Towards a destruction of our collective heritage with the revision of flood zones in Quebec?

Imagine for a moment: twenty years ago, you bought the house of your dreams, a century-old residence, steeped in history. You renovated it with care, maintained it with love, in the hope of passing it on to the next generation. But, overnight, an administrative stroke condemns it, threatening to transform it into worthless property. This is what happens to me.

My house, purchased in good faith, is suddenly cataloged in a flood zone. Not because it actually is, but because a tiny stretch of the road leading to it passes through an area now classified as high-volume. This seemingly insignificant detail could cause the value of my property to plummet and deprive me of any recourse. The heritage that I have built, the fruit of a life of work, is today threatened by a bureaucratic decision disconnected from the realities on the ground. A choice imposed from above, without nuance.

And I’m not alone in this situation. Throughout Quebec, owners find themselves trapped by this modernization of flood zone maps. If this initiative aims to better inform and supervise future construction in risk areas, it becomes a condemnation for those who already live there, legitimately. Without compensation, without solutions, it is nothing more or less than a disguised expropriation.

This administrative rigidity has serious consequences, well beyond individual households. At a time when the housing crisis is raging with relentless brutality, this situation only makes matters worse. Thousands of properties find themselves, overnight, on hold, their maintenance or sale becoming impossible. This exacerbates the housing shortage, when every house, every piece of land should be seen as a valuable resource. The supply of housing, already tight, is further reduced, in a context where so many families are desperately looking for a roof over their heads.

Worse still, the massive devaluation of these properties does not only affect the owners. Municipalities, dependent on property taxes to provide essential services, will see their revenues collapse. When property values ​​fall, municipal coffers are emptied, and the bill is passed on to all citizens. What will happen when these municipalities have to increase taxes to compensate for this shortfall? Every citizen, even those who live outside flood zones, will pay the price for this hasty decision.

It is high time to review the use of public funds and invest in smarter, more humane solutions. Rather than ruining citizens, why not offer ways to adapt? Why not allow owners to raise their houses, strengthen their foundations, adopt innovative solutions, such as construction on stilts, as is done in other countries, notably in Norway? Why not open a compensation program for damage to wetlands and bodies of water available to developers, but closed to citizens?

We also have at our disposal an engineering treasure: Hydro-Québec dams, which could play a key role in flood management. They have the potential to be water shields, provided they are used intelligently to protect our built heritage, and not just to generate electricity revenue.

The science and innovation are here, ready to be mobilized to provide solutions to this crisis. Resilient constructions, protective structures, amphibious emergency vehicles, more flexible water management systems… there is no shortage of ideas. What is missing is the will to invest in these solutions rather than arbitrary regulations which ultimately do more harm than good.

The real tragedy is that this project, designed to protect the environment, could cause irreparable damage to our collective heritage and our social fabric. Destroying houses to build them elsewhere also generates a major environmental impact, not to mention the disintegration of communities. Ultimately, the proposed solution should never be more destructive than the problem it purports to solve.

Mr. Charette, Minister of the Environment and the Fight against Climate Change, it is your duty to revise this project. Offer us realistic means of adaptation, and flexible solutions adapted to each situation. The government must protect not only the environment, but also citizens and their heritage. Because, ultimately, it is not only our real estate that we seek to save, it is the dignity of those who live there.

To watch on video

source site-41