14 comments

  1. How many billions is this going to cost taxpayers?

  2. Alanah – your integration question was the first one asked by the OCPM –

    “Comment concevez-vous l’arrimage entre le projet d’un corridor d’autobus et des projets comme
    celui du SLR, de la navette ferroviaire vers l’aéroport, du tramway ou d’une gare Windsor
    réhabilitée dans une optique intermodale?”

    They have till Jan 12 to give a detailed answer but the Windsor station plans are very prelim now.

  3. According to the report, it would cost 141 million, compared to about 55 million to simply maintain the elevated structure for another 20 years. I imagine both of these estimates are subject to inflate massively as seems to be the norm in Montreal.

  4. Good thinking Niomi! Let’s stop any kind of development just because it is going to cost us money!

  5. booooo…..this would block my view of the Farine Five Roses sign from my office window at Place Bonaventure. :(

  6. good! they should do this, and start right away! i live in brossard, and make my way downtown pretty much everyday, passing through there. its ugly, hideous, and nasty. that area needs to DRASTICLY change

  7. By demolishing this autoroute -that was constructed with access to Expo 67 in mind more than anything else – we are correcting a significant, short-sighted error in urban planning and restoring the original street grid. This will go along way in helping to re-connect the tissue between Old Montreal and Griffintown. Furthermore, our central business district needs to grow and to expand its boundaries for many generations to come.

  8. The hatred of buses among urban design experts remains a source of aggravation and a major reason why urban design thinking is so easily dismissed as elitist.

    When confronted with buses, much urban design thinking tends to assume that they need to be slowed down. This not only pushes some bus riders back into their cars, it also means you get more of the problematic impacts of buses with fewer buses.

    If you want less of an impact of buses on your development, you should be helping them get through as fast as possible.

  9. Seeing the condos already in place in the area, like Notre-Dame around the Metro grocery store, does not augur well for the future. All very square and drab, and tall. Modern gloomy instead of old gloomy. I prefer the old.

  10. Does anyone have a picture of what’s there now to compare to the proposed development pictured above?

  11. There are a lot of flaws in this plan as evidenced by the questions at the public consultations so far. And how this all links with, for example, the Windsor Station plan, is extremely important. One of the reasons for the Bell Centre disaster was a total lack of a universal analysis of long term transportation options in the city and, of course, plain stupidity.

    But this plan is a relatively easy sell because it just looks so wonderful compared to what it looks like now. The whole Griffintown area is the least known close to downtown area to all Montrealers and the city and others felt it might be an easy no-brainer to just massively develop it. But things have changed in Montreal. Citizens are standing up and demanding that all these mega projects be at least held up to public scrutiny. We have learned that Griffintown has residents who care, plenty of heritage worth preserving, and the potential to be much, much more than just more boxes scattered around bus and train corridors. Build neighborhoods, not projects!

  12. While it would be great to take down the Bonaventure this particular project is so off the mark it is hard to believe. For one, the city plans to sell off the land the bonaventure sits on to developers to raise the money to do the project… BUT there are NO developers to make it real in the forseable future, simply because the real-estate market isn’t there so the money won’t be there for a long time and we could end up with a vast expanse of vacant land. To get that vacant land the plan dumps a bus corridor onto the Griffintown side of the tracks, spending 130 million (probably more) to bore a tunnel underneath the train track and create a bus passage on a street that will be less than 11 metres wide and driving 1400+ buses a day through what is an emerging residential neighbourhood of 1000 residents and growing. All the studies conducted failed to include proper analysis of the impact on the west side of the railroad track in Griffintown. No pollution, noise, public safety,etc studies… hmmmmm and they call this project “vivable et conviviale”. For who? the people who won’t be there for another 20 years? Griffintown is going to be turned into the wrong side of the tracks if the bus corridor happens.Do we really want that at the gateway to the city and the canal?

    I can’t see how this makes sense for a temporary solution… Temporary? if the vacant land will be temporary ie. 20 years or more, why not create a temporary corridor there or split the bus corridor between Bonaventure and Peel and use the money from the tunnel to start working on the SLR, and south shore metro’s asap? Why put the New City Gas works building at risk because the buses will be just about right up against the wall of this great building. The logic defies me. It wasn’t until the last night of the OCPM consultation evenings that it became clear… there are no developers but for some reason there is a rush to do this bus corridor. No question we need to do something about the Bonaventure expressway….. but not this… send it back to the drawing board cause if we can’t do it right, we should not be spending our tax dollars on something that is so wrong,……….. again.

    time to stop the rant
    firedup

  13. There is a better chance of Giza plateau being redeveloped, or Speer’s Berlin seeing daylight, than Montreal getting funds for urban renewal. We got all the money we asked for for the St. Lawrence Seaway, Expo 67, the 76 Olympics, Mirabel, the Metro, and all we gave Canada back were two nail biting referendums.

Leave a Reply

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