L’Assomption extension will partly destroy woods
The extension of l’Assomption Boulevard will inevitably destroy part of the boisé Steinberg – but what can you do, you’ve got to build bypasses.
-
Kate
Reply
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
Pages
Other levels of gov’t
Sideblog projects
Enviro Montreal is a Bluesky feed that follows local environment news. Also available on Mastodon.
Archives
Pages rescued from montreal.com
Meta
Nicholas 10:25 on 2024-03-04 Permalink
Man, that area is depressing. I remember going to the paintball place there as a teen, and nothing has changed. They’ve got a metro station and the area is filled with a handful of large warehouses. And I can’t imagine we need more roads here.
Blork 11:01 on 2024-03-04 Permalink
I don’t understand how the boisé is affected very much. If the boulevard is extended in a straight line it will run along the edge of the wooded area. At most one line of trees would be removed, affecting less than 5% of the so-called “natural’ area. That would also involve expropriating and removing part of the very large and low building that’s currently at that location (it houses a metal shop and an artisinal brewery and a few other businesses).
Maybe they want to save that end of the building and deke around it? That would result in eating up about 20% of the “natural” area but would also mean all those trucks would need to do a weird zig-zag at that intersection. But hey, if it saves appropriation and demolition money then I guess that’s how they’ll do it. :-/
su 11:22 on 2024-03-04 Permalink
A so-called “natural’ area is an area left to natural processes long enough to rewild itself as a thriving ecosystem which includes flora and fauna. Many residents tend to value such settings for the tranquil contrast ( bird songs, scent of fresh vegetation, the hum of insects in meadow grasses, rustling leaves shady coolness etc.) they provide to the growing bustling “development” of their neighborhoods.
Blork 12:52 on 2024-03-04 Permalink
That sounds nice, but I’m not sure it applies here. For one thing, there are no residents near that space; the closest residences are half a kilometer away across grim industrial spaces. And those natural sounds and aromas are likely drowned out by trucks, vehicle exhaust, and light industrial smells, even when you’re in the park. As to the “natural processes,” the park is cleaned every spring by those not-so-local locals, and then left to unnatural processes over the summer such as urban camping, drinking, late night partying, etc.
That doesn’t mean I’m against preserving the space. Not at all. I just don’t think we should romanticize it and make it sound like some sort of untouched natural meadow.
MarcG 14:23 on 2024-03-04 Permalink
Facebook group has some good photos and history https://www.facebook.com/boiseSteinberg
Blork 15:44 on 2024-03-04 Permalink
Does anyone here have any links to what the actual plan is? I see nothing in the couple of media links, and nothing in the FB group. It would sure help people understand what’s going on if we knew the actual plan.
There’s a lot of variation between the best-case-scenario I describe above where they extent the boulevard in a straight line (resulting in 5% or less loss of the park space) and the worst-case-scenario of “park will be destroyed!” that some people think will happen.
CE 18:45 on 2024-03-04 Permalink
Looks like a pretty bleak and underused space. I know people have romantic ideas about “wild” spaces in the city but I’d prefer us develop in the centre of the city with good transportation connections which is likely already contaminated over pushing the city farther and farther out onto good farmland or wild forested areas.