Experts weigh in on roadblock dispute

BY ANDY BLATCHFORD

andy.blatchford@transcontinental.ca

To open or not to open.

Residents, emergency-service directors and traffic consultants converged on Beaconsfield City Hall Monday evening to debate the opening of a residential road.

Presentations by three parties backed the city’s fall decision to open James Shaw Street. Beaconsfield hoped the public meeting would shed light on its ongoing dispute with citizens — a battle that has already veered into a Quebec courtroom.

In December, the city removed barriers on James Shaw because it slowed the response time of emergency vehicles.

But locals say the unblocked stretch is a raceway for vehicles that use it as a shortcut to nearby Highway 40. Ten neighbours took the dispute — and Beaconsfield — to court, where they won a temporary injunction to keep the road closed.

On Monday, representatives from Montreal’s fire department and Urgences Santé outlined how the road barrier cuts critical response times.

Traffic consultants from the Genivar engineering firm used diagrams to show how the open stretch would benefit locals and not attract considerable outside traffic.

But residents were not sold on the experts’ opinions.

“I don’t care about them, they don’t live on my street,” James Shaw resident Frank Palumbo told Mayor Bob Benedetti, gesturing to the presenters. “Any more traffic would cause an accident, God forbid.”

More than a dozen residents weighed in on the presentation and offered suggestions.

Most wanted the road to remain closed.

However, one man warned that shaving response time from emergency vehicles outweighed traffic problems.

“Nobody wants more traffic but . . . you have to realize if you have an emergency, you want the fire department or ambulance to get there as fast as possible,” he said.

Debate crosses the border

The disputed link has also stirred debate with neighbouring Kirkland, where residents, and at least one council member, have requested that it remain sealed. The barrier juts up to the Kirkland border and Gerard Guindon Street.

“My kid, if he puts his toe on the road, he’s a goner,” said Kirkland resident Mark Neiss. “Where does your presentation show that?”

Kirkland councillor André Allard also addressed the packed council chamber.

“We will do whatever it takes not to have it opened,” he said. “I have the support of my council.”

His comments stirred enthusiastic applause from many in the room.

However, when reached yesterday, Kirkland Mayor John Meaney was surprised by Allard’s statement. Meaney said he appreciated that Allard was protecting the interests of his citizens, but had made it clear to the councillor he did not support closing the road.

“I don’t need anybody talking on my behalf,” he said. “As far as I’m concerned this has always been a case of security. Unless somebody can prove to me there is no security problem, my personal opinion is it should be open.”

In December, Kirkland asked Beaconsfield to keep the road blocked, Benedetti said. “I was appalled that a councillor from another city would come in and claim to represent the voices of a city that asked us to open a road officially,” he said.

Genivar representatives jotted down citizens’ concerns and will present their final report to Beaconsfield tomorrow.

Benedetti said the city will announce its decision on the road’s future at Monday’s regular council meeting.He said council must consider that added traffic from new homes currently being built in the area will be diverted from James Shaw to other streets if it stays closed.

“I wish there was a magic solution,” he said after the meeting. “We have to find the best solution for everybody.”

He acknowledged that court proceedings could continue if the city decides to open the road. The court injunction is set to expire next month, he added.