The Official Moncton, NB Project Thread

[Taeolas]

True, Moncton needs a visionary council (and provincial government) that is willing to define a solid green belt around the cities to minimize the sprawl in the future and keep everyone snug within the city urban limits. (Freddy and SJ certainly could use that as well for that matter). It's best to do it now, while the city's are small and the belts are easy to set up, then later when growth has sprawled even more out of control (I'm looking at you Hanwell in Freddy.....)

[Ammn_guy]

It already exists to some extent on the north side, its not widely known.

They own land from Irishtown to mountain rd. It goes --> Caledonia industrial park --> Irishtown nature park, large swath east of McLaughlin rd above and behind Moncton high, then McLaughlin resevoir(most of the way to gorge rd, I think there is a gap they don't own between the end of Mapleton and gorge.

last year I think it was they purchased the land containing the gorge rd entrance to the concert site, then of course they have the on concert site and zoo.

I been waiting for them to build a giant trail connecting it all from Irishtown park to the zoo. They have been doing select, managed, wood harvesting on McLaughlin rd and off(south) of Ammon rd for the last 2 winters. There are City of moncton do not trespass signs on the logging rds.

Originally Posted by Taeolas

True, Moncton needs a visionary council (and provincial government) that is willing to define a solid green belt around the cities to minimize the sprawl in the future and keep everyone snug within the city urban limits. (Freddy and SJ certainly could use that as well for that matter). It's best to do it now, while the city's are small and the belts are easy to set up, then later when growth has sprawled even more out of control (I'm looking at you Hanwell in Freddy.....)

[JHikka]

Ottawa is a good example of a greenbelt being implemented but having little to no effect whatsoever. Development in Kanata and Barrhaven hasn't slowed and the greenbelt simply pushed more sprawl further out. I'm not entirely sure a greenbelt around Moncton would be entirely successful in dissuading growth beyond it.

Sprawl isn't going to be halted so long as it's easy to commute 20/30 minutes into the urban core with little to no issue. Living in a suburban community only makes sense when commute times are within a reasonable window to make the lost time economically feasible. The goal shouldn't be to make things more difficult for sprawling areas to develop but should be to make things more easy for urban areas to grow and densify. Give people reasons to live Moncton instead of commuting in from elsewhere. Suburban bedroom communities will run themselves into economic issues when they grow so large - they'll make themselves less appealing on their own in the long run.

[MonctonianSentinel01]

Originally Posted by JHikka

Ottawa is a good example of a greenbelt being implemented but having little to no effect whatsoever. Development in Kanata and Barrhaven hasn't slowed and the greenbelt simply pushed more sprawl further out. I'm not entirely sure a greenbelt around Moncton would be entirely successful in dissuading growth beyond it.

Sprawl isn't going to be halted so long as it's easy to commute 20/30 minutes into the urban core with little to no issue. Living in a suburban community only makes sense when commute times are within a reasonable window to make the lost time economically feasible. The goal shouldn't be to make things more difficult for sprawling areas to develop but should be to make things more easy for urban areas to grow and densify. Give people reasons to live Moncton instead of commuting in from elsewhere. Suburban bedroom communities will run themselves into economic issues when they grow so large - they'll make themselves less appealing on their own in the long run.

It's true. This is a very good point. People have already jumped over the green belt in Toronto and people drive more than 2 hours into work and then more than 2 hours home everyday. Green belt's don't work. Considering that people drive from Shediac, Bouctouche and even Rogersville outside of Miramichi every day.............where is this Green belt supposed to be placed? The actual flaw in urban design in North America that they keep on making is that they want everything placed in one location in the downtown core. Having millions of people rush from the suburbs and get squeezed into the downtown and then at the end of the day migrate back to the suburbs in the millions again.

What has been catching on in smarter cities, is that they are developing multiple cores where the population can support them. Building cores close by to where the sprawl is happening so that everyone doesn't need to migrate on a daily basics to where "downtown" is. Moncton is already on that course.

#1 Dieppe has their own core downtown.
#2 Moncton has a core in it's downtown
#3 Arguably Trinity is Moncton's 2nd core, especially if it had more office buildings and services
#4 Soon enough Riverview will also have something similar

There is no need to have everyone stacked up like hamsters and gerbils. Frankly it's been showed to be unhealthy mentally but in defense of it, it has been shown to be physically healthy because of exercise. Density in Europe is fine, everyone can take the subway, bike, scooter or walk and the cities are made for those modes of transportation. Here in North America (except for New York city), our cities are made to get around by car. We can't expect the same results as Europe, your literally talking about rebuilding every North American city. In North America we have car culture and were not willing to part away with our cars either, this makes 1 core cities very hard to move everyone around and to live. Coupled to the fact that most of us want our own piece of property with a house and not some downtown apartment where there is minimal space.

[David_99]

Causeway will close during new bridge project



The causeway between Moncton and Riverview will have to close for four to six months to accommodate the construction of a new bridge between the two communities. That means the Gunningsville Bridge will be the only way between the two communities during that time.

The pending traffic disruption is one of the host of details about the new $61.6-million project that the public can learn and ask questions about when DTI hosts a public presentation of the project on Wednesday in Riverview.

Times&Transcript

[BlackYear]

Jeezas! Who created that render on Windows 95 Paint? Hope it wasn't you.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by Budyser

Jeezas! Who created that render on Windows 95 Paint? Hope it wasn't you.

It was the same architects and engineers actually building the new bridge. :

[josh_cat_eyes]

I guess the good news is that for 4-6 months the causeway traffic circle will run a litte smoother. Bad news is that the traffic on the bridge is gonna get 10 times worse.

[Good2go]

Originally Posted by josh_cat_eyes

... the traffic on the bridge is gonna get 10 times worse.

Seriously though, I have seen the morning rush lined up to DQ. Even when Main Street at Jones Lake was down to one lane with traffic lights last year, it was still a much quicker route than taking the bridge.

[Franco401]

Originally Posted by Budyser

Jeezas! Who created that render on Windows 95 Paint? Hope it wasn't you.

That appears to a zoomed-in pixelated shot of a probably-ok render.

[josh_cat_eyes]

Originally Posted by Franco401

That appears to a zoomed-in pixelated shot of a probably-ok render.

Just look at the blockyness of everything. The truck on the bridge is completely out of proportion to the car that's next to it. The banks of the river or Bramm and then abruptly change to green along a solid line. It's not a very good render imo.

[Monctoncore]

Originally Posted by josh_cat_eyes

Just look at the blockyness of everything. The truck on the bridge is completely out of proportion to the car that's next to it. The banks of the river or Bramm and then abruptly change to green along a solid line. It's not a very good render imo.

It looks like it was made on Sim City 4

[josh_cat_eyes]

Originally Posted by Monctoncore

It looks like it was made on Sim City 4

More like the original Sim City. I often wished Sim City incorporated more realistic aspects to city's. Like big box stores, shopping malls, mix use, and smaller gyms or hockey rinks etc. In terms of city planning, I think Moncton is decent example of this clearly worked and this clearly didn't. In hindsight they probably wouldn't have a bunch of industrial zoning in the very middle of the city.

[BlackYear]

Last week during the ice storm outage, traffic lights were out everywhere and I got to thinking.

1) A large portion of Moncton drivers have no clue how to drive. Does Canadian Tire have sales on Drivers Permits?
2) A large portion of Moncton drivers do not follow the rules of the road, or they simply don't know them.
3) I witnessed dozens of drivers blowing right through 4 way stops, where the STOP signs were displayed at intersections where traffic lights were out due to power failure.

So my thought is, is Moncton ready for another large roundabout? This one would be located at the Vaughn Harvey & St George location.

Comments?

[MonctonRad]

This could make for an interesting discussion.

Personally, I like single lane roundabouts. They can make for more efficient traffic flow and any accidents (when they occur) tend to be low velocity ones with little risk of injury.

I am not a fan of multi-lane roundabouts however. They can be quite confusing, especially to drivers who are unfamiliar with the layout, and don't necessarily expedite traffic flow, especially in heavy traffic situations.

The two existing multi-lane roundabouts in Moncton (Causeway & Hall's Creek) work not too badly most of the time, but drivers are quite familiar with them and, except for rush hours, they aren't overwhelmed with traffic volumes. The fact that these roundabouts have large radii is a definite bonus as it gives drivers time for lane changes if necessary.

As for your proposal for a roundabout at St George & Vaughan Harvey, I don't think it would fly. The traffic volume there isn't too bad most of the time, and the real problem with Vaughan Harvey is the proliferation of poorly synchronized traffic signals along the entire length of that street. I would have them fix that problem first!!

[Franco401]

How about this:



This isn't a complete preview. IMO any roundabout there should include extensions of the bike lanes past this junction onto St. George street and better intersection designs than what I've drawn.

[ScoutDog]

I couldn't agree with you more. I am not lying when I tell you that it took me LESS time to travel from the Calgary Zoo (East) through the downtown core of Calgary, AB to the West side than to travel from the Moncton Hospital across the bridge to Riverview. I wrote a letter to city 5 years ago explaining how poorly the traffic lights are synchronized. At the time, they said they were addressing it.

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

This could make for an interesting discussion.

Personally, I like single lane roundabouts. They can make for more efficient traffic flow and any accidents (when they occur) tend to be low velocity ones with little risk of injury.

I am not a fan of multi-lane roundabouts however. They can be quite confusing, especially to drivers who are unfamiliar with the layout, and don't necessarily expedite traffic flow, especially in heavy traffic situations.

The two existing multi-lane roundabouts in Moncton (Causeway & Hall's Creek) work not too badly most of the time, but drivers are quite familiar with them and, except for rush hours, they aren't overwhelmed with traffic volumes. The fact that these roundabouts have large radii is a definite bonus as it gives drivers time for lane changes if necessary.

As for your proposal for a roundabout at St George & Vaughan Harvey, I don't think it would fly. The traffic volume there isn't too bad most of the time, and the real problem with Vaughan Harvey is the proliferation of poorly synchronized traffic signals along the entire length of that street. I would have them fix that problem first!!

[Franco401]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

This could make for an interesting discussion.

Personally, I like single lane roundabouts. They can make for more efficient traffic flow and any accidents (when they occur) tend to be low velocity ones with little risk of injury.

I am not a fan of multi-lane roundabouts however. They can be quite confusing, especially to drivers who are unfamiliar with the layout, and don't necessarily expedite traffic flow, especially in heavy traffic situations.

The two existing multi-lane roundabouts in Moncton (Causeway & Hall's Creek) work not too badly most of the time, but drivers are quite familiar with them and, except for rush hours, they aren't overwhelmed with traffic volumes. The fact that these roundabouts have large radii is a definite bonus as it gives drivers time for lane changes if necessary.

As for your proposal for a roundabout at St George & Vaughan Harvey, I don't think it would fly. The traffic volume there isn't too bad most of the time, and the real problem with Vaughan Harvey is the proliferation of poorly synchronized traffic signals along the entire length of that street. I would have them fix that problem first!!

The two you mentioned are not roundabouts but rotaries, defined by their larger size, higher speeds and lack of yield signs. A multi-lane roundabout is smaller (traffic calming) and has one very important rule: yield to ALL traffic inside the circle and never change lanes.

For all the complaints, the newly-built one on Route 8 in Fredericton works delightfully. Even at peak hours traffic moves along quickly. The widely-predicted wheel of death has been a rousing success, even last summer when it was the only way to/from New Maryland with the closure of the Regent Street overpass.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by Franco401

How about this:



This isn't a complete preview. IMO any roundabout there should include extensions of the bike lanes past this junction onto St. George street and better intersection designs than what I've drawn.

This is a nice design, and I'm sure it could work at this intersection. It's just that Vaughan Harvey/St George isn't typically a bottleneck (except when the power is out), and the real problem with Vaughan Harvey is the eight sets of traffic lights between Mountain Road and Assumption Blvd. I've gone this entire distance catching every single light. It's beyond frustrating. Sometimes I wonder if the city traffic engineer has a mean (or sadistic) streak in him..........

[Sunnybrae]

I never understood the multi-lane traffic circle. I know how it is suppose to work but human nature kicks in and people take it as a passing opportunity. Anytime I go to the inside lane, I get stuck in there because no one will let you back out, signal light be damned. Then you have the ones who don't bother to signal the lane change and it turns into NASCAR racing because they start to merge into you as you enter the circle.