East end residents will finally get their say on the Notre Dame highway project today, when about fifty groups and individuals submit statements as part of the scheme’s public hearings process.
One of the concerned groups is Radio-Canada, which fears that the new highway would scuttle its plans to redevelop the vast parking lots of the CBC headquarters with new housing. “We expected an urban boulevard. This is the Decarie expressway,” fumed Vianney Bélanger, the project’s would-be developer. He questions the wisdom of converting Notre Dame into an eight-lane downtown highway. “There’s no one in the world that’s doing that anymore. It’s bringing back the urbanism of the last century!”
Montreal’s health and social services agency is also expressing alarm about the highway’s effect on the health and safety of east end residents. In order to limit the negative impact of increased traffic and pollution, it recommends widening Notre Dame to no more than six lanes. The agency is also worried that the bike paths and pedestrian overpasses included in the highway plan would become forlorn, isolated and havens for street criminals, who could prey on the cyclists and pedestrians who use them.
Perhaps the most pertinent analysis of the Notre Dame plan so far comes from the Gazette’s Henry Aubin, who wonders why City Hall has been so silent in the dossier. The only thing Gérald Tremblay has said in the matter is that, by reducing congestion, the Notre Dame plan would improve the quality of life in east end Montreal. This despite the fact that the provincial department of transport estimates that the Notre Dame highway would increase traffic by thirty-five percent — that’s an additional 23,000 cars rumbling through the east end every day.
“Notwithstanding the bus lanes, this project flatly contradicts the spirit of Tremblay’s transport master plan of last June,” writes Aubin. “That plan said cars would no longer rule — public transit would. The Notre Dame project would make it easier for off-islanders to enter the city without using public transit.” Ultimately, he adds, “Notre Dame Street would become a misnomer. An eight-lane artery is not a street. Let’s call a spade a spade. This is really a plan for extending the Ville Marie expressway.”
27 comments
I don’t know where he gets his facts from but American cities are constantly upgrading and adding to the highway network, especially in cities. Cairo is also building highways in their cities at extraordinary rates. I am sure with a little research you would find this to be the norm and not the exception because as every level headed person knows and understands, the road infrastructure is the life line of our economy. You want people to get to work? You want food in the groceries? We need the infrastructure to support that, as well as compete and be taken seriously as a city.
I’m not so sure that most American cities or Cairo are often held up as shining examples of successful urban centres. Aren’t they usually used as examples of what not to do?
Eric, don’t worry, containers will take the tramway and we will grow our food on the reclaimed land from the obsolete roads.
Well, Cairo for one is probably one of the oldest cities in the world, modernizing cities like that is a hell of a feat. The city here likes to complain and make excuses for itself using old infrastructure as an excuse, imagine what they must be going through there.
As for the US, I have never seen highways built so speedily and efficiently. I am always in shock that we haven’t caught up here with the technology at least. But the fact that they are constantly adding says something about the prosperity it brings and how important they know it is.
Um, don’t we have enough prosperity? How about some quality of life? A public culture where people mingle and interact on the street? I don’t know what television shows you are watching, but I’ve lived and driven extensively in the SF-Bay Area and New York City and speedily and efficiently are not the words I would use for the construction of highways there, let alone the feeling one gets when stuck on them.
New York for instance has been struggling for a decade with trying to limit the amount of traffic coming on to Manhattan. The push for fees on all the bridges is a constant political fight because of the entrenched car culture and upstate lobbyists.
Here we have a chance to right the mistakes of the 60s (as was done so well with the Pine-Parc interchange). Let’s not cut another neighbourhood in half with a giant, ugly freeway that benefits nobody as we’ve done with the Metropolitaine and DeCarie.
street public culture? you have the plateau, mile end and all those places in the heart of the city to do all the culturing you want. Playing guitar and smoking weed are hardly enjoyable activities near the port and its containers. Industry and people need these highways to go to work pay those taxes so that those artists on the plateau can enjoy welfare and subsidies.
;-)
This new “expressway” is ridiculous, and I don’t understand why people haven’t organized and opposed themselves to this project. The saddest part is that depsite the consultations, the government has already decided that the project is set in stone.
It is very true that a project like this represents a 20th century solution. Instead of adding to the supply of roads in Montreal, which is really costly why not manage what we already have and improve on it? Instead of adding a new highway, why not simply add *reliable* public transit infrastructure?
If there are any anti-highway groups, I would like to know about them!!
Don;t forget Old Montreal, where I assume this Highway would start, of course past Old Montreal there isn;t very much south of Notre Dame as far as I know except some factories and the port, the very things that need a highway.
As far as American cities, I too have lived and driven extensively down south, among others, in Houston Dallas and Minneapolis, sure they like to complain about traffic but God if it isn;t a hell of a lot better then what we have here.
At least someone in City hall is thinking progress instead of regress and at least tried standing up to the libernazis.
Malek dude, do you play? That’s so cool man! Maybe after you’ve done your taxes and I get my welfare cheque we can go out and do some culturin’! Don’t know how I’ll get there though, I don’t live near a highway.
This is an opportunity to develop a truly spectacular urban setting feeding into the CBD and old Montreal. There is so much open space around the SRC/CBC that it is like a blank slate A grand boulevard with broad tree-line sidewalks similar to the Champs-Elysees can be created. Why not tunnel truck lanes only? There are so many possible creative solutions.
Is this becoming an anti-urban board? Houston is a mess of sprawl where it is impossible to live without a car.
I had a laugh when Malek said I’d change my tune as soon as I got a car. I’m 53 years old…
Libernazis?
Edward, tunnels for sure! That would be my first option… if we had enough money for them (and less people playin’ guitars smoking weed)…
but reality is, that we can’t afford them… sad state of affairs.
Todd dude, take your unicycle to the highway, there’s no problem, speed limits are so slow you’ll have no trouble getting by. Don’t forget, left lane is for slow traffic.
Wow! Eric, what are you smoking?! I want some ;-)
FACT is, roads are an antiquated solution we’ll grow out of, guaranteed.
FACT is, many bridges and roads in the USA are unacceptably unsafe, to the point that they have weight restrictions or temporary closure, even in wealthy states like Washington. I know. I live here and have driven through all but 3 states extensively.
FACT is fossil fuel and congestion solutions are for old-guard ignoramuses. New solutions employed increasingly around the world include cycling, walking and tramming it to work. The only reason larger roads should even exist, let alone be constructed is to move large goods around. And, their use should be restricted to just that. Gee, that’s too visionary, though, eh?
Montréal is fantastic. Building this piece of crap, assininine solution out will kill it just as the highways Jane Jacobs and co. killed before they materialized would have destroyed NYC life(or, do you not know your history, at all).
Montréal, wake up and STOP THIS NOW!!!!!
hhahahahahaah roads are antiquated, whoa man, roads have been around way before the romans and they will not go away… ever, get used to them :)
The usual granola excuse that we will not need roads and cars (and by extension suburbs) because fossil fuels are going the way of the dodo is just bigotry and unreal.
If its not with fossil fuels (which will never completely disappear but slowly decrease in global output, economics 101), it will be smaller engines, more efficient ones, hybrid cars, electrical cars, hydrogen cars, heck there’s even a propane alternative. Higher fossil prices are forcing thousands of corporations and hundreds of thousands of scientists and engineers around the world to find ways to use less of it.
Private means of transportation will never disappear to the displeasure of the commies visiting this blog.
Umm, and what do you say to congestion? You didn’t address that dear Malek.
I’m neither a commie nor a hippie but I’d gladly wear those labels over HarperITE, BushIE or SarkozyAN.
I’m not suggesting roads will go away. I’m stating that the building of bigger roads will only encourage more of humans’ stupid, bad, self-extincting habits. Maybe it’s time people be reminded that most of us have legs for a reason. Small roads are fine -for people to traverse on bikes and foot (etc.) as well as for transit, to haul goods and for service vehicles.
Cities are not and should not be highways. And, suburbs are incredibly inefficient. All planners are realizing this. Some of us might prefer to live under big rocks, I guess ;-)
Happy smog!
congestion is normal, its part of city life… every city on this planet has congestion, even the most pedestrian friendly ones you guys love to take as example in europe.
If legs were so efficient, cars wouldn’t exist. People have families and they need to bring them from point A to B. Not everyone lives or wants to live on the plateau so he can walk to work. Its impossible to cram 3.7 millions in the relatively low density area that is the plato.
North american life doesn’t start and end living in tiny shoe box size residential units. There’s plenty of space for everyone to live without having to smell your neighbours farts. You want to live Honk Kong style? move there. (geez even these guys are building highways for christ sake).
But back to the point, congestion at morning and evening rush hour times are nothing to be worried about, its the prolonged rush times that are become more of a problem in Montreal, and the worst segment is the Notre Dame which not only serves the eastern part of the conurbation, but also one of the biggest container port on the north atlantic.
I don’t even understand what your issue with cycling and walking is. No one walks or cycle on Notre Dame. People do it on parallel streets like Ontario or Maisoneuve/ste-catherine. You are beside the point. The city is developing massive cycling paths and you don’t hear the “greedy” motorists complaining about them… the way you are complaining about an upgrade to our road infrastructure, vital to the economy.
And for the love of god, how is a tramway more useful there than say any other part of the city not served by the metro? These people are complaining with a full stomach, they have a green line that gives an excellent coverage in HOMA.
Case closed :)
MTQ and City are unanimous, going ahead with a (measly) 8 lanes of highway.
Hopefully construction starts this spring so we the MTQ attend to other matters like Metropolitan highway perma-congestion.
Just build the dammed highway,Montreal streets are deplorable as it is.
It’s 2008 Montreal, not 1950!
“How about those new Kaisers and Frazers eh.”
Only 8 lanes???!!!
Cripes, the neo-con brigade can’t even spell Plateau. (No, I don’t live there).
Mise à part their baiting (commie, hippie, artist, Plateau-inhabitant, privileged latte-drinker or welfare musician – one and the same person, no doubt), these people are fundamentally anti-urban. Their only reason for weighing in here is to be nasty and to counter the very purpose for this board.
anti-urban, neo-con, Bushie, harpie, sarko and others are thrown around, you use terms such as private automobiles which is hilarious at best… thought commies like you only existed in 50s US propaganda. Notwithstanding you projecting your limitations on other people in your age group bracked even though 53 is nothing to be ashamed of… your loss.
It seems, most of you people have never set foot north of Crémazie, worst never left the island to check whats up with the ‘burbs. Wake up and smell the coffee, the majority of Montréal now lives outside of the island!
These people need roads as much as you need your bike lanes, bike parking and bus services, they are not second class citizens.
Shame on you.
*newsflash*: a measly 400M$ will be spent in Montréal to maintain and upgrade highways…
P.S. this is not a board, its a blog.
P.S.2. http://www.mtlurb.com is a board and you’re all welcome to share your weird opinions there.
Okay, I think this discussion has run its course. I don’t want this to devolve into an all-out flame war.
Building more highways only creates more traffic. If the option is not there people find other modes of transport.
Sweden is a great example — similar climate to Toronto and Montreal (and similar in population to Quebec and Ontario) and similar amount of car ownership. BUT, and this is a big but, the amount of trips made my personal vehicle is half. The reason? Not as many highways and road and an excellent choice of transit.
People will get out of their cars if given the choice. Adding highways supplants that choice and we can see the devastation that is created when highways are added or expanded.
Matthew, the main reason why there’s much less traffic is that fuel prices are taxed at draconian rates, it cost two to three times as much as in Canada for every liter.
Combined with a better transportation system and a very dense city, cars are less needed in there as in Montreal.
I am not against better transportation systems, but these doesn’t include biking paths, buses and tramways which are just not as effecient as metro and suburban trains.
Chris,
This is a healthy discussion on a subject that should be discussed, the people here seem to be reasonably intelligent and somewhat restrained. Let it play out.
Malek, Malek, Malek.
Montréal can’t/shouldn’t speak out of two different sides of its proverbial mouth, saying two opposite things: “Let’s be green and clean” AND “let’s be auto-accomodating to the point where we build highways though our city to move suburbanites”. You, sir, are part of the problem. Pollution, congestion by large metal vehicles, danger in the form of a steel box moving 60-80km/hour and ugly asphalt lanes are YOUR legact. I’m younger than you. I give a sh*t about the planet and won’t allow it to be mine.
Baby boomers screwed this planed up beyond total repair. However, it’s time to say ENOUGH. As we do we must DEMAND that government regulate real estate so people can afford to live near where they work. It’s time to insist that retailers build IN THE MIDDLE of all neighborhoods and communities (regardless of their economic might) AND it’s time to implement the harshly strict planning that would have been unnecessary had the likes of you not taken advantage and mocked the wise experts who warned otherwise.
This is some joke to you? People who chose to live in the Burbs should live and play there, too. If they wish to but can’t live in the city, City government MUST address affordability. Not only is daily commuting 20-40KM+ to work a waste of petrol, detrimental to air and water quality, congestion-causing, hazardous to health, and stress-inducing, it’s also unsustainable.
BTW, an 8 lane highway will destroy the air corridor surrounding this monstrous mistake. A recent medical study of people living within several hundred meters of major freeways around Seattle found reduced lung function and increased heart ailments to these same folks. Nice to see you don’t care.
Mass transit, cycling, carpooling, telecommuting, walking and living near what you need are all much more responsible ways of dealing with moving people around.
And Malek, I forgive you. Almost ;-)
OK, I don’t know what people have against the Suburbs – I live in the suburbs, I like it there (it’s quiet and nice place for families) and I commute using the bus and metro to get in to the city or wherever. Also, houses our cheaper out of the city and I don’t mind an hour long commute – I’ve been doing it for about 10 years now. Granted the increase in population and the increase of housing costs has driven people to live outside the cities – which does in fact contribute to much of the traffic. But we have a shortage of housing in the city – unless you want them to build more ridiculously high skyscrapers that shadow the city – we simply do not have enough space for people to live on the island. And it’s expensive in many cases. It is also the case in many other cities. (even European ones) But that’s besides the point.
The problem that we have in Montreal is that it is not easy to go from North to South, because of the way that the urban grids are developed and there are very few arteries that lead directly downtown. In fact the Decarie boulevard
/expressway is one of the few arteries that allow for easy access to downtown.
I’ve been to Manhattan (NYC) once and I noticed that going East to West or North to South wasn’t hard at all because of the way the the urban grid is developed (except maybe the old district). We aren’t so lucky here in Montreal because the streets are not so straight forward.
It’s unfortunate that they will be adding more lanes – I’m actually more worried about the existing buildings and surround communities that will be affect by this.
For those who are interested about some the propositions that have been made to improve urban planing in the area while allow for the expressway to stay as it is – check out this report (it also give a bit of history about the Decarie Expressway) One of the propositions was to make a parc out of a portion and having it partially covered (that way they won’t have to spend a massive amount on ventilating it (if they made it into a tunnel) Its worth a look:
gpe.concordia.ca/projects/StudentsWorkGallery_URBS433/DecarieHighway/SouthernDecarie_DesignBrief.pdf