Beaconsfield mayor frowns at bike path
Beaconsfield mayor Georges Bourelle is doubtful about the utility of a bike path to link Exo to the Kirkland REM station. Bourelle sees no point in putting in the path unless it can be shown that a significant number would cycle between the train and the REM, ignoring the possibility that some would use it to get around the traffic‑heavy suburbs safely with no other transit plans.
Ian 13:48 on 2024-07-24 Permalink
It really would be a nice parallel to the Lakeshore path.
Uatu 13:51 on 2024-07-24 Permalink
You’d think that the increasing use of e bikes would make this a no brainer
PO 14:22 on 2024-07-24 Permalink
How are these reports so light on information?
There’s already a path along the Angel woods there — just not paved. It’s used frequently enough that it even shows up on Google maps.
If there’s already a path carved out, why not hold the mayor to task when he makes stupid comments like “I only see 3 bikes on this bike rack”
What route would the total path take? Not even a mock-up?
What’s the total approximate distance?
No mention of how to cross A-40?
Do EXO trains allow bikes? Will the REM allow bikes?
No trip time estimates? On-foot time? Bike time?
What’s the projected completion date for the REM station?
Even if these are evident to a small fraction of the population, they all should be answered in an article like this. It blows my mind that we get news reports like this without even an ounce of effort. Maybe I’m in a mood, but this article was basically:
“Mayor questions whether a bike path connecting EXO to REM would be worth it. A local cyclist thinks it would. A McGill guy agrees. There isn’t much parking at the new station. The end.” That’s literally all that was provided.
Kevin 14:39 on 2024-07-24 Permalink
I know this area very well and have wondered for decades why, when they eliminated the golf course, they didn’t extend Woodland to Highway 40.
While there’s been a lot of talk about putting in a bus route north of highway 40 and rerouting buses elsewhere to head to the REM, there should also be a direct route from the 20 to the 40 without going to St. Charles or Ste. Anne’s.
Taylor 15:26 on 2024-07-24 Permalink
This is really infuriating short-sightedness:
1. It’s hard to estimate how many people will drive on a road before the road gets built, much like it would be for a bike path.
2. This would encourage more cycling between transit stations
3. That in turn would reduce roadway congestion
The problem here is that these old farts think bikes are toys for kids (or a small niche of adults who use them principally for leisure or exercise), and have no concept of the fact that they’re efficient means of conveyance that reduce congestion, free up parking spots, improve the health of the citizenry (both cyclists and drivers alike due to increased exercise and decreased air pollution), and are exactly what we need to be encouraging in the era of climate change.
Their myopia condemns future generations. Total failure.
Blork 16:04 on 2024-07-24 Permalink
I’m not defending the short-sighted view of the Beaconsfield mayor, but what I see here (based on maps and whatnot, not direct experience with the area) is that the proposal of paving the 400 meter path that already exists along the forested area seems like a no-brainer at first. But on closer examination it only really creates a sort of hermetically sealed run between two train stations, which is not all that useful. It’s “hermetically sealed” in that it’s hemmed in on both sides by autoroutes, so it is not easy to get to, and there is very little need to simply cycle between train stations.
That said, if I were the King of the West Island, I would propose that this new path also be extended to cross the 20 to the south and to run along Woodland down to Lakeshore. On the north side, I’d propose some kind of passerelle be build that would cross over the 40 into Kirkland.
This would create a much-needed bicycle connection between the north of the West Island and the South. If done right it would be safe and I’m sure it would be very popular.
Unfortunately it would also be very expensive. On the south side there is already an overpass over the 20, but the bike path would have to cross two service roads and a regular street in close proximity. It’s already a somewhat chaotic exchange. Figuring out how to add a bike lane and making it safe would not be easy.
On the north side they’d need to build something grand, on the scale of the Passerelle Normandie in Longueuil (which is the finest passerelle in the land if you ask me; picture: https://flic.kr/p/QidW4u ) That is a huge and expensive project.
As King of West Island I’d pay for all of it without hesitation. But the problem here, I think, is that we have a conflict between creating a cheap but not very useful bike path, and an expensive but very useful bike path. So wot’s a king to do?
Nicholas 16:05 on 2024-07-24 Permalink
I hate the framing as between the REM and Exo stations, as if people will bike between them, when they run parallel. More like people will bike from the adjoining neighbourhoods to one of the two stations, or to Lakeshore, or another path. If there’s actually a reasonable way to cross the highways then people will likely cycle a few kms and then hop on another vehicle, bringing or locking their bike. The bike to train model works very well, if you make it safe and easy.
As for parking spots at the REM station, am I confused or is there not a giant set of parking lots just to the north of the station? Are we going to pay for an expensive deck when most of those spots sit unused? Just make a deal with the mall/cinema operator to allow REM users to park there, or in some of the spots, that’s gotta be cheaper than building some decks. Or maybe reroute some buses and people will bus there rather than drive.
Jaye 17:17 on 2024-07-24 Permalink
A similar path/overpass is being proposed from Stillview (near Lakeshore Hospital) to Fairview. It would cost 2 million dollars for the study and 20 million dollars to build.
Apparently the agglomeration requested that Montreal pitch in, but they see our bike paths as not their issue, while we pay for paths in the city, mini putt courses, and baseball diamonds in theirs.
yasymbologist 20:48 on 2024-07-24 Permalink
one of my impressions with the beautiful Beaconsfield town is that they are on the verge of cancelling that thin pedestrian sidewalk in the neighbourhood.
Ian 07:22 on 2024-07-25 Permalink
@Jaye I sympathise with the WI independent towns’ complaint that they bear an unfair tax burden in the balance, but mini putt courses? I live downtown, I don’t know about these mini putt courses. Where are tehy? That sounds fun.
Jaye 08:36 on 2024-07-25 Permalink
@ian https://montreal.ca/en/places/jardins-du-petit-laurier
I heard something about the original intent being housing, but can’t confirm…
Ian 09:01 on 2024-07-25 Permalink
Transitional space usually means a tax break for the owner as opposed to outright purchase but yeah, your tax dollars at work. It’s a wonder there aren’t clowns.