Reactions mixed to Mount Royal traffic project
Road closure angers some motorists, greeted with enthusiasm by bike users
It was only a few minutes into the presentation that the already impatient crowd boiled over with sarcastic laughs and light heckling. “I understand it’s a subject that brings up a lot of emotions,” the moderator interjected, speaking up to calm the room. “But please, let the presenter finish.” The crowd had gathered in downtown Montreal on Thursday night to hear the Office de consultation publique de Montréal’s early findings on the controversial Mount Royal through-traffic pilot project. When the OCPM presented one of its findings from a survey — that roughly 55 per cent of respondents “completely agree” the project reduced traffic on the mountain — the crowd, it appeared, had heard enough. “Bravo!” someone shouted snarkily from the back of the room. “This is ridiculous!” another man added, before being called to order. But other findings drew more positive reactions from those who opposed the project. Fifty-nine per cent of participants thought the pilot project was “a very bad idea,” the OCPM said. Sixty-two per cent agreed it made it more difficult to travel between the mountain’s different points of interest, and 67 per cent found it increased traffic in the “areas surrounding the mountain.” The OCPM was mandated by the city to look into the future of access roads to Mount Royal and to evaluate the pilot project itself. The project, which ran from June 1 to Oct. 31, eliminated through traffic on Mount Royal, preventing vehicles from using Camillien-Houde Way and Remembrance Rd. as a crosstown artery. It came to be after the death of 18-year-old cyclist Clément Ouimet on Camillien-Houde Way a year ago sparked demands to make the road safer. Controversial from the outset, it led to a 36,000-name petition opposing it and an 8,292name one in favour. In its presentation Thursday night, the OCPM said the consultation process on the project has drawn one of the greatest participation rates in its history, with more than 10,000 people weighing in on it. Perhaps not surprisingly, the office explained in its presentation, results from its surveys differed depending on the respondent’s main mode of transportation: 83 per cent of motorists qualified it as a “very bad idea” while 62 per cent of cyclists considered it a “very good idea.” Earlier this week, after releasing a preliminary report on the project — which was also presented at Thursday night’s meeting — the city of Montreal praised it as a success, hailing the fact there were no accidents during the five-month period and noting an increase in the number of cyclists using the mountain. “When you were on the mountain this summer, you felt the difference. You felt the peace, you felt the tranquillity, you felt the contact with nature,” Luc Ferrandez, the executive committee member responsible for large parks, told reporters. “We are extremely satisfied, even joyful. In fact, it was more than we hoped for.” But that wasn’t the opinion put forward by residents on hand Thursday. “In which way are motorists considered for this pilot project?” asked Plateau-Mont-Royal resident Jean Thompson as an open question period began following the presentation. “Are we second-class citizens? Does our voice not deserve to be heard?” Notre-Dame-de- Grâce resident Michael Silas, who says he opposed the project from day one, called the city’s report meaningless. “It’s a completely biased point of view,” he said. “You’re asking someone how they felt about their own pilot project. Of course they’re going to say it’s a great success.” Silas was encouraged by the OCPM’s findings trending in a different direction, but said he was baffled by some of the statistics the city presented. “We don’t care how many people there were or weren’t at an intersection,” he said. “The question is do we want to continue using that road? And it’s clear people do not want to stop through traffic over Mount Royal. They want to keep using the road.” Addressing the panel, Raymond Cherrier, from Côte-des-Neiges, shared a similar opinion. “I see a majority of respondents indicated an interest in keeping cohabitation in the traffic lane, but when we see the city’s report, the adjectives used don’t reflect that desire,” he said. “Will it be considered?” The OCPM’s Nicole Brodeur answered. “The very reason why the city mandated the OCPM was to consult the population,” Brodeur said. “On one side we have the city’s report. On the other, we have what the citizens and users of the mountain have to tell us about their perception of the project. That’s why we’re holding a consultation. It will be considered.”