The importance of public transportation
I live in Outremont and I am in favor of the project. However, if I rely on the Facebook groups of neighborhood citizens, there are a lot of dissatisfied people (and that goes beyond the discontent against everything related to Projet Montréal which usually animates these groups!). I really have little sympathy for motorists who use the Camillien-Houde route as a transit route or who deny the current dangers of cohabitation with bicycles. However, I admit that the question of access to public transport concerns me. We will have to judge the tree by its fruits, but we will have to find efficient and user-friendly options to replace the 11 and 711 buses which allow citizens of the Eastern Slope to easily access the summit and its activities.
Laurence Gévry-Fortier, Montreal
Block transits
It would be useful to know the percentage that transits represent in relation to the total passages on this route. If this is the main cause of the problem, why not simply prevent these transits by blocking the passage up the coast? This would still allow access to the mountain for those whose goal it is.
Edward Doucet, Boucherville
Expensive cycle path
I am outraged! Ninety-two million dollars for a mega cycle path while we are experiencing an incredible social crisis with all these homeless people. People sleep on Saint-Laurent in front of Ubisoft and an art gallery, along the Métropolitaine, in the discreet corners of the parks! Some elected officials lack common sense, it seems to me. Green the city, so be it. But why are there so many trees missing from our streets despite the tree pits ready to receive them? It’s hypocrisy. Why ignore the report from the Office de consultation publique de Montréal which recommended maintaining automobile traffic within a safer framework in 2019? Hypocrisy!
Chantal Gilbert, Montreal
Funicular
And why not a funicular which would reach the Camillien-Houde belvedere, from where shuttles could depart to the other points of interest at the summit? It would certainly be a great non-polluting tourist attraction as well.
Guy Geoffrion
Let’s dream a little
The closure of traffic on the east side of Mount Royal will undoubtedly cause an increase in traffic on other routes, notably on Chemin de la Côte-Sainte-Catherine. Furthermore, it is already difficult to park on the east side if you want to walk up to the belvedere. A shuttle system could be a good compromise, with a safe lane reserved for cyclists (there are still quite a few more potential pedestrians than cyclists on this axis). Another solution, but more expensive, would be a gondola, as is done in many cities around the world. But hey, we’re dreaming there, in a country which is still hesitating between a TGV, a TGF and a return to stagecoaches…
Jean-Marie Doizy, Longueuil
A bicycle project
I tend to agree with the idea of eliminating cars from this road. On the other hand, it seems imperative to me that a mode of motorized transport (preferably electric) be put in place. This will make it a tourist destination in itself. It is ridiculous to think that this will be a popular place to walk. The slope of this path is VERY steep and there is already Olmsted Road which meets this need for a walk. In its current form, this project still appears to me to be a cycling project that cannot be assumed by proposing an unrealistic vision.
Louis Dallaire, Montreal
Thinking about Eastern families
I agree with M.me Collard that we must maintain access to public transport in Camillien-Houde for families from the East, many of whom (perhaps even more numerous than those from other neighborhoods, we have no data on this subject) go on the mountain to picnic or take advantage of the leisure activities offered at Beaver Lake. To take into account the objections raised by Mr. Mercure, it is enough to think of a mode of collective transport leaving a safe space for cyclists, or of reducing the frequency of buses. It is at this price that the mountain will truly be for everyone!
Monique Grégoire
A cannon to kill a fly
I find it sad that we justify the closure of Camillien-Houde by always bringing back the tragic death of a cyclist four or five years ago. On this basis, should we close all the streets where there have been cyclist deaths? The problem, in my opinion, is much more political than security. I climb the mountain by bike several times a week and sometimes cross it by car. However, the City installed barriers along the entire route to prevent cars from making U-shaped turns. That’s good, but there was more to do to secure this path and discourage excessive passage. For example, in 15 years, I have never seen a single police officer control speed. That would be a start. We could then install speed bumps or a traffic light at the top to make the journey less attractive and less rapid. In reality, the only real problem with cohabitation is at the very top of the course. Why not just widen the passage? We would have to cut through rock, but it’s just that, rock. Once again, Projet Montréal uses a cannon to kill a fly. Where are the population impact studies? There isn’t, in fact there never is. We change the direction of the streets or cut off access to the entire population of the East without ever calculating the human impact of these changes. And above all without offering any other option. To walk ? I never see anyone doing it, especially since the Olmsted path already allows it in a magnificent environment.
Laurent Imbault, Montreal