Trent: Cracking the mystery of Montreal's self-destructing roads
Let's try to crack that great Montreal mystery: Why do we build self-destructing roads?
When it comes to durability, all roads lead to Rome. While our roads barely last 50 years, some ancient paved Roman roads still survive. A metre thick, they were built on compacted soil in four layers: crushed rock, mortared crushed rock, concrete, and stone pavers.
Two millennia later, in 1816, roads of compacted gravel called macadam were developed by John McAdam — not, however, the John Macadam whose name graces the rather more digestible macadamia nut. Macadam was far inferior to its Roman equivalent, without even a concrete layer because 'modern' concrete was first used for paving in 1865. By 1904, macadam had tar added to it as a binder and dubbed 'tarmac.' We call it asphalt.
Roadbuilding techniques have essentially remained unchanged ever since, but stresses on roads have multiplied — think of the pounding of 50,000-kilogram loaded trucks compared to wagon-wheeled carts.
For many Quebec roads, crushed and compacted gravel topped with asphalt is still common. The City of Montreal usually specifies 20 centimetres of concrete under the asphalt. Some highways and airport runways use up to 50 cm of concrete with no asphalt — giving a boost to strength and possibly longevity.
Water is the great destroyer of building materials: it corrodes metals, rots wood and weakens concrete. The Romans understood the danger of water acting on their handiwork: They built watertight roads with a cambered surface for water run-off. In our climate, when water penetrates the rigid sponge that is concrete, it expands as it freezes, tearing apart the concrete after repeated freeze-thaw cycles.
Then there's potable water. For 'home delivery' of water, Romans used pipes made of lead — plumbum, whence the word 'plumber.' Don't mock the Romans for poisoning themselves: One-third of U.S. cities still have lead in their water service lines, as does Montreal. One more reason why our roadways need to get deconstructed.
Along with water pipes, Montreal buries utilities such as gas, power and telecom trunk lines underneath concrete roads and sidewalks, requiring jackhammers or diamond-bladed saws to get at them whenever inaccessible via manholes. Any such cuts in the road surface by Énergir, Hydro-Québec and Bell Canada can ruin a road's watertightness, shortening its life.
But how do other northern cities manage to have decent roads and we don't?
Chronic underinvestment aside, the underlying cause is probably the sort of contractor building our roads. Even if we delude ourselves that the widespread corruption uncovered by the 2011-2015 Charbonneau commission of inquiry into the Montreal construction industry is now behind us, today's crumbling road infrastructure is a poisoned legacy, a product of 50 years of bid-rigging, dodgy engineering firms and complicit bureaucrats or politicians. When contractors cheat on price, they cheat on quality.
We have to attract a new class of skilled road contractors and shift the obligation to perform onto them. One way is to have the contractor design, build and then maintain the road in good condition at their cost for (say) 30 years. Contractors would have an inescapable incentive to build well and durably. (If ever they go under, their performance bond kicks in.)
While the design-build-maintain method falls under the general category of Public Private Partnerships (PPP), using it for street construction offers minimal snares. While not everyone would declare the PPP that created the MUHC Glen complex was an unalloyed success, using PPP for building streets is a far cry from building and maintaining a hospital. The cause and effect of pavement failures are relatively evident.
Repeated contracts for self-destructing roads constitute a gift that keeps on giving. It's time to end this generosity.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


CTV News
2 days ago
- CTV News
$20M Lotto Max jackpot won by group in Trois-Rivières
Lotto Max tickets are shown on Monday, Feb. 26, 2018. (THE CANADIAN PRESS) The $20 million Lotto Max jackpot was won by a group of 15 people in Trois-Rivières, according to Loto-Quebec. The winning ticket was bought as a Formule Groupe. The winning numbers were 06 29 39 40 42 44 48, with Bonus 22.
Montreal Gazette
3 days ago
- Montreal Gazette
Trent: Cracking the mystery of Montreal's self-destructing roads
Let's try to crack that great Montreal mystery: Why do we build self-destructing roads? When it comes to durability, all roads lead to Rome. While our roads barely last 50 years, some ancient paved Roman roads still survive. A metre thick, they were built on compacted soil in four layers: crushed rock, mortared crushed rock, concrete, and stone pavers. Two millennia later, in 1816, roads of compacted gravel called macadam were developed by John McAdam — not, however, the John Macadam whose name graces the rather more digestible macadamia nut. Macadam was far inferior to its Roman equivalent, without even a concrete layer because 'modern' concrete was first used for paving in 1865. By 1904, macadam had tar added to it as a binder and dubbed 'tarmac.' We call it asphalt. Roadbuilding techniques have essentially remained unchanged ever since, but stresses on roads have multiplied — think of the pounding of 50,000-kilogram loaded trucks compared to wagon-wheeled carts. For many Quebec roads, crushed and compacted gravel topped with asphalt is still common. The City of Montreal usually specifies 20 centimetres of concrete under the asphalt. Some highways and airport runways use up to 50 cm of concrete with no asphalt — giving a boost to strength and possibly longevity. Water is the great destroyer of building materials: it corrodes metals, rots wood and weakens concrete. The Romans understood the danger of water acting on their handiwork: They built watertight roads with a cambered surface for water run-off. In our climate, when water penetrates the rigid sponge that is concrete, it expands as it freezes, tearing apart the concrete after repeated freeze-thaw cycles. Then there's potable water. For 'home delivery' of water, Romans used pipes made of lead — plumbum, whence the word 'plumber.' Don't mock the Romans for poisoning themselves: One-third of U.S. cities still have lead in their water service lines, as does Montreal. One more reason why our roadways need to get deconstructed. Along with water pipes, Montreal buries utilities such as gas, power and telecom trunk lines underneath concrete roads and sidewalks, requiring jackhammers or diamond-bladed saws to get at them whenever inaccessible via manholes. Any such cuts in the road surface by Énergir, Hydro-Québec and Bell Canada can ruin a road's watertightness, shortening its life. But how do other northern cities manage to have decent roads and we don't? Chronic underinvestment aside, the underlying cause is probably the sort of contractor building our roads. Even if we delude ourselves that the widespread corruption uncovered by the 2011-2015 Charbonneau commission of inquiry into the Montreal construction industry is now behind us, today's crumbling road infrastructure is a poisoned legacy, a product of 50 years of bid-rigging, dodgy engineering firms and complicit bureaucrats or politicians. When contractors cheat on price, they cheat on quality. We have to attract a new class of skilled road contractors and shift the obligation to perform onto them. One way is to have the contractor design, build and then maintain the road in good condition at their cost for (say) 30 years. Contractors would have an inescapable incentive to build well and durably. (If ever they go under, their performance bond kicks in.) While the design-build-maintain method falls under the general category of Public Private Partnerships (PPP), using it for street construction offers minimal snares. While not everyone would declare the PPP that created the MUHC Glen complex was an unalloyed success, using PPP for building streets is a far cry from building and maintaining a hospital. The cause and effect of pavement failures are relatively evident. Repeated contracts for self-destructing roads constitute a gift that keeps on giving. It's time to end this generosity.


Winnipeg Free Press
4 days ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Getting your letter to the editor published
Opinion Hello, dear correspondent. We are so delighted to hear from you. Truly, we are. Within reason. File This is our semi-regular missive about the land of letters to the editor, and also about opinion pieces that appear on the Free Press Think Tank page. Feel free to cut this out and put it on your fridge, secured there safely for all eternity with a jaunty fridge magnet. Equally, feel free to recycle it without qualm or even bothering to read to the end. First, word length. The hardest part of writing a letter to the editor or a Think Tank piece is knowing how many words to use. For a letter to the editor, somewhere around 150 words is the true sweet spot. Get in, make your point, and get swiftly out. Your friends will be amazed — your enemies, both chastened and humbled. In a crass bastardization of Lewis Carroll's Jabberwocky, the vorpal blade will go snicker-snack, and with its head, you'll go galumphing back. For the Think Tank page, we can handle two pieces every day around 825 words, and one between 750 and 770, with ease. Go longer, especially really longer, and things get difficult. Reach 1,100 words of truly stellar prose, and we may eventually find a home for your work — but not until we find a piece that matches both your length and quality, so that we can reduce the page from three pieces to two. It might be a while. By the way, that includes the line at the end of your piece which we include to explain your experience, expertise, and why readers should respect your authority and accept your opinion. It might be something like this: 'Russell Wangersky is the comment editor of the Free Press and an insufferable prig.' Bear that line in mind as well when thinking about your word count. Some other basic rules apply to both letters and Think Tank pieces, however. If you give someone the literal equivalent of the side-eye — if you imply they are responsible for some ill, without either outright saying that they are and also providing the necessary proof — you are likely to be cast into the hideous pit of opinion darkness, never to emerge again, at least not right away on our pages. Reputation is important, both yours and whoever you're choosing to smite. This is not the Roman forum of the internet, where all weapons are fair game and you can both cast a net over your unwitting prey and then stab your tangled opponent repeatedly with your wordy trident, without facing so much as a raised shield. Accusing someone of something criminal or otherwise libel them? Not going to happen, at least, not if we spot it. Then, there's basic propriety. 'Cuck,' 'moron,' 'idiot' and 'slobbering fool' are not acceptable debate in print or on our website. You get the point. Threatening things like hanging for politicians — heck, threatening politicians, neighbours or random strangers — will find you so far down the naughty list that you'll be begging for coal in your stocking, just to prove you still exist to the rest of the world. Some last thoughts. No one is as funny as they think they are — even us. Humour is actually very hard. That is why true comedians are incredibly smart. You can swing for the humour fences if you choose to, but you may strike out. Pretend your mother is reading everything you send — and don't write anything that will make her give you that disappointed face. Weekday Evenings Today's must-read stories and a roundup of the day's headlines, delivered every evening. You know the one. And short and to the point will always be better. Did we mention how delighted we are to hear from you? We are. Truth is, slaving down here in the opinion mines, we couldn't do it without you.