Île-aux-Tourtes Bridge | We are no longer in 1960

Officials from the Quebec Ministry of Transport (MTQ) did not break their heads to plan the new Île-aux-Tourtes bridge. They practically did a cut and paste of the original plans, which date from the early 1960s.

Last spring, the MTQ had to crash four of the six lanes of this structure which connects Vaudreuil-Dorion to Senneville, in the west of the island of Montreal. The bridge, used daily by about 87,000 vehicles, represented a real danger. Construction completed in 1965, at the same time as the Champlain Bridge, the bridge no longer met current standards and its structural beams were damaged. By 2031, the MTQ plans to spend more than 172 million to keep it safe.

In a decree adopted last October, the MTQ submitted a reconstruction project that ignores all the current discussion around climate change and the reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

There will be no lane reserved for public transit on the new bridge planned by the MTQ, which offers three lanes in each direction, plus a bicycle path and a wide shoulder lane on each side. Buses will be able to use this shoulder in the event of congestion, provided there is no accident or a broken down vehicle, because this lane will be multifunctional. Then, the buses will have to re-enter traffic when exiting the bridge.

The MTQ has not planned any space for the possible passage of the REM, which will be invited to use a corridor to be built in the axis of Highway 40, if ever it is decided to extend it that far.

Is this how we plan transport projects in 2021? Without any declared desire to reduce the number of cars on the roads?

All urban planning and transportation specialists will tell you: the MTQ’s objective is to move vehicles, not people. This ministry has a way of thinking that is completely outdated in 2021.

This explains the lack of vision and ambition of this project. Just read the analyzes to confirm it. By studying the possibility of cutting off a lane on each side to reserve them for public transport, the MTQ notes that 30% of motorists should swap their car for public transport. Obviously, this goal seems unattainable, not to say inconceivable.

However, it is precisely this type of objective that we must set to reduce GHG emissions over the next few years. Currently, an estimated 2,100 riders cross the bridge by bus on a daily basis. If we favored access to public transit near the bridge and reserved a fast lane for buses, we can think that more commuters than the number estimated by the MTQ would leave their vehicles in their driveways. This would reduce the probability of traffic jams once you arrive in Montreal.

We can see from the numerous documents attached to the project that the Ministry of Transport is not the only one lacking in vision.

In its environmental analysis report, the Ministry of the Environment uses the word “inconvenience” when referring to the costs and complexity of building reserved lanes. As if, again, we were unable to get out of tunnel vision.

Nowhere is there mention of the environmental and collective costs in public health, to name just a few, associated with a project that promotes the use of the car. We could have gone gradually by reserving a lane for buses, taxis, self-service cars and vehicles occupied by two or more people. We could also provide access to public transport near the bridge, which does not exist for the moment.

No, we prefer to reproduce an infrastructure from another century, worthy of the golden age of the automobile. A great missed opportunity. And further proof, if one were needed, that we are incapable of thinking, planning and integrating transport infrastructure in the greater metropolitan area.

If the Legault government is serious in its desire to achieve its GHG reduction targets, Minister Bonnardel must send his officials back to their drawing board.

What do you think? Express your opinion