In my 14 years covering Montreal’s urban development stories, I’ve rarely seen community mobilization quite like what’s happening around Pierre Elliott Trudeau International Airport. The tension between airport expansion and quality of life has reached a critical point, with residents increasingly vocal about their concerns.
“My windows literally rattle when certain planes fly over,” explains Marie Thibault, who has lived in Dorval for over two decades. “It’s gotten worse in the last few years, especially during early mornings and late evenings when you’re trying to rest.”
According to recent data from Aéroports de Montréal (ADM), complaints about aircraft noise have increased by 37% compared to pre-pandemic levels. This spike coincides with the airport’s gradual return to full operational capacity and proposed expansion plans that include additional flight paths over residential areas.
The community group “Quiet Skies Montreal” has gathered over 4,200 signatures on their petition demanding stricter enforcement of noise regulations and a comprehensive environmental impact assessment before any expansion moves forward.
Dr. Caroline Bergeron, an environmental health researcher at McGill University, points to growing evidence about noise pollution’s effects. “Chronic exposure to aircraft noise has been linked to sleep disturbance, cognitive impairment in children, and increased risk of cardiovascular issues,” she told me during our conversation at her campus office last week.
The airport authority maintains they’re following all federal guidelines. “We take community concerns seriously and have invested $26 million in noise mitigation measures over the past five years,” said ADM spokesperson Jean Landry in an email statement.
However, residents from Saint-Laurent, Ahuntsic-Cartierville, and other affected neighborhoods argue these measures are insufficient. At a recent town hall meeting I attended, the room overflowed with concerned citizens. Many expressed frustration about the perceived lack of transparency in the airport’s development plans.
City councillor Marvin Rotrand has been advocating for stronger municipal involvement. “While airports fall under federal jurisdiction, the city has a responsibility to ensure residents’ wellbeing,” he explained. “We’re pushing for representation on the airport noise advisory committee and greater public consultation.”
The situation reflects broader tensions between economic development and environmental concerns facing many Montreal communities. Pierre Elliott Trudeau International generates approximately $5.5 billion annually for the regional economy and supports nearly 50,000 jobs directly and indirectly.
Environmental assessments show aircraft operations contribute significantly to local air pollution. Transport Canada data indicates aviation accounts for about 13% of transportation-related emissions in the greater Montreal area.
François Laramée, who founded the environmental advocacy group “Montréal Vert,” believes there’s a middle ground. “We recognize the airport’s economic importance, but development must happen responsibly. Simple measures like adjusting flight paths over less populated areas and implementing stricter nighttime noise restrictions would make a difference.”
Montreal’s situation mirrors challenges faced by other urban airports worldwide. Cities like Frankfurt and London have implemented noise curfews and created designated quiet periods to balance operational needs with community wellbeing.
As I walked through affected neighborhoods last weekend, the issue became tangible. Every few minutes, conversation would pause as aircraft noise momentarily dominated the soundscape. For residents, this isn’t an occasional inconvenience but a daily reality affecting their quality of life.
The airport authority has scheduled public information sessions for next month, though some community leaders remain skeptical about whether their input will meaningfully influence decisions. As Montreal continues evolving as a global city, finding balance between growth and livability remains a crucial challenge – one that requires genuine dialogue between all stakeholders.
One thing is clear from my reporting: this issue transcends simple NIMBY concerns. It raises fundamental questions about how urban development decisions are made and who bears the environmental costs of economic progress
