Coalition No third link Transport Minister Franయిois Bonnardell was outraged at the words “taking the people for suitcases” by “instrumentalizing” the obstacles to come in the 2030s on the Laporte bridge to justify the Quebec-Lewis tunnel project.
The various environmental groups that form the coalition – with the support of civic bodies and some neighborhood councils – issued a press release on Saturday in response to the ministry’s comments this week.
The aging Pierre-Laporte Bridge will be subject to increased maintenance over the next few years, with the complete replacement of the bridge deck by 2037, a major project that will have a significant impact on river travel.
A tunnel to get relief from traffic
“This information confirms the importance of the Quebec-Lewis Tunnel project, which is to ensure the fluidity of traffic and the economic viability of the Greater Capital-National region,” said Minister Bonardell’s office.
“Allows the opening of the Quebec-Lewis tunnel, scheduled for early 2030s […] To mitigate the consequences of these major tasks by providing a new opportunity to cross from one shore to another, ”MTQ added.
“Telling us that a third link to work on the Pierre-Laporte Bridge deck is going to be resolved in 2037 is really taking people lightly and looking for every possible excuse to justify a project that does not exist. It’s like wanting to buy a new tank when you need to change your tires!”
Build on existing links
“Maintenance and optimization of existing infrastructure should take precedence over the addition of new roads or motorways to avoid exacerbating congestion by induced traffic,” the coalition stressed. Other infrastructure, such as the Quebec-Lewis Crossing and the Quebec Bridge, needs love “today and not in 2030 or 2037,” said Sarah V. Snyder of Trajektoir Quebec. Doyon insisted.
“While it is not clear how we will achieve our GHG reduction targets by 2030, it is interesting to see the government planning to lay bitumen in 2037,” added Mark-Andre Vue of Équiterre. We invite the government to prioritize the impact of climate change on existing infrastructure rather than dipping tens of billions into a wasteful project. ⁇
“Is there any way to improve mobility in a sustainable way between the two shores? Sure, but by continuing in the motorway tunnel and excluding any study of alternative solutions, the government is blocking the real debate, “lamented Charles Bonhome of the David Suzuki Foundation.