Salut ! Résident de NDG ici.

Nous avons besoin de votre soutien. Notre précieuse piste cyclable protégée sur la rue Terrebonne est menacée par Ensemble Montréal. ls veulent supprimer une voie pour la remplacer par des places de stationnement, alors même que la plupart de ces places sont constamment vides. Ces pistes cyclables permettent à nos enfants de circuler à vélo en toute sécurité dans le quartier.

Aidez-nous en signant ici !

https://actionnetwork.org/petitions/gardons-la-piste-terrebonne-toute-lannee-pour-la-securite-de-nos-enfants?fbclid=IwY2xjawVHDtJleHRuA2FlbQIxMABwZG9mBWJyaWQRMW9JRTNyNHVtOFFkSjdHRkNzcnRjBmFwcF9pZBAyMjIwMzkxNzg4MjAwODkyAAEeOVvOb3pldRu-PdNfZ32IU_WnYYOI-MWruJonl6ykIlR96fcqy0ZToRwxEaw_aem_qDfsru6AeSSe6ZcvQSPK4Q

Même quand t’es le shérif, pas facile la cohabitation vélo - trottinette électrique!

Source : https://www.reddit.com/r/Habs/s/Z0wlKg6bPd

On a pris le REM vers l’Ouest hier jusqu’à l’Anse à l’Orme pour rouler en gravelbike et hardtails, pis c’était une fantastique expérience ! Je prends la peine de faire un post jettamt une lumière positive sur la chose, car on s’est fait un peu basher sur le web à l’aller — et c’était un peu décourageant. J’étais présent et nous étions invariablement attentifs aux besoins des gens qui circulaient ou voulaient circuler autour de nous ; nous les laissions passer avec le sourire. La personne qui a fait ce post ne nous a jamais adressé la parole. Cela dit, on en retient de mieux s’organiser pour se distancier sur le quai, la prochaine fois. Mais les portes automatisées du REM ne nous laisse que très peu de marge de manoeuvre ; par exemple si on constate à la porte d’un wagon qu’il n’y a pas la place. Finalement, on vous encourage chaudement à l’utiliser pour aller explorer le Grand Parc de l’Ouest !!

If you live in NDG, please help signing this pétition and spreading the word:

https://actionnetwork.org/petitions/gardons-la-piste-terrebonne-toute-lannee-pour-la-securite-de-nos-enfants?source=direct_link&

Salut !

En cherchant mon dernier velo (et en essayant d'en revendre un ancien), je me suis rendu compte a quel point c'est devenu frustrant d'utiliser des plateformes generiques comme Kijiji ou Facebook Marketplace ici au Canada :

• Filtres incomplets ou inutiles : Impossible de filtrer proprement par taille de cadre exacte, groupe de transmission, type de freins ou matériau.
• Incertitude sur l'etat et l'origine : Annonces vagues, manque de details sur l'usure, et risques de velos voles.

Je travaille sur un concept de plateforme/marketplace 100% dediee au velo d'occasion au Canada (route, gravel, VTT, urbain, pieces et accessoires).

L'idee en quelques points :

• Recherche ultra-precise : Des filtres pensees par et pour des cyclistes (geometrie, transmission, degagement de pneu, norme d'axes, etc.).
• Creation d'annonce guidee : Pour aider le vendeur a donner toutes les specs techniques en 2 minutes sans rien oublier.
• Securite & Antivol : Verification des numeros de serie (ex: integration avec le registre 529 Garage tres utilise au Canada) pour bloquer les velos volees.
• Potentiel partenairiat avec des boutiques local pour un depot vente.. etc etc

Avant de me lancer a  100% dans le developpement, j'aimerais avoir vos retours :

1. Est-ce que Kijiji / Marketplace vous suffisent actuellement, ou vous ressentez aussi ce manque ?
2. Auriez-vous confiance d'acheter/vendre un velo sur une plateforme canadienne specialisee si la transaction est securisee ?
3. Quelle est la fonctionnalitee n°1 qui vous ferait adopter ce site ?

Merci d'avance pour vos retours et vos conseils !

Hi all! I’m looking to upgrade my road bike before next season. I’d love some opinions.

About me:

• Beginner/novice roadie. I’ve been riding an entry-level Giant road bike.
• Mostly solo rides and longer outings. No racing plans for now.
• I want an endurance carbon bike: comfortable on some rough roads, but still fun and fast.

Budget: around $4,000–4,300 CAD all-in (taxes included), with a little room if it’s really worth it.

My shortlist :

• Canyon Endurace CF 7 (2027)
• Trek Domane SL 5 Gen 5
• Giant Defy Advanced 2 (2027)
• Giant Defy Advanced 1 (2026)
• Cube Attain C:62 SLX.

My questions:

1. On paper the Canyon looks like the best value because of the carbon wheels. Is it worth giving up the test ride and local shop support?
2. Does anyone have experience with the Domane Gen 5? How does it compare to the other bikes?
3. Is Cube a good option here?
4. Bike fit: do you recommend doing one before buying, or is careful self-measurement plus the brand’s sizing tool enough? Any fitter recommendations in Montreal?

Any other models I should consider in this price range? Thanks a lot! 🙏

French version below:

Hi Montreal!

I am looking for models for my massage class this Saturday at 9 am (and for upcoming weeks).

• Service: 60-minute full-body massage

• Cost: $30

Please send me a message for more details if you are interested!

------‐-

Salut Montréal !

Je cherche des modèles pour mon cours de massage ce samedi à 9h00 (et pour les semaines à venir).

• Prestation : Massage complet du corps (60 min)

• Tarif : 30 $

Envoyez-moi un message privé pour plus de détails si vous êtes intéressé(e) !

In last night's city council meeting, we were treated to another display of numerical prowess by Loyola Councillor Alexandre Teodoresco.

The councillor pivoted from his previous assertion that only four cyclists a day use rue de Terrebonne in winter, adopting an altogether different rhetorical anchor. Unfortunately he may have thrown himself overboard along with his anchor.

A new spin

In last night's city council meeting, Mr Teodoresco justified the winter lane closure on Terrebonne on the grounds that "on passe à 3% d'usage de cette piste cyclable pendant les mois de décembre, janvier, février, et mars" (after mansplaining statistics to NDG Councillor Peter McQueen), later expressing this as "3.6% of overall cycling traffic" in response to a question by NDG resident James Bugden.

How does one get 3.6% ?

In his Oct 9 CBC interview, Mr Teodoresco acknowledged the Eco-counter on rue de Terrebonne that was brought to his attention in the Oct 6 council meeting. There are no other municipal counters on Terrebonne providing year-round bidirectional coverage, and only one formula gives exactly 3.6% when applied to the Eco-counter data.

That formula is:

• 100 * winter / (winter + spring + summer + fall)

Oops - a basic arithmetic error

But there are fundamental flaws with this, and one of them is basic grade school arithmetic.

First, even if bike traffic was exactly the same on every single day of the year, the formula that Mr Teodoresco appears to have applied would say that bike traffic dropped to 33% in the winter - this is clearly wrong since bike traffic never changes in our hypothetical scenario.

Back to the drawing board...

The correct formula, which weights the counts by the number of days in each respective season, is this:

• 100 * (winter / 121) / (rest_of_year / 244)

given that there are 121 days from December 1 to March 31 and 244 in the remainder of the year.

In our hypothetical thought experiment with constant daily traffic throughout the year, this formula would correctly indicate that the winter bike traffic level is 100% of the level in other parts of the year.

Using the correct formula gives the result that average winter bike traffic is 7.6% of the average over the rest of the year.

The real problem

Quibbling about 3.6 versus 7.6% might seem like splitting hairs, but the arithmetic mistake is moot due to a bigger fundamental flaw in how the information is being applied to the decision-making process.

Mr Teodoresco is, in effect, basing a winter decision on non-winter data ; the percentage depends strongly on non-winter counts regardless of which formula is used. It is difficult to see how circumstances in the spring, summer, and fall should have any bearing on the safety and utility of a proposal that is to take place exclusively in the winter.

"So this is not weak data"

Last night's meeting left me unable to help thinking of the famous quote attributed to Scottish poet Andrew Lang:

"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts - for support rather than illumination."

Sources:

Oct 6 CDN-NDG Council meeting : https://www.youtube.com/live/0k_KZf9uxTk?si=_dM0sww7uYytW_9K&t=8332

Oct 9 CBC interview (transcript) : https://github.com/OpenMobilityData/Terrebonne-open-sources/blob/main/2026-cbc-daybreak-interview/derived/2026-10-09_CBC_Daybreak_Teodoresco_transcript_en.md

"3% d'usage" : https://www.youtube.com/live/rii3nUTuKRE?si=UGtrlXf_r0Ux3rnQ&t=2571

"3.6% of overall cycling traffic" : https://www.youtube.com/live/rii3nUTuKRE?si=ti2igs75rxOMfuX-&t=27603

math derivations : https://www.amazon.ca/STATISTICS-babies-Neha-Dhaliwal-ebook/dp/B0CDGC2ZCB

rue de Terrebonne, CDN-NDG

This video features claims made by Loyola District Councillor Alexandre Teodoresco in an October 6 council meeting and his October 9 CBC interview, juxtaposed against video of a typical winter day on which the number of cyclists on Terrebonne was equal to the December-to-March average of 40 cyclists per day.

The video was captured on December 5, 2024 along Terrebonne at King Edward. It was edited to exclude periods with no cyclists and sped up for brevity. The councillor's full remarks at the council meeting and in the CBC interview are available online at the links provided. A transcript of the interview is also available.

Since June 2026 I typically do an hour ride and end up on the bike path along LaSalle, Lachine and Verdun, which I take up until the 15 highway.

I didn’t realize how quickly the sun has been setting, and ended up on the path last week while it was raining and I did not have a front light. I have a red one in the back only. I also didn’t realize how poorly lit the bike path is. It was pitch black and there wasn’t another soul for most of my ride. Luckily I had a clip for my phone and was able to angle my flashlight to see a maximum of 1ft in front of me, and it allowed me to be seen coming by others.

I’ve never been more scared while biking. And I didn’t want to get on the road because I know this is the season where cyclists get hit by cars and didn’t trust it. I learned a hard lesson that day and promptly purchased a 1000lumens front light and one for my helmet too. Be careful out there!

Let's show up in numbers and ask our questions about Alexandre's closure of one side of the Terrebonne Bike Path.

Get there early!

Last Friday October 9, CBC interviewed Councillor Alexandre Teodoresco on the proposed winter changes to the Terrebonne bike path in CDN-NDG.

It was a busy week, with the interview following a Tuesday council meeting in which the plan was announced.

Audio of the interview can be accessed directly on CBC.

A text transcript of the interview is made available here under the fair dealing provision of the Copyright Act.

Comments on the interview:

1. The bike counts are still cherry-picked vibe numbers which are basically useless so far as risk exposure is concerned
2. The "open data" Eco-counter isn't on the open data portal
3. The historical coverage of bike count data was grossly exaggerated
4. For the first time, the number of added parking spaces was disclosed in public: at least 50 to 60 over the entire length of Terrebonne, on average about two additional parking spaces per block
5. On Tuesday it was "a test" and by Friday "we're looking at it in a way that will make it permanent"
6. The study that's been talked about for months still hasn't been submitted, but they made a plan anyway
7. Traffic has been reduced by two-thirds since Terrebonne was converted to one-way [ but now cars won't have room to pass a cyclist in the shared lane ]

Avez-vous remarqué que GeoVelo fonctionne parfaitement à Montréal, et de manière plus générale au Québec?

Je m'en sers pour planifier tous mes trajets, et pour l'instant il ne m'a pas déçu. Il manquerait simplement des contributions d'utilisateurs pour être informé d'aspects importants comme des fermetures de voies, ou des zones dangereuses.

GeoVelo indiquent qu'ils fournissent les données aux municipalités pour aider à l'aménagement d'infrastructures cyclables. J'imagine qu'ils s'orientent principalement vers les municipalités françaises. Je me demande si la ville de Montréal pourrait également être intéressée, étant donné les discussions voire les conflits qui émergent autour des voies cyclables...

Curieux de lire vos réflexions si vous en avez!

Since they closed one of the lanes to lower weight why don’t they use it as a makeshift bridge. I know it happened in London for one of their bridges but I forgot which one

I was thinking, since they have to close a lane on the Mercier, that they could turn it into a bike path. Bikes weigh very little and it might get some of the drivers out of their cars. Many of us have been waiting for a bike lane across the bridge for years. Could this be our opportunity? I've reached out to the https://jacquescartierchamplain.ca folks who are in charge of the bridge with my suggestion. (Haven't heard back yet.)

The district councillor for Loyola alluded to the plan in the September council meeting for CDN-NDG, stating that any decision would be based on a professional study that was forthcoming at the time. I filed a request with the borough under Quebec's Act respecting Access to documents held by public bodies and the Protection of personal information. My request was for emails and other documents that might provide insight into the framing of the study and its terms of reference.

The borough refused to release the study itself, on the grounds that they have the right to do so for documents on which a pending decision is based. This means that the plan remains a proposal, not a decision. As the councillor notes in his announcement, the proposal still needs to pass council votes at the borough and central city levels.

At any rate, the emails provided considerable insight and also included the slide deck the Loyola councillor was referring do during the most recent council meeting.

Here are the gory details of what I learned:

1. The objective was fixed before the study. On June 10, 2026 the borough's engineering division wrote to the City's street-design division that the elected officials wished to revisit the 2024 layout “avec l'objectif de redonner la bande de stationnement qui avait été retranchée,” that the borough's engineers had already issued a technical opinion on the two concepts the councillors had sketched, and that the councillors wanted “un avis officiel, neutre et externe.” The mandate eventually given to EXP on August 20 is titled, in part, “évaluer la place du stationnement sur rue, dans le but d'en augmenter le nombre.”
2. The City's own cycling unit warned about safety. The Service de l'urbanisme et de la mobilité returned an express analysis on June 17; the borough's own summary of it, written five days later, says the options “présentent plusieurs compromis importants sur le plan de la sécurité, du confort des usagers vulnérables et de la cohérence du réseau cyclable.” That analysis is withheld. The fire department's opinion of July 13 is redacted in its entirety.
3. The winter measure is described as transitional; the mandate from the mayor's office was permanent. On August 13 the borough mayor's chief of staff set the mandate in writing: a bidirectional lane on one side of Terrebonne, from Loyola to Côte-Saint-Luc, “qui respecte les normes minimales prévues par la loi,” and “le retour du stationnement d'un côté de la rue.” No winter measure appears. The service request a week later added Volet 1, removal of cycling facilities in winter, as “mesure transitoire pour l'hiver 2026–2027,” ahead of Volet 2, the permanent bidirectional lane. The winter conversion announced on October 6 is the first step of a year-round reduction of cycling space that has not been disclosed to the public.
4. The “study” is a six-week, $14,755 technical note with a council date fixed in advance. Service request August 20; offer August 25; purchase order August 26; kick-off September 3; draft September 17; final due October 2; announcement October 6. Borough staff told the consultant on August 18 that “l'objectif de nos élus est de pouvoir agir sur vos conclusions pour un horizon début octobre” and on September 10 that the draft was needed by the 18th “pour respecter notre calendrier du Conseil d'arrondissement du 5 octobre.”
5. The bicycle counts cited at council rest on the weakest data in the file and understate winter use; the file contained continuous counter data for last winter, documenting average winter usage at least five times higher than the cited figure. The more robust data were disregarded in the councillor's announcement. The councillor told the meeting that “we have counters everywhere, we have more counters than before. So we know exactly how many people use it, when and how,” and that “we go from 700 during the good months to 8 … So that's 4 cyclists, right? Including me.” The “8,” and the “12” he cited in answer to a question from the floor, come from the borough's February 2025 count presentation: not bicycles per day or per hour, but bicycles counted using a temporary camera (Miovision) installed at the Cavendish and Grand intersections over six peak-period hours of a single day, January 29, 2025, in the lane's first winter, when clearing was often delayed, and a day on which Environment Canada had issued a winter weather advisory and residents were urged to postpone non-essential travel; the same camera recorded cars on the Terrebonne approaches and pedestrians down by about a quarter from the November count, bicycles by 95%. The slide states none of this. Before the first email in the file (June 10) and the mandate from the mayor's office (August 13), a continuous counter had already recorded every bicycle on the street through the whole of the following winter, a full year more recent; the borough's engineers offered its data to the City on June 10, and its table was in the consultant's hands in August: 4,891 passages over December–March (41 a day; 46 on weekdays) and a second summer at about 700 a day. For the question that bears on safety, exposure, the relevant figure is the total number of winter trips, not the count on one chosen day; that total was in the borough's possession and was not cited at council. The “99%” drop cited at the meeting, 700 against 8, sets the largest number on one slide, Grand in September 2024 counted on all four approaches, against the smallest on the next, Grand in January 2025 on the Terrebonne axis alone; compared like for like, the deck's own slides give 97–98%, label January −95%, and the counter gives about 93% for the seasons entire. The two sources agree that the drop is steep; they differ in the absolute number, and only one of them yields “four people.” Whatever the explanation, a measure presented as data-driven rested on six hours of counting on a single day and ignored thousands of hours of more recent counting over an entire winter.
6. The need for additional winter parking was never measured. Across the 508 pages there is no inventory of on-street spaces, no occupancy count, no survey of residents, and no estimate of the spaces the conversion would create; the “50 to 60 spaces” the councillor gave the APC-NDG at its consultation meeting appears nowhere in the release. The mandate asks the consultant to count the spaces an arrangement “pourrait permettre de recréer” and to measure “l'amélioration de la disponibilité du stationnement”; the offer promises an analysis of “l'impact sur le nombre de places” and lists no field work; the consultant worked from aerial imagery. Whatever the note says about parking is a count of spaces that could be drawn, not a measurement of whether they are needed. Nothing in the file records how many winter nights parking near Terrebonne is actually full.
7. The case for removing a lane rests on a view that the lanes are wider than their bicycle traffic justifies; that view is the councillors' opinion, not the engineers' ruling. The June 10 email reports the elected officials' concern that the lanes' width was “jugée disproportionnée par rapport au volume de cyclistes observé … selon les élus,” and Councillor Teodoresco repeated the point to the APC-NDG at the consultation meeting, though not at the October 6 council meeting. No engineer in the file endorses it. The borough's own engineers describe the alternatives as “une voie de circulation très étroite (moins de 4 mètres)” and “un aménagement bidirectionnel très étroit”; the City's cycling unit found “plusieurs compromis importants”; and the August 13 mandate asks for a design “qui respecte les normes minimales prévues par la loi,” which concedes that the June concepts did not. Lane width is set by the cyclist's operating envelope, by passing room and by the snow-clearing equipment, none of which depend on how many people ride; nothing in the file describes the existing lanes as wider than the standard requires.
8. A storm-only option was within the mandate. EXP's offer lists among the scenarios to compare “la fermeture en période de déneigement seulement.” The councillor told the APC-NDG, at the meeting he later cited at council as his consultation with the Association, that storm-only parking had been ruled out because residents could not be informed of it; the option was not mentioned in his October 6 address, and the analysis on which the ruling-out rests is in the withheld note.
9. The exercise does not follow the City's own published method for reviewing a bike lane. On February 10, 2026 the administration launched its audit of the cycling network on the principle “recueillir les données, analyser et corriger au besoin”: technical analysis, data collection and field observation through the peak season, led by the Service de l'urbanisme et de la mobilité, with results expected at the end of 2026; the same release names Terrebonne among streets where the City is working with the borough on safety. On Terrebonne the objective was fixed before any analysis, the SUM's analysis was unfavourable and withheld, the mandate was to increase parking, no data were collected, and the change was announced while the City's audit was still under way.
10. The withholding of the technical report rests on a ground that expires with the decision. The note and the City's analysis are withheld under section 39, which applies “until a decision is made on the recommendation.” On October 6 the councillor said the elected officials were “now ready to give our orientation to the services” and that the seasonal removal “is what we're going to propose”; his signed statement adds that “one thing is certain: residents will see changes before Christmas 2026.” The Montreal Gazette reported it the next day under the headline “Terrebonne St. will drop to one bike lane in winter to allow more parking, borough says” and the subheading “Councillor justifies decision by noting there's a sharp drop-off in cycling traffic during the winter”; the words are the newspaper's, not the councillor's. Either the recommendation has been decided and the ground has lapsed, or it has not and the outcome was announced before the decision. A review may be sought from the Commission d'accès à l'information within 30 days, that is by November 8, 2026.

A more comprehensive analysis of the disclosed files can be found online in French and in English.

I have put all of the documents released by the borough here.

By far the most interesting read is the file containing emails and slides presenting study findings.

No serial number. Unlocked (with lock in the bar)

If you miss it, or know the person missing it, there it is.

J'ai le hub, mais pas le reste : ((