Marie-Andrée Chouinard’s editorial “Against all odds” of last November 24, on the intermodal logistics platform project of Ray-Mont Logistiques in the east of Montreal, adopts a harsh tone and without appeal to our company by omitting to take into account several facts that are essential to a good understanding of the file.
Mme Chouinard speaks of an “industrial wart on a wasteland”. However, this land has hosted a century of heavy industry; it was covered with 243,000 m3 foundry sand contaminated with lead, cadmium, petroleum hydrocarbons, PAHs and PCBs. We have invested more than 15 million to decontaminate and make safe a literally poisoned place. Making it a park was never considered by the authorities, as the level of contamination was high there.
Mme Chouinard incorrectly asserts that the project “has so far escaped any rigorous analysis aimed at the effects on the environment and public health”. Here is an overview of the procedures. Since 2016, we have submitted to the Government of Quebec all the studies necessary to obtain an environmental rehabilitation plan allowing the decontamination of the site. This plan was studied and approved by the Technical Evaluation Group (GTE), a round table made up of the Ministry of the Environment, Public Health and the INSPQ. Moreover, our teams and experts actively participated in the thematic working group (GTT) of the Assumption Sud–Longue-Pointe consultation body, bringing together the company, the City, citizens and experts.
We have also voluntarily submitted to the ministerial authorization procedure of the Ministry of the Environment, a first for a project of this kind in Quebec. This process involves an environmental impact analysis conducted by the Ministry of the Environment confirming that our project meets all applicable standards.
It is legitimate to wonder about the impacts of a project on the environment and health, but it is important to take into account all the factors before saying that it will be harmful. However, the relocation of our activities, currently located in the residential district of Pointe-Saint-Charles, to this land bordering the Port of Montreal will lead to a reduction of almost a third of the total heavy trucking on Notre-Dame Street (400,000 kilometers traveled less each year) as well as an 88% reduction in the distance traveled on local roads by our trucks and those of our customers. This represents an 82% reduction in greenhouse gases generated by our business in Quebec, according to a study by the Interuniversity Research Center on Business Networks, Logistics and Transportation. We are talking here about a major advantage both from an environmental point of view and from that of traffic congestion.
Mme Chouinard finally says that “experts predict that the noise level caused by the transshipment of huge metal containers will lead to disproportionately high sound levels” without specifying the identity of the said experts. However, the exhaustive and rigorous analysis of the experts of the Ministry of the Environment confirms rather that our operations will respect the sound thresholds in force.
We are fully aware that our project may raise concerns in the local community, we are also listening to the criticisms that are expressed. Our company understands the value of the green spaces that some citizens demand in the area; this is why, in the context of our discussions with all the parties, we have always supported the idea of maximizing the greening of the site by creating a buffer zone between our land and the Viauville district.
It is important to take into account all the facets of a file before launching attacks without caution in the public space. These are serious and hinder the establishment of a constructive dialogue aimed at the harmonious development of this sector.
Reply from the editorialist
We can agree that we disagree. I made every effort to deplore the lack of rigorous and independent analysis for the environment, public health and social acceptability of a project of such scope. Only a study by the BAPE could have met this need, which the Government of Quebec did not see fit to agree to. The evaluations you quote were produced at the request of your company and do not seem to me to meet the criteria set out above. As for the experts whose names you cannot find in the editorial, they are, among others, those from the Ministry of the Environment itself who, in a Opinion on a noise impact study for the first phase of operation of an intermodal platform dated February 2022, are not convinced that “the noise that could be generated in the first phase of operation [du projet] may not be considered a significant contaminant”. These ministerial concerns are reflected in the warnings issued by the Ministry of the Environment itself when giving the green light to the project subject to conditions, on November 4th.
Marie-Andree Chouinard