The Turcot Challenge Overview

Turcot Exchange

A link to a small video clip of the Turcot Exchange situation as it stands today. Though most definitely a biased view, it presents a pretty good overview for those who haven’t been following these major changes in the city. The film summarizes the current problem with the Turcot Exchange, then showcases the city’s solution and a few other proposed (better?) ones. An interesting 10 minutes.

Photo by Designwallah.

6 comments

  1. Definitely a biased “review”. I don’t know much about the Turcot issues or the various solutions that have been proposed, and that video did help me to be better informed. Other than stating that air pollution is bad (duh) and the Montreal construction industry is corrupt (again, duh), What are the actual details of both the current plan and proposed alternatives? It is easy to say “we will build light rail”, but a 10 minute video should get into the details a bit more.

  2. I love the turcot, even in its present dilapidated state. It takes you right where you want to go. Uses vast quantities of space to do so, but that’s just modern life for ya.

    Of course, this doesn’t mean that its replacement shouldn’t be better in every way.

  3. The biggest problem is that most of the anti-Turcot people are blind to letting people make choices for themselves. Instead of wanting to provide options for people they wish to remove them. Montreal doesn’t need a Pyongyang-style transport system.

  4. Cyrus, if you knew of even half the ideas that are out there over Turcot you might think differently. At the BAPE hearings there were depositions from groups as far away as Lachine and Cote Saint Luc. It is about a lot more than just what inner city people perceive as options. Personally, just as an example, I feel strongly that rapid rail to the airport has to be part of the talks. And there is lot’s more.

    When I was at the BAPE hearings someone said to me that the “Superhospital” up on the Glen was rather conspicuous by it’s absence. Indeed, where are they?

  5. I agree with Cyrus, I have spent a good 3 long hours going thru the BAPE report, yes it takes longer to read, but three hours was my psychological time limit reading the same rambling over and over.

    Those ideas you’re talking about are all in that BAPE report, most of them are inaplicable as the BAPE panel has concluded.

    Why when the BAPE doesn’t agree with you anti-car zealots, you don’t take notice of it?

    Conclusions of the BAPE:

    1-The capacity of Turcot should remain the same, but not augmented.

    2-All of “remove the highways” solutions are not realistic and thus ignored.

    3-Reserved lanes should be better studied, and by extension public transport going thru, but with conclusion at point 1 remaining.

    4-MTQ and the City have to find a middle ground to keep the expropriation at a strict minimum, to 0 if possible.

    5-Build highway 15 between Turcot and Champlain in a Décarie fashion, not elevated. This will reduce the sense of encirclment of the affected neighbourhood.

    Turcot will go ahead soon, with Richard Bergeron agreeing or not. As with the Hwy 25 bridge, a special law can be enacted in Québec City to make things work thru.

    Waiting forever is not an option, when the MTQ is paying 3-4 millions a year for engineer only to keep a daily watch on the structure, this means clear and present danger. Turcot has to be reconstructed asap.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *