropping them off at McGill?

    • Chris 20:30 on 2022-06-23 Permalink

      >How would we increase public transit…

      Probably not by making it free, as has been argued for recently. People can clearly afford to buy all these extra cars, so they can afford public transit too. It needs to be more frequent, faster, cleaner, more comfortable, etc.

    • Ephraim 21:48 on 2022-06-23 Permalink

      I think that there is an increase in people who moved to further suburbs, like St Anne de Bellevue, which is essentially still on the island. But we are still making street parking available overnight. The city should allow overnight parking ONLY in resident zones and resident zones have one price for the first vehicle and a higher price for the second vehicle. You aren’t going to make people think twice about buying a second car unless you start to make it more dear and inconvenient. And one way is to stop allowing overnight parking without a resident permit.

    • dhomas 01:56 on 2022-06-24 Permalink

      @Ephraim After spending multiple tens of thousands of dollars on a vehicle and recurring fees for gas, the extra couple of hundred dollars for a vignette will not deter people from buying a second vehicle. We would need to make it more difficult to acquire the vehicle outright.
      This is why I think the whole EV subsidy program is flawed and should be abolished. It costs the government, and therefore us, money. Also, car manufacturers use it to increase their prices. For example, my parents are buying a new EV, and the estimated price went up as soon as the federal rebate was changed to include higher priced cars. Capitalists gonna capitalize, I suppose.

      Instead, we should take a page from Norway’s book. Give no subsidies for EVs. Charge a hefty tax for ICE vehicles. I’m talking a tax will make you think twice about buying a car, like 50%, so your $60k Ford F150 becomes $90k. Make the tax even higher for a second registered vehicle.

      If the goal of the EV rebate is to encourage adoption of electric cars, I think this would be much more effective. And it has the added benefit of bringing in tax revenue, instead of costing us. The problem is that it’s political suicide for any politician that proposes it.

    • Bert 12:38 on 2022-06-24 Permalink

      Why should a pedestrian, who does not have a drivers’ license or a vehicle be covered by insurance? Because they don’t pay insurance and our system is a no-fault system. So your insurance pays for your injuries, your damages.

      Car owners pay far above their share of taxes. Buy a new car… taxes. Buy a used car… taxes. Registration… taxes. License…. Taxes. Fuel… You wonder why any government loves vehicles…. Taxes.

      A single person with more than one car generates no more waste than having one car, as it is quite impossible to drive multiple cars at the same time. A multi car, multi person household generates more…. Taxes.

      On behalf of all car owners, you are all welcome.

    • JaneyB 13:19 on 2022-06-24 Permalink

      Public transit won’t compete favourable against the car until the commute time is the same or better. If it takes 3x longer by STM, no one will prefer it. People forget that those with day jobs would like to see their kids and little kids go to bed at 7pm. If parents can only get home by 7pm by transit, they will buy a car. Additionally, the mentally ill, masturbators, beggars etc do not add to the appeal of public transit and it is clear nothing will be done about them; appeals to their rights etc will just yield fewer riders.

    • Jonathan 06:22 on 2022-06-25 Permalink

      Haha Bert. You are not paying even a third of the cost of owning and operating a car. Car infrastructure is heavily subsidized by those not driving. On behalf of tax payers, you’re welcome.

    • Kevin 11:37 on 2022-06-25 Permalink

      It looks like Ste. Anne’s population has been hovering at 5,000 for decades.

      Off-island is a different matter… and a different matter.

  • Kate 08:35 on 2022-06-23 Permalink | Reply  

    Chaos continues as people camp in lines at passport offices.

    • Kate 08:35 on 2022-06-23 Permalink | Reply  

      Police have been out in Rivière-des-Prairies, even with their horses, to try to reassure residents they’re working on the problem of gunplay in the streets.

      • Kate 08:32 on 2022-06-23 Permalink | Reply  

        Many households are reaching the end of their lease without a new place to live and the city is stepping up its offer of help for people finding themselves in this jam.

        • Kate 08:24 on 2022-06-23 Permalink | Reply  

          A Montreal man murdered at a Mexican beach resort was wanted here on fraud charges.

          • Kate 08:07 on 2022-06-23 Permalink | Reply  

            Friday is St-Jean, and despite the possibility that the rain will continue, various festivities are planned starting Thursday evening.

            Also notes on what’s open and closed and a warning that the SQ will be ramping up highway patrols.

            And some highway closures for the long weekend.

            The Jacques-Cartier bridge will be closed Saturday night for the first of the fireworks festival shows.

            • Kate 08:04 on 2022-06-23 Permalink | Reply  

              Parts of Pierrefonds-Roxboro are under a boil-water advisory.

              Update: Lifted as of Thursday afternoon.

              • Kate 08:02 on 2022-06-23 Permalink | Reply  

                Appropriately, the Old Brewery mission has opened the city’s first wet shelter, meaning that people with serious alcohol addiction can get one beer per hour, or whatever maintenance amount they’re deemed to need. Only three people are in it so far, but they’re aiming to serve 30 eventually.

                No journalist has asked what brand of beer is being handed out, or whether it’s donated. I’d be curious.

                • Ephraim 21:51 on 2022-06-23 Permalink

                  I didn’t realize that they were actually giving them alcohol. I thought the point of wet shelters was to not require them to be sober to stay…. not to actually supply them with alcohol.

                • Kate 07:36 on 2022-06-24 Permalink

                  They have to give them a small maintenance amount because alcohol withdrawal can kill you. It’s not an open bar.

              • Kate 07:58 on 2022-06-23 Permalink | Reply  

                The Polytechnique has its first woman director in its 150‑year history.

                Compose new post
                Next post/Next comment
                Previous post/Previous comment
                Show/Hide comments
                Go to top
                Go to login
                Show/Hide help
                shift + esc