The proposal and its conclusions immediately made Touring jump. “Deleting them permanently, instead of rehabilitating them or adapting them to new multimodal functions, is equivalent to destroying a useful heritage, with no real guarantee of long-term gain.”
But will this study really be followed? On the side of the regional Ministry of Mobility, the ball of decision is passed to the next government, due to current affairs. But the PS, through the voice of Ridouane Chahid, already announces its opposition: “We are following a dogmatic ideological logic of attacking motorists, but without any solution behind it. I wonder if the desire of some is not rather to make Brussels the least accessible city-region in the world.”
Teeth are still gnashing on Avenue Charles Quint: the municipalities are demanding changes to the redevelopment project, with 165 places removed
Discomfort in the City
These major axes are regional: it is therefore the Region which supports, finances, designs and decides on these issues. But the municipalities have a certain blocking capacity if, opposed, they decide to go to standoff.
Bad news for Stib users: prices will increase by almost 5% from February 1
In the City of Brussels, there is unease. Neither the mayor Philippe Close (PS) nor the new Mobility alderwoman Anaïs Maes (Vooruit) want to comment on the matter. In Brussels, on Avenue Louise, there are the Bailli and Vleurgat infrastructures, which, as a reminder, are already experiencing a reduction in traffic due to their state of disrepair.
In Etterbeek, mayor Vincent De Wolf (MR) does not hide his reservations about the scenario concerning the Boileau tunnel. “If the consequence is a significant shift in traffic in the Montgomery district, a residential area, it will be a disaster.”
gull“If the consequence is a significant shift in traffic in the Montgomery district, a residential area, it will be a disaster.”
“A question of cost-benefit”
On the Woluwe-Saint-Lambert side, concerned by the Woluwe and Georges-Henri tunnels, the tone is one of openness. “For Georges-Henri, we are not opposed to the deletion. It’s an urban trench and we’re asking for a redevelopment of Brand Whitlock Boulevard.”comments Olivier Maingain (Défi), which however requires in-depth mobility studies to see the consequences on residential neighborhoods. Same philosophy for the Woluwe tunnel: “We are not opposed in principle, but we do not want to eliminate it in principle either. It’s a question of cost-benefit, you have to look at the studies.” The Woluwean mayor, however, says he is skeptical about the management of public funds. “I am surprised, because the Region recently invested in these tunnels. She should know where to put her money and not spend it unnecessarily.”
“Arrogant and haughty” for some, “direct and efficient” for others: De Gucht’s son, the enfant terrible of the VLD who is dynamiting negotiations in Brussels
Note that the study states: “the closure of the Georges-Henri tunnel is the only one that does not allow savings to be made”. The choice is therefore not financial: “It still seems interesting to us to consider closing the Georges-Henri tunnel given its inconsistency from a mobility point of view, its strong influence on public space and the potential rebalancing for the different modes.”
“Destroying a useful heritage, without any real guarantee of long-term gain”: Touring shoots down the project to remove five Brussels tunnels
Note that the Brussels Mobility study also mentions the removal of “in the longer term” Tervueren, Delta, Madou, Arts-Loi, Porte de Namur and Van Praet tunnels.
