The reversal of the situation in the matter of the third link in Quebec City is an opportunity to reflect on what will happen next for the major transportation infrastructures in Quebec and the Quebec City region. In this first article of two, the author proposes a reflection on the famous “transport demand”.
The argument of insufficient demand to justify the third link is the one that weighed the most in the balance, in the media and politically, to explain the government’s volte-face in abandoning the third motorway link.
However, although this is relevant data for the analysis of a transport project, particularly with regard to its costs, one must be careful and not get too stuck on the argument of ” current transportation needs. In many respects, this approach can trap us in a highway logic and cause us to lose opportunities for the development of public transit. My discomfort with this angle is not new. Explanations in three steps.
1. A bad reason to justify freeways. If too much importance is given to the argument of existing demand, of course, the third link is discarded. But we also find ourselves, by the same argument, forced to consider motorway extensions in many other places. The extension of the A13, for example, could become “justified” since the A15 is already very busy and the Laurentians are experiencing strong population growth.
If it is necessary to oppose the increase in road capacity in urban areas in an almost systematic way, and this, whether the demand exists or not, it is because it locks us into a vicious circle of dependence on ruinous car in every way. Highways in urban areas are to transportation what pipelines are to energy: carbon lock-in. We have to stop building them.
2. Insufficient reason to reject transit projects. Sometimes the demand for sustainable mobility is latent. By the mere fact that an infrastructure becomes available, a lot of people will start using it – people who, before that, moved differently or gave up moving. For example, there weren’t many people on bikes in Saint-Denis before the Réseau express vélo, but the arrival of the infrastructure captured latent demand very quickly.
Another example: it is not because few users go from Montréal-Nord to the city center by public transport that the northeast branch of the REM de l’Est project is useless. Obviously there are few users, there is no service worthy of the name! There cannot be strong demand where there is no infrastructure.
3. A situation that may change over time. Travel habits are strongly modified by a new infrastructure, in particular through its influence on urban development — this is called induced demand. It can be a problem when a highway supports urban sprawl. It can also be part of the solution, when a new public transport line becomes an axis of urban densification and consolidation.
Forecasting future demand is complex; there are many parameters to consider: demography, culture, urban planning, economic vigour, etc. For example, densification around the metro has stagnated for decades due to rampant urban sprawl and the cultural force of the automobile. On the other hand, for the past ten years, the surroundings of stations have become denser everywhere (Longueuil, Laval, east of the green line, west of the orange line, etc.).
The dynamics at the origin of this phenomenon are diverse, but the presence of the metro is part of the universe of choice in housing and makes it possible to meet the new needs of a lifestyle less dependent on the car.
In short, the existence of current travel needs is only one of the criteria for evaluating a public transit project. The impact on modal shift, the possibilities of urban consolidation, social and territorial equity, costs and even the window of political opportunity are other very important criteria.
Above all, above all, basing the entire analysis on current needs is a form of renunciation of territorial planning. Planning a city is not about staring at the current situation; we have to project ourselves into what we want. After 70 years of motorway fantasies, we are beginning to know the price of this choice. It’s time to offer something just as powerful, but which will have a positive impact.
Would a direct public transit link between Lévis and Quebec be able to help build this city that is less dependent on the car and increase demand enough to justify the investment? An attempt to answer, tomorrow.