CDPQ Infra released images of its Eastern REM project last week. From the outset, we must recognize the work done over the past year to improve the project. Based on the parameters set, CDPQ delivered a vision of the project that demonstrates commendable efforts to integrate an aerial structure into Montreal’s urban fabric.
The sketches do not fail to highlight everything that could make this massive structure acceptable to citizens: a promenade, green facilities, modern street furniture, cycle paths. The problem is that these drafts illustrate a complete and integrated project, while CDPQ delegates the financing and the realization of the elements that could make it acceptable to other stakeholders who do not have a seat at the table.
The committee of experts on architecture and integration emphasizes in its report — the quality of whose recommendations we can salute — the importance of defining the mode of governance so that “we can guarantee the population the achievement of the of the concepts and developments proposed, not only for the transport infrastructure itself, but also for the urban developments along the route”.
Without the mitigation measures that are the proposed developments, we return to the initial evocation of concrete pillars – whether they are tapered, white, dancing or not – which rise and replicate over more than 24 kilometers and which create a real urban divide. It therefore seems essential that all the costs relating to these developments, as necessary as they are attractive, be included in the project so that we can judge it as a whole.
Knowing all the implications of a scenario makes it possible to compare it, in complete transparency and in an informed manner, with other scenarios that may be less prejudicial in terms of town planning, landscape, human and socio-economic aspects.
Architecture and aesthetics
The REM file reveals another problem: the widespread misunderstanding of what architectural quality really consists of. Much more than an aesthetic assertion, this quality must be the result of a creative approach that reconciles the needs of users, functionality, durability and beauty, while offering added value to the community.
We repeat it because we have to: architecture is not the art of quickly covering up inconsistencies, once decisions have been made, so that a problem that we have created from scratch can appear an acceptable second best. Architecture is based on the global intelligence of a project.
The essence of this approach must be understood and encouraged by all stakeholders: here, this includes CDPQ Infra, but also the City of Montreal and citizens. Naturally, this also involves the Quebec government. We have to be able to count on the fact that projects that benefit from state support — like the REM — go beyond the objective of simple profitability to aim for global exemplarity.
This exemplarity is all the more important if we consider that the REM seems to want to reproduce itself on the metropolitan territory. It calls us to reflect on what is best for Montreal and for Quebec. We must want to be proud of our success rather than looking for the solution that will obtain, out of the blue and for fear of seeing the project abandoned, the only pass mark in the test of social acceptability.
Let’s take a little more of that time it takes to do well. Regrets are never pleasant.