Category Archives: Unrealized development projects

A modest proposal, Economic commentary, Kondiaronk - My Montréal Experience, Let's make this an election issue, Perspectives on the City, Social commentary, Unrealized development projects, Urban Redevelopment, Waddayoutink?, What were they thinking?, Worth reconsidering

On the Métro Impasse

2 Comments
2009 AMT proposal for Métro extensions - not the work of the author

There’s been a fair bit of talk about extending the Montréal Métro of late in the English Press. Typical; now removed from the halls of power the English media spends its time twiddling their thumbs and dreaming about what could be, while Angryphones come out of the woodwork to demand Métro access to the West Island. I’ve said it before and I’ll say a million more times – no West Island residents should expect Métro extensions until there’s a West Island city, one with a tax-base as large as the cities of Laval or Longueuil. That or the West Island communities seek voluntary annexation from the City of Montréal. Then, and only then would the citizens out there be in a position to demand Métro access. I personally think a Highway 40 corridor Métro line from De la Savanne station to Fairview (and possibly as far as Ste-Anne-de-Bellevue) would be an excellent way to cut back significantly on vehicular traffic on our major highways. However, such a new line should be mirrored on the eastern side of the island, such as with the recommended Blue Line extension to Anjou. That said, residential development on the eastern side is oriented on a more North-South axis than on the West Island, and thus the proposed Pie-IX line (running from Laval or Montréal-North south to the Centre-Sud/HoMa district) would likely handle more passengers than any West Island extension (but only if it in turn were connected to East-West lines at multiple points).

While an unfortunate number of people have complained the 2009 MTQ proposal (above) is ‘too focused on the East End’, I look at it as focused primarily on where the population density seems to be high and increasing. There are more than 400,000 people living in Laval and another 700,000 people living on the South Shore (spread out over several municipalities, with an estimated 230,000 people living in Longueuil alone). Moreover, there are 85,000 people living in Saint-Laurent borough and another 125,000 people living in the Ahuntsic-Cartierville borough. In total, the proposed extensions as demonstrated above could potentially serve almost 1 million people directly and indirectly.

So while it is nice to dream about ideal systems that serve the entire metropolitan region, or at least serve the City better, we need to consider what the government is proposing seriously.

What’s unfortunate is that this plan now seems to be in jeopardy, given that the respective mayors of Longueuil, Laval and Montréal had to take out full page advertisements in the local press some months ago announcing why their city should benefit from expansion. I’ve said it before – sicking the mayors against each other isn’t going to achieve much. The entire system needs to be expanded until the whole region is eventually covered. In essence, we need to follow the same planning philosophy used to design the Paris, New York, London or Moscow subway systems, wherein the project is considered incomplete until near-total coverage is achieved. We won’t grow nearly as quickly unless the Métro develops in such a fashion so as to increase transit efficiency within the region. Montréal’s successful urban communities wouldn’t be nearly as successful as they are if it weren’t for the fact that they have Métro access. It is crucial for expansion and development.

In sum, we need to start planning as a unified metropolitan region wherein the interests of all citizens are considered simultaneously. Métro line development cannot be a reward for political loyalty. We’ve come a long way from the nepotism of the dark ages under Maurice Duplessis, so when the provincial government finks out and pits the suburbs of Montréal against the City for an individual line extension, the citizens of all communities must demand an end to such ridiculous partisanship. We can’t continue on like this. This is why our city is broken.

And just a reminder – completing the project illustrated above is pegged at 4 billion dollars. Cost of the new Champlain Bridge has been estimated at 5 billion dollars. Is it me or would it not be smarter to use that money to complete the proposed Métro expansion, and then spend a billion dollars renovating and improving the existing Champlain Bridge? A new Champlain Bridge will accommodate about 156,000 vehicle crossings per day. With this expansion, the Métro would be able to accommodate over 1.5 million passengers per day, which in turn will free up space on the highways, bridges, tunnels, buses and commuter trains, possibly even allowing some buses to be re-purposed to new routes, further improving the public transit system here in Montréal. To me it’s a no-brainer. What do you think?

A modest proposal, Economic commentary, Let's make this an election issue, Montréal Architecture, Montréal Landmarks, Perspectives on the City, Unrealized development projects, Urban Redevelopment, Worth reconsidering

Update: Three Competing Métro Proposals

1 Comment

Neither of these are of my own design; judge for yourselves:

I found this one a while back, seems like an interesting idea. It incorporates three rapid-bus systems plus a Parc Avenue light rail system, with a considerably larger Métro system in general, though with considerable focus on the higher-density regions closer to the downtown core.

The following proposal for system improvement doesn’t involve any non-Métro systems, but has considerably more lines and stations. Also notice how all three airports are connected, and how the downtown would be connected by four parallel East-West lines and seems to indicate a type of network-sharing system where multiple lines would use the same track. Further, consider the number of junction stations:

I also like this proposal because it very clearly allows access to all four corners of the Metropolitan region. Keep it in mind Рthis system is nothing more than a dream, though its always encouraging to see random people envisioning their ideal M̩tro system. If only our elected officials would get the picture and pursue a more ambitious expansion program. Imagine what could be if we were building at a rate of 26 stations every 4 years. We did it without blinking between 1962 and 1966.

October 27th update:

Another find!

Looking at this plan I can’t help but remark on the similarities in the three designs, as it seems to have borrowed from each in addition to the current MTQ plan and elements of very early designs. Among other things, closing the Orange Line loop, extending further into Laval and Longueuil, following bridges and highways, extending the Blue Line East to Anjou, connecting Ile des Soeurs and additional East-West lines to cover the downtown and a Pie-IX line are all featured in these three designs. The first plan is highly reserved and realistic whereas the second is bold (though less accurate than the others), and the third seems constrained by the dimensions of a Métro map poster. That said – check out that Brown Line – it goes everywhere! What a great idea, a ‘sight-seer’ Métro line running from Brossard through the CBD and onto the airport. I also like the idea, oft repeated, of having additional multi-line hubs East of Berri-UQAM, such as at the Olympic Stadium, and of course the second plan’s design to link all the airports with the urban core. What’s striking is that it doesn’t seem to me like any official plan would even consider the possibility of building entirely new lines and hubs; these plans are realistic given that by 2012-2013, the metropolitan population is going to reach 4 million, and the citizens will no longer be able to rely on their cars to get around the metropolitan region. Public transit will require a massive investment in order for large cities to remain operationally competitive, we just cannot afford the same carbon footprint in the future. Thus, it makes sense to begin a massive development project and wildly expand the Métro, as soon as possible. Any of these designs are feasible as long as we demand it, but we must demonstrate clearly and effectively that we will not stand for anything less than the world’s finest Métro system. It is our responsibility, it is our heritage and a credit to our high-tech industries, but it must be kept at a perpetual ‘state-of-the-art’ status if we’re to make any money off it. The citizens need better than what is currently provided and Métro development needs to become a principle priority for the Mayor. If we were as motivated to build a Métro system today as we were fifty years ago, we could attain total metropolitan coverage within forty years, maybe sooner. That kind of long term steady investment is exactly what we need to keep our economy stable and create real, insurable employment. Public works and infrastructure projects worked in the States with the New Deal, so there’s no reason why we can’t do the same basic thing today on a localized scale. Building a massive new Métro could be money in the bank.

A modest proposal, Let's make this an election issue, Montréal Architecture, Montréal Landmarks, Perspectives on the City, Unrealized development projects, Urban Redevelopment

Can’t we do better than this? {Yet another Modest Proposal}

6 Comments
Close up of the Bell Centre from Boul. René-Lévesque and Rue de la Montagne - not the work of the author.

So here’s the deal.

This building pisses me off.

I know that may seem like a strange reaction to have to a building, but what can I say Рthe home of my favourite team is an unfortunate eyesore and a continuing annoyance for smart development and urban planning in Montr̩al.

The problem is this – twenty some-odd years ago people were convinced that the era of rail travel was likely over in North America. Both CN and CP were in dire financial straights, VIA ridership was at an all-time low, and the AMT had yet to be created. So when it came time to build a new, state-of-the-art arena for the Montreal Canadiens, the site chosen was on top of the CP tracks leading out of Windsor Station, which by that time had ceased all passenger operations anyways. A half-assed attempt at building a commuter rail station into the complex resulted in a grandiose platform and little else. The area has been a mess ever since. The Bell Centre failed to form a nucleus of new activity and the area south of St-Antoine quickly eroded away.

Today the Bell Centre is over capacity and regularly selling out. The Canadiens have out-grown it and have been speculating about a new arena. Moreover, the Bell Centre is a shitty concert venue, and a new rink with better acoustics is certainly in order for a city such as ours. The question is where to put it.

At the same time, passenger rail traffic has increased dramatically, both CN and CP have rebounded to become two of the largest railways in the entire world and the AMT and VIA are both under pressure to provide better service. Calls for airport express trains and a high-speed line between Montreal and Toronto grow every year, and it is becoming apparent that the plan to save Windsor Station from outright demolition was exceptionally wise – we may need to use it again.

Complicating this issue is Cadillac Fairview’s proposal to develop condominiums and an office tower around the Bell Centre, seemingly designed to be integrated into the featureless facade of the arena.

Regular reader EMDX provided this graphic of an overhead perspective of a train viaduct designed to connect the track leading from Lucien l’Allier around to Gare Centrale, something which has been floated around for a while now, and that Cadillac Fairview had also proposed as part of a plan to build a new train station south of Windsor Station.

But if the Bell Centre were simply torn down, we wouldn’t have to build a viaduct, which runs the risk of further cutting up the urban tapestry and creating a larger divide between the CBD and Griffintown, which is in the process of being redeveloped. In addition, we could return Windsor Station to its former grandeur and actually use it as a train station, while land liberated by the demolition of the Bell Centre would still allow for Cadillac-Fairview’s tower plan, should that ever get off the ground.

But perhaps the best part of this little scheme of mine is that there is a great deal of potential for a new arena, and I can imagine it would be the kind of thing that might be able to anchor a neighbourhood and lead to exceptional redevelopment. This could be the case of the Canadiens management were to consider purchasing the former Canada Post sorting facility in Griffintown along Rue Ottawa. See for yourself by checking this bird’s-eye view. The adjacent lots are all 1970s light industrial and are prime for redevelopment. Furthermore, it’s just a couple of streets down from uber-trendy Notre Dame West and the plot of land, currently owned by Canada Lands Corporation, is considerably larger than the Bell Centre site, possibly allowing for a much larger arena, not to mention more parking space. CLC is looking to rid itself of the building, and such a development, specifically on that site, may allow for a complete re-genessis of the area.

I really wish I could get someone in Canadiens management to consider demolishing the Bell Centre and making this move – it would give a whole new meaning to the term ‘nos amours’ in my eyes. An urban-planning conscientious professional hockey team – how much more Montréalais could it get?

A modest proposal, History and Culture, Let's make this an election issue, Montréal Architecture, Montréal Landmarks, Perspectives on the City, Political commentary, Unrealized development projects, Urban Redevelopment, Worth reconsidering

Let’s make this an election issue No. 1 – A Strategic Airports Plan

6 Comments
Mirabel's opening-day open house - The Future Was Then

I’ll start with the tl/dr (too long, didn’t read). If I were elected Mayor, I’d propose the following:

A) Rationalize our three airport system by returning Mirabel to its originally intended hub/gateway role by re-routing all international flights to Mirabel away from Trudeau International.

B) Finance the completion of Highways 13, 19 and 50 in addition to the high-speed rail link intended to connect the airport with Central Station. I would further propose a partnership with the provincial & federal governments to extend Highway 50 to Gatineau/Ottawa in the West and through to Berthierville (connecting to Highway 40 and then onto Québec City) in the East, further intersecting with Highway 25.

C) Extend Métro service to both Trudeau and St-Hubert airports (and, by extension, get around the current AMT/ADM squabble re: commuter train access at Trudeau).

D) Re-organize Trudeau into a domestic/regional airport with a stronger emphasis on cargo flights (since Trudeau is better served by existing highways and is adjacent to the city’s principle rail yard) in addition to taking on some of St-Hubert’s general aviation load. St-Hubert would be given a new role as a ‘city-link’ STOLport, similar to Toronto’s Billy Bishop airport.

E) Build the once-proposed Aerospace University (I’d make it a joint venture between an English and French university) at Trudeau.

If the citizens were to authorize the completion of these projects, Montréal would doubtless re-take the position as Canada’s primary gateway, and in time would likely win a considerable amount of business in air travel back to the city and metropolitan region. It would also solidify our position as an aviation leader, both nationally and internationally.

Mirabel's vacant main concourse - not the work of the author.

Here’s a little trivia about Montréal’s relationship with civil aviation;

1. As far as the laws and governance of international civil aviation is concerned, Montr̩al is the world capital, featuring not only the International Air Transport Association (IATA, headquartered at the Tour de la Bourse) but the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO Рa UN body) as well. These two organizations form the utmost authority regarding civil aviation in the entire world, and as you can imagine, their consolidated political power is exceptional to say the very least.

2. Montréal boasts a total of three airports, two of which are ‘international airports’ – meaning they are designed to accommodate the largest (and longest-range) aircraft and the largest passenger or cargo loads. The third, St-Hubert Airport, is the busiest general-aviation airport in all of Canada. It is also partially a military base and the home of the Canadian Space Agency.

3. Montréal’s Mirabel International Airport was once Canada’s international hub (for the latter part of the 1970s until the late 1980s), meaning the the vast majority of international flights were departing and arriving at Mirabel (and thus, Mirabel was Canada’s gateway to the world and most immigrants/refugees during that era passed through there). When the land was originally purchased, it was several times larger than the entire area of Manhattan Island. It is still amongst the world’s largest airports in terms of total surface area, as the airport was supposed to be expanded over twenty years into a massive facility handling 50 million people per year. Even though it is no longer used, Mirabel is still exceptionally modern, still fully functional, and still capable of massive expansion.

4. Montréal is Canada’s aviation industry capital. Bombardier, arguably the world’s third largest civil aircraft manufacturer, is based here and has developed extensive manufacturing and maintenance facilities. Pratt & Whitney Canada, one of the world’s largest engine manufacturers is also located in the Montréal region, as is Bell Helicopter. Add to the list CAE, the world’s premier designer and manufacturer of flight simulators, and the myriad other enterprises and industries building aircraft components, electronics, landing gear etc.

There’s a reason why ICAO and IATA are based here.

What was planned and what was completed - the full project was designed to handle 50 million people per year.

But as we all know, our failures with regards to aviation are still quite significant, and there’s a considerable amount of room for improvement. And one of the principle causes of our failures with regards to local air travel is our over-dependence on federal and provincial assistance for large-scale infrastructure projects. There must be centralized planning emanating from City Hall. Furthermore, the City needs to consider financing the missing pieces of our only partially completed strategic airports plan.

To begin with, the City must begin planning for a return to Mirabel Airport. It is unthinkable that we should allow Mirabel to be destroyed or otherwise converted away from being an international airport of the highest calibre. Let us say that it has been held in storage; we require Mirabel because the other two airports in our system are presently over-capacity while Mirabel sits an empty shell of its former self. Rationalizing the airports and instituting a more efficient division of labour goes hand-in-hand with ensuring the airports are far better connected to our public-transit system in addition to the regional highway infrastructure.

Trudeau is currently at capacity and has no hope of being expanded beyond its current capacity of 20 million passengers per year (ironically, what Mirabel was initially designed to handle). However, it can’t reach that volume without a major improvement to the local highway, train and subway systems – all the more reason to shift some of that bulk back to Mirabel and expand highways and trains into the undeveloped portions of the metropolitan area, as opposed to trying to build through the already high-density of the Island. Limiting Trudeau to domestic/regional flights will be far more in-line with the ADM’s desire that Trudeau be a “9-5” airport, while the scarcely populated region around Mirabel could operate twenty-four hours per day. Furthermore, it is ultimately negligent for a city to route high-capacity jumbo-jets over densely populated urban areas.

Pretty self-explanatory - why not finish the project?

In a similar vein, the over-capacity St-Hubert airport should transfer some of its general-aviation operations to Trudeau, which may be under-capacity after international flights are re-routed. STOL (short take-off & landing) aircraft could make excellent use of St-Hubert for ‘city-link’ business flights, like those offered by Porter Airlines. Extending the Métro as far as St-Hubert would allow those passengers a direct link right into the heart of the City, an invaluable asset (and far more efficient than waiting for the ferry as is the case in Toronto.

My last note is this. After reading this article, consider its proposals and ask yourself “can we afford not to do this, can we afford the status quo?”

I certainly don’t believe we can pass up the opportunity to re-invigorate our airports system and associated aerospace industry. A massive investment in air transport for this city, in addition to the secondary improvements to local traffic and transit infrastructure which would also be required would propel Montréal into a new position as a new national gateway. We’d be able to compete with Toronto directly, and could potentially solidify our position by reducing airport fees and increasing the ease by which Montréalers can travel. By extending highways from Mirabel to Montréal, Ottawa and Québec City, Mirabel could potentially offer its services to more than 6 million people living in the region.

Mirabel's deserted entrance - not the work of the author.

And we’d finally reverse a great injustice. Stephen Harper and Brian Mulroney deeded land secured by the Trudeau Administration for the construction of Mirabel back to the original owners as they felt threatened by Mirabel’s potential power. Under the guise of correcting what was in their minds a historical injustice, these two leaders have sought to shift the focus away from Montréal. If we don’t act quickly, we may lose Mirabel in its entirety. The proposals for what to do with it have included everything from outright demolition to conversion into some kind of water themed bio-diversity amusement park.

In my eyes, that would be the greatest injustice to this once proud city.

A modest proposal, History and Culture, Political commentary, Scenes from the City, Unrealized development projects, What were they thinking?, Worth reconsidering

Using Socialism to Finance a Transportation Revolution in Canada

1 Comment
Our last attempt at high-speed transport in Canada: the Turbo Train, 1973 - not the work of the author.

The People have a right to move.

So too, does the State – it’s vital that the State have the ability to move large amounts of people and materiel to support the People, really, whenever the People call for it. And the People and the State are one – given that the State would not exist without the People. I find it odd that I would have to go through this diatribe, but given the state of political discourse in this country, this world, it is vital too that the people recognize the State – in a democracy – must work in the service of the collective. Yes, our society is based on Socialist principles.

A populist appeal, a vision for strategic State economic-planning and the real threat of losing our national sovereignty compelled John A. Macdonald, our beloved drunken-buffoon of a first Prime Minister, to work towards completing Canada’s first transcontinental rail link. It was done as a means to encourage British Columbia to join Confederation, not to mention that a transcontinental link was necessary for continued economic expansion and would further solidify the foundation of the fragile young state. Despite a near chronic lack of funding and the Pacific Scandal, the link was completed by the mid-1880s, and Canada was bound in a railway. Canada today has not one, but two major international rail carriers; they are in fact among the largest transportation companies and networks in the entire world.

But when it comes to moving people in Canada, well, we’re coming up short. That’s being overly polite – we’ve shat the bed. Canada, once a world leader in railway design and associated technologies & services, is today considerably behind the times. We have no high-speed link – none – nowhere in Canada do trains travel in excess of 200km/hour. In fact, most don’t go faster than 150km/hour, and that’s painfully slow given that speed of modern trains. Compared to a growing list of nations, such as France, the UK, Germany, Japan and China, Canada lags behind without something largely becoming vital to a first world transportation system – a high-speed electric train. What’s worse is that we have the technology and the industry – least to mention the wide-open expanses – to build a system that could link the nation in incomparable ways. And it would make sense that we ought to have one too – except that time and time again, the Canadian People choose the path of least resistance, and choose the party that looks best on camera. This party, whether wearing Grit Red or Tory Blue, has no real plans for high-speed rail in Canada because they exist in a state of perpetual TV-readiness; prepared to argue, never to act.

It would seem that the Canadian People, much like our American cousins, have lost sight that they have a responsibility to demand progressive action from their elected representatives. Whom they elect, they elect to fight to build what is missing, provide what is lacking – instead, our political battles aren’t over projects anymore, they’re over nuances in policy, in personal attacks and the promotion of an endless cavalcade of wars on apparent immoralities. Who has time to build a world-class high-speed train network when you’re caught up fighting for abstinence-only sex education in some rural backwater middle school, right?

There was once a time when the Prime Minister felt a personal responsibility to build a transcontinental rail link – as a means to connect the whole country though also to propel the development of smaller provincial and city networks as well – so that all Canadians could easily move around our great nation. Today, trying to do the same on VIA – if you want a berth that is – will cost you thousands of dollars and take several days. The only people who seem to be able to afford the privilege of crossing our country by rail are retired middle-class types who think it might be romantic. Good lord! Are you telling me there’s no practical need?

I think it’s obvious our country has to invest in affordable high-speed rail transit, and provide all Canadians a quick and efficient means to get across this vast nation. I think it’s a right shared by all of us, and the State has a responsibility to provide it to us. But we’re clearly going to have to make it a priority for them. Once again, the State works towards the benefit of the People – always.

Consider what your life would be like if you could hop on a regularly scheduled bullet train from Montréal to Toronto and the trip took less than three hours, was perfectly comfortable, and cost a fraction of a current regular fare ticket. A high-speed line serving the Windsor-Québec City corridor would attract large numbers of riders based on novelty and geography alone – and in so doing, just such a system could potentially move massive quantities of people throughout this region each day. If the distance from Montréal to Toronto is about 600km, and some French and Japanese bullet train models currently travel in excess of 350km/hour, then it is foreseeable that a future high-speed network in Canada may reach even higher speeds. Imagine a ten-hour trip to Vancouver from Montréal? It’s technically possible now, and the sheer volume of people that could be moved by just such a system would allow significant savings for travelers, which in turn would pay back the initial investment. What’s more, a high-speed link connecting major cities across the country could itself spur the development of new provincial systems to allow even greater rail coverage.

Rail seems to me to be an inherently socially conscious means of transit. It’s big, it’s fast, it can move a lot of people, who in turn share the limited space within. Most importantly, it can be ecologically and economically sustainable, and was initially instituted in this nation because our elected leaders felt they owed it to the People to link up as many small towns and big cities to the same, shared network.

There’s no reason not to invest in rail. We need to establish a far better degree of inter-connectivity in Canada, and should further encourage people to abandon more polluting technologies in favour of the State-sponsored socially conscious alternative. We need to make it easy for people to get out and visit the country – we don’t do this nearly enough, and it isn’t getting any easier. Canadians need to realize that their nation is massive and diverse, and if it was cheap to get around I’m certain many more of us would jump at the opportunity to get out and explore it. But it will take the will of the People to elect a State that seeks to invest in itself, as that is the best method to encourage new growth and a stronger economy. We need a transportation revolution in Canada to improve all our lives, but we must also be willing to pay for it, and recognize that strategic planning does not bestow much instantaneous gratification. And perhaps this is why so few of our politicians promote it – they likely won’t be around to reap the benefits of their petitioning as their political career is a mere stepping stone into the world of corporate governance.

And that is the great sad truth of our era, and something I hope we’ll one day do without, because I’m getting sick and tired spending seven-ten hours traveling to Toronto on the Megabus. Seriously, what’s up with that twenty minute mad-dash at the Kingston Bus Terminal Tim Horton’s anyways?

This article was originally published on Forget the Box.

A modest proposal, Kondiaronk - My Montréal Experience, Let's make this an election issue, Perspectives on the City, Political commentary, Social commentary, Unrealized development projects, Urban Redevelopment, Waddayoutink?, What were they thinking?, Worth reconsidering

Montr̩al M̩tro Extensions РHow to get around an impasse.

Leave a comment
2009 AMT proposal for Métro extensions - not the work of the author

There’s been a fair bit of talk about extending the Montréal Métro of late in the English Press. Typical; now removed from the halls of power the English media spends its time twiddling their thumbs and dreaming about what could be, while Angryphones come out of the woodwork to demand Métro access to the West Island. I’ve said it before and I’ll say a million more times – no West Island residents should expect Métro extensions until there’s a West Island city, one with a tax-base as large as the cities of Laval or Longueuil. That or the West Island communities seek voluntary annexation from the City of Montréal. Then, and only then would the citizens out there be in a position to demand Métro access. I personally think a Highway 40 corridor Métro line from De la Savanne station to Fairview (and possibly as far as Ste-Anne-de-Bellevue) would be an excellent way to cut back significantly on vehicular traffic on our major highways. However, such a new line should be mirrored on the eastern side of the island, such as with the recommended Blue Line extension to Anjou. That said, residential development on the eastern side is oriented on a more North-South axis than on the West Island, and thus the proposed Pie-IX line (running from Laval or Montréal-North south to the Centre-Sud/HoMa district) would likely handle more passengers than any West Island extension (but only if it in turn were connected to East-West lines at multiple points).

While an unfortunate number of people have complained the 2009 MTQ proposal (above) is ‘too focused on the East End’, I look at it as focused primarily on where the population density seems to be high and increasing. There are more than 400,000 people living in Laval and another 700,000 people living on the South Shore (spread out over several municipalities, with an estimated 230,000 people living in Longueuil alone). Moreover, there are 85,000 people living in Saint-Laurent borough and another 125,000 people living in the Ahuntsic-Cartierville borough. In total, the proposed extensions as demonstrated above could potentially serve almost 1 million people directly and indirectly.

So while it is nice to dream about ideal systems that serve the entire metropolitan region, or at least serve the City better, we need to consider what the government is proposing seriously.

What’s unfortunate is that this plan now seems to be in jeopardy, given that the respective mayors of Longueuil, Laval and Montréal had to take out full page advertisements in the local press some months ago announcing why their city should benefit from expansion. I’ve said it before – sicking the mayors against each other isn’t going to achieve much. The entire system needs to be expanded until the whole region is eventually covered. In essence, we need to follow the same planning philosophy used to design the Paris, New York, London or Moscow subway systems, wherein the project is considered incomplete until near-total coverage is achieved. We won’t grow nearly as quickly unless the Métro develops in such a fashion so as to increase transit efficiency within the region. Montréal’s successful urban communities wouldn’t be nearly as successful as they are if it weren’t for the fact that they have Métro access. It is crucial for expansion and development.

In sum, we need to start planning as a unified metropolitan region wherein the interests of all citizens are considered simultaneously. Métro line development cannot be a reward for political loyalty. We’ve come a long way from the nepotism of the dark ages under Maurice Duplessis, so when the provincial government finks out and pits the suburbs of Montréal against the City for an individual line extension, the citizens of all communities must demand an end to such ridiculous partisanship. We can’t continue on like this. This is why our city is broken.

And just a reminder – completing the project illustrated above is pegged at 4 billion dollars. Cost of the new Champlain Bridge has been estimated at 5 billion dollars. Is it me or would it not be smarter to use that money to complete the proposed Métro expansion, and then spend a billion dollars renovating and improving the existing Champlain Bridge? A new Champlain Bridge will accommodate about 156,000 vehicle crossings per day. With this expansion, the Métro would be able to accommodate over 1.5 million passengers per day, which in turn will free up space on the highways, bridges, tunnels, buses and commuter trains, possibly even allowing some buses to be re-purposed to new routes, further improving the public transit system here in Montréal. To me it’s a no-brainer. What do you think?