No, but easily it could be over 1000 people using this! People from buses and everyone else south of rue exuinoxes……
1 « J'aime »
On revient au sujet principal: qui va payer? Je ne vois pas pourquoi CDPQi ouvrirait le portefeuille.
Et c’est somme-tout un problème de la ville et des propriétaires des terrains.
Er no, the 215 passes every 30 minutes at best, and Eastward there’s a stop before, and westward people have the option of the 164. It’s a very very local problem. Looking at the layout, that fence is more than likely owned by the restaurant, who pins it on the REM to shoo you away.
I’m done discussing this, as you are generalizing and overblowing a very small issue, and we’re talking past each other at this point.
alrighty everyone, im going to stop with this topic and just walk in frigid weather for a few months, in the summer ill take my bike. it sucks extremely but it is what it is
1 « J'aime »
Hi all - regarding the fence, very important to note that there is already a gate on this (apparently REM owned?) fence, on the northwest corner of the parking. It would take less than 15 minutes of labour to open the lock on it, a totally negligible amount of funds to increase pedestrian access to the REM for 100+ residents. Massive easy win for very little effort.
I’m confident we can fix this based on the info we have at the moment, we just need to put some pressure on the REM/city/other stakeholders ASAP.
I’ve written to the city council, and submitted a question that is to be addressed at today’s city council meeting. I encourage everyone to also write the council, their representative, and to REM management, so the demand is clear.
There is a city council meeting today (Tuesday Dec 2, 7:30PM) at the Saint-Laurent city hall, I encourage every concerned citizen who has time to go and bring this up to Alan DeSousa and the rest of the council at question period. @PowerGuy FYI if you have time tonight
12 « J'aime »
I don’t know if I’ll make it but I have already asked the rem, saint laurent counselors and even Crystal. Let’s see what they say!
1 « J'aime »
The Crystal owner just got back to me
Indeed the rem owns it, it seems Crystal doesn’t care about opening the gate or whatever…. We just need to pressure the rem. I’m hoping all goes well
10 « J'aime »
It may be the REM still and not the city, because the REM hands the area outside to the city later, but not right away. It may be worth it to reach out to the ARTM as they are also responsible for outdoor connections, especially in regards to bus connections like for here. They were responsible for the path being adjusted at Panama
3 « J'aime »
We should use that email while asking the REM why they don’t open that gate.
They can’t say it’s not theirs lol
@BoisFrancFenceREM will be at the Borough meeting tonight, I’ve gave him the emails!
J’étais là aussi, je lui laisse écrire la réponse, mais c’est surprenant.
Back from the city council meeting - it appears the current fence situation stems from a decision on the CDPQ’s side.
The mayor and council members confirmed they had been working with CDPQ with the goal of creating the shortest pedestrian link (this is clear based on how the new Frères-Vachon passage is built). For unclear reasons, CDPQ ended discussions with the city on this. The mayor said they’re still willing to push for it, but as things stand, the only confirmed passage is the one going through the Equinoxe condos, slated for 2028.
It seems the sticking point was a “servitude de passage” issue that would have created some kind of financial or liability burden - still unclear on the exact issue.
At this point, the pressure likely needs to be directed toward REM/CDPQ Infra’s management and public affairs teams.
Also if anyone has more insight into how passage rights/servitudes de passage might work in this context, that would be helpful.
11 « J'aime »
Sounds like the regional version of the Place Bonaventure exit.
- Why would we the CDPQi block a passage to our own services?
- Oh right, nevermind.
5 « J'aime »
To be clear do you mean the freres vachon passageway that’s slated to 2026?
Merci @BoisFrancFendeREM! En vidéo à -1:01:30.
4 « J'aime »
Indeed - I think especially with the Equinoxes condos having a passage confirmed, it will be difficult to convince the CDPQ to open this fence if it comes with any additional $/liability burden, since their primary stakeholder aren’t the residents, but rather their pockets.
Unless the borough offers them some sort of special derogation from all the rules that come with providing a right of way + the parking lot owners don’t ask for anything. I’m not a expert in any of this so I’m just speculating.
We will have this passage in (late) 2026 at some point - until then it might be worth trying to contact them/politicians but I can’t say I’m optimistic.
6 « J'aime »
D’où vient le 2026? La phase 2 est très proche du futur passage et la construction de cette phase devrait se terminer en 2028.
I call the fence being CDPQ’s story bullsh*t. Pay the owner the right of way and find out who really has the keys.
It’s the same thing with the town:
Political way of saying they hung up when we tried to foot them the bill. It’s technically a public passageway, it should be the municipality’s responsibility to make it so.
They probably did legislatively by requiring the condo project to implement a passageway. So basically you guys have to wait until the project is done and the new owners of the lot with the responsibility to provide a passageway takes possession and opens it up.
J’ai peut-etre mal compris le conseil mais j’ai cru avoir entendu confirmation pour 2026 + le site du developpeur immobilier mentionne occupation 2026. Je n’ai pas plus regardé que ca pour les condos. Si c’est 2028, l’argumentaire pour une ouverture temporaire deviens plus pertinent.
La phase 1 c’est été 2026 alors que la phase 2 c’est en 2028. Donc probablement que ça serait pertinent de voir avec CDPQ pour un passage… qui tôt ou tard la clôture sera coupée.