Third link | “We need to take stock of the situation”

François Legault acknowledged Friday that the four-lane highway tunnel he is planning between Quebec and Lévis is not based on any valid study, the last dating from the time of the Liberals and concerning a completely different project. An “astonishing” observation, but which above all calls for getting to work, according to experts.

Henri Ouellette-Vezina
The Press

“It’s still just an idea”

For Jean-Philippe Meloche, professor at the School of Urban Planning and Landscape Architecture at the University of Montreal, the absence of up-to-date studies on the third link project is “a bit surprising”. “But at the same time, to be for the project, you must not have seen a study on it, because if you had seen one, you would realize that it doesn’t look good,” he says. “Basically, all that we convey to the government to date is still just an idea for a project, but we have not yet done an in-depth study to assess whether it meets our needs,” he judges.

Compare with other solutions

At Trajectoire Québec, general manager Sarah V. Doyon regrets that François Legault’s remarks “confirm that we need to compare [le troisième lien] with perhaps more sustainable alternatives”. The reality, she says, is that “there has never been an opportunity analysis since 2018.” “It confirms that adding road infrastructure is not the way to solve congestion problems. In fact, the third link would be a first”, ironically the one who is also a member of the coalition No to the third link, saying she is impatient to see other government studies.

Acceleration of urban sprawl

Pierre Barrieau, expert in transport planning and lecturer at UQAM, believes that a question now arises: “Did the government run out of time, or did it just decide not to the studies because he knew that the result would be negative for him? In both cases, adds Mr. Barrieau, we must rely on the facts. “As early as 1974, studies have shown that any improvement in travel time leads to an acceleration of urban sprawl, which means that a few years later, we arrive at the same travel time. The studies that Mr. Legault would have had done, they would have demonstrated that, “he says, recalling however that” a political project, basically, does not need social acceptability “.

“We need to take stock of the situation”

The holder of the UNESCO Chair in Urban Landscape at the University of Montreal, Shin Koseki, believes for his part that it is above all necessary to “make a real inventory” of the project. “We now need to update the studies that have been done, assessing how much the situation has changed compared to 2018, and also the risk that the changes to the project will have an impact on the results of the study”, he explains. “All this illustrates the need not to make hasty decisions for political reasons, to take the process seriously. This is a project that would have a considerable impact on generations of Quebecers. We have to be really sure that we understand the issues that this generates,” concludes Mr. Koseki.