autoroute 10 Autoroute 10 (Bonaventure - portion au nord du canal (boul. urbain))

[IluvMTL]

From what I've read they haven't even tackled the question of precisely where the new bridge or tunnel will be constructed, or if and what type of mass transit system will be part of the project, let alone when it will be built. Pressure will increase when the new session of parliament opens and I suspect that they will have to 'give in' and announce the project within a year.

 

I imagine some parts of the Bonaventure Project might remain, but it is also possible that adjustments will have to be made to incorporate the location of the new bridge or tunnel (and no longer the old) and the type of mass transit system used. Both projects should be thought out in tandem. The City might also receive more funding for the project if they have to alter the route to support the new Champlain and mass transit from the south shore.

 

You rightly mention that it is not advisible to have all these projects going on at the same time. Perhaps we should wait until the new bridge is built, so that we don't add to the problems alreday experienced by the condition of the existing bridge. Maybe we can get the Notre-Dame project moving instead. What is the real urgency of tearing down the Bonaventure (eyesore that it is) right now anyway?

 

As soon as the Feds determine exactly where the new Champlain will go (and all it's components), the City can start their part. Who knows, maybe even the Dalhousie street reserved bus lanes (along with it's costs) will not be necessary if there are rapid trains going to Central Station. Possibly other expropriations may be necessary instead....

 

In the end, the real priorities should be safety, traffic flow and the best use of taxpayers money.

Modifié 16 août 2011 par IluvMTL

[Habsfan]

I don't agree. We all know where the new Champlain will be located. (Immediately to the east of the existing bridge)There's no where else it can go! NO delays, please! Like someone else mentionned, it'll only cause the pricetag to go up!

[IluvMTL]

I generally support the proposal, so I'm not questionning if it should be done, although I still think it would be preferable to wait untill the new bridge is built for the reasons I gave in the earlier post.

 

Unless I missed it, I'd like to know what is the real urgency of this project ?

Why should it be proritized and millions of dollars allocated to this project at a time when the city's infrastructure is falling apart all around us? As long as there are no reports to say it is dangerous and traffic flow is not compromised...

Modifié 16 août 2011 par IluvMTL

[MARTY]

Hi IluvMTL

 

The real urgency is that the Champlain bridge be built ASAP. Yes you are right the feds should hopefully announce the start date of construction for the new bridge in the very near future. I would certainly hope that the different players in the combined redevelopment will talk to each other about major points such as a rapid rail link or a tramway link over the new Champlain and unto the New Bonaventure. The big worry I have is that the cost will double or triple if it is delayed a year or two. Look at what happened to the Train de l'Est AMT!!

[IluvMTL]

Hi Marty

 

I do agree with you on the urgency of the Champlain and you are right about government costing estimates.

 

One thing is almost a given:

The final cost of any government project will double or triple after the project starts getting built. Seems to be built into the system and unfortunatley we all accept that.

Modifié 16 août 2011 par IluvMTL

[IluvMTL]

Among other things, the OCPM seriously questionned the financial estimates of the project in their final report dated March 18, 2010 and made many reccomendations.

http://www.ocpm.qc.ca/sites/default/files/rapports/Rapport_Bonaventure.pdf

 

 

Here's part of what they wrote in their covering letter about some of the financial aspects:

 

''La robustesse du scénario financier reste à valider

 

De l’avis de plusieurs, incluant la commission, le scénario financier mériterait d’être

révisé. Certains coûts pourraient avoir été sous-estimés ou ne pas avoir été pris en

considération dans l’évaluation de la rentabilité du projet.

 

Les coûts d’acquisition des droits du CN et de Dépotium et les coûts de la mise en

valeur des espaces du viaduc du CN n’ont pas été estimés, alors que les retombées

semblent avoir été incluses. La consultation a révélé que l’actuelle entreprise locatrice

du bâtiment-pont a signé l’an dernier un bail de 40 ans avec le CN. De plus, les coûts de

décontamination des terrains qui seraient vendus par la Ville ne semblent pas avoir été

dégrevés des recettes anticipées. On croit également qu’une estimation plus serrée de

la valeur marchande des terrains libérés devrait être produite, en tenant compte de

l’existence du surplus actuel de terrains disponibles au centre-ville.

 

Enfin, dans des études assez récentes du promoteur, le projet Devimco à Griffintown a

été considéré comme un facteur de succès pour les futurs espaces à bureaux, à la fois

par son apport d’une masse critique de résidents et d’une destination commerciale. Or,

ce projet a été considérablement réduit sans que la prévision des retombées n’ait été

ajustée.''

[Malek]

This project is nonsense from the beginning, dismanteling the alternative to the 720 when it will be under heavy construction within the turcot interchange is just irresponsible.

[Cyrus]

If I am reading that summary correctly, it seems that it isn't just an oversight but number manipulation that is either criminal or optimistic incompetence in the extreme. We're seeing it with the Bixi, and we've been hearing about all kinds of such things for some time now. The whole structure is so rotten.

 

I generally support the proposal, so I'm not questionning if it should be done, although I still think it would be preferable to wait untill the new bridge is built for the reasons I gave in the earlier post.

 

Unless I missed it, I'd like to know what is the real urgency of this project ?

Why should it be proritized and millions of dollars allocated to this project at a time when the city's infrastructure is falling apart all around us? As long as there are no reports to say it is dangerous and traffic flow is not compromised...

 

AFAIK the structure needs investment to ensure safety in the long term but for now... the pieces will only fall on City of Montreal owned vehicles anyway

Modifié 17 août 2011 par Cyrus

[MtlMan]

Les explosions de coûts sont la plupart dues à une sous-estimation initiale et presque systématique des projets. Les politiciens veulent "ménager" l'opinion en disant que ça ne coûtera pas si cher. Ils se disent qu'une fois parti, le projet ne pourra pas être arrêté, même si les coût réels finissent par être révélés.

 

L'autre problème, c'est qu'en cours de route, un paquet de monde demande des ajouts, des cecis et des celas. Le projet final est souvent pas mal plus complexe que l'estimation première. D'où le triplement de la facture.

 

Je ne pense pas que ce soit le simple fait de retarder un projet qui explique ces explosions. Si le projet était évalué correctement au début, et ses paramètres rigoureusement maintenus, je ne crois pas qu'une année ou deux de délai amènerait de tels gonflements.......

[IluvMTL]

http://www.montrealgazette.com/opinion/golden+nutty+planning/5281568/story.html

 

It's the golden age of nutty planning

 

The bonaventure expressway project is a classic example, and Louise Harel is showing common sense by questioning it

 

By HENRY AUBIN, The Gazette August 20, 2011

 

Of all the questionable transport plans in the news this summer, the one that's of most pressing interest is the remake of the Bonaventure Expressway. City council is to vote Monday on whether to launch construction with a $71-million loan.

 

This is the golden age of nutty planning. There's Transport Quebec's Dorval Circle redesign, whose estimated cost has soared 55 per cent to $350 million and whose completion date has gone from 2013 to 2017. There's Quebec's commuter train to Mascouche, whose cost has gone from $300 million to $665 million and which is behind schedule. There's Quebec's support for not one but two trains along a similar axis to the West Island, including an airport shuttle that will be of uncertain utility (because of the cheap, popular 747 bus). Even so apparently simple a project as the province's express-bus lane on Pie IX Blvd. is far behind schedule and its cost - which includes stations and other chrome-plated extras - has jumped 98 per cent to an eye-popping $305 million.

 

The Bonaventure Expressway plan differs from the pack in two ways. It's more Montreal city hall's baby than Quebec's. And it's not quite so expensive as the others (at least so far).

 

The estimated cost of bringing the elevated expressway to ground level and redesigning it as a "prestigious entrance" to downtown is $141 million, of which the city is paying the great majority. An adjunct to the project is the transformation of Dalhousie St., a small street that runs parallel to the expressway, into a special corridor for South Shore buses; the province will pay the corridor's estimated $61-million cost, bringing the total price tag to $202 million.

 

I've rarely had occasion to praise Louise Harel, city council's opposition leader, for anything, but her opposition to next week's vote on the loan shines with common sense.

 

The Mercier Bridge, the Champlain Bridge and the Turcot Interchange are all decaying dangerously, and Harel exaggerates only slightly in saying the Bonaventure Expressway "is the only access route to the city that does not require urgent repairs." She calls for a moratorium on the project. The money could be better spent, she says, on fixing what needs fixing.

 

Mayor Gérald Tremblay says Harel "wants to paralyze" Montreal's development. Oh, please.

 

This project is built on false premises.

 

The first one is that the expressway is in bad shape, which it is not. This is no Turcot. To be sure, the elevated roadway has some weaknesses, but one of the project's promoters, Jacques Côté, told me last year that it would cost $45 million to keep it in good condition until 2037. That's not cheap, but it's still 22 per cent the cost of this plan - and a bargain.

 

The second premise is that the expressway offers motorists an unpleasant entry to the city. Nonsense. This is not like coming in from the airport. The approach is decent, especially as you take the curve and sweep into University St. with its tall buildings.

 

A third premise is that the road's redesign would create a wide city-owned median strip (roughly opposite the Delta Hotel) on which office or condo towers could be built sometime in the future. That's magical thinking. The city needs to prioritize the development of downtown's many parking lots instead of fantasizing about squeezing buildings into a no-man's land between two streams of heavy traffic.

 

The final premise is that owners of hundreds of attractive, recently built condos would not mind if more than 1,900 buses - repeat, 1,900 - pass some 30 metres from their buildings. Would you want to live with such noise and pollution, Mr. Mayor?

 

This project serves no serious public purpose. A secretive coterie of businesspeople has conceived it at arm's length from the city's urban planners. It diverts money from far more pressing needs.

 

Yet because Tremblay's party holds the majority of seats, the loan approval will zip through city council. It is not development that is paralyzed in this city. It is intelligent development.

 

Construction starts in October.

 

haubin@montrealgazette.com

 

 

Read more: http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/golden+nutty+planning/5281568/story.html#ixzz1VgGZxZuJ