The 3rd link project cannot be justified exclusively by the maintenance deficit of the Pierre-Laporte bridge, according to the mayor of Quebec, for whom these are two totally “independent” files.
• Read also: Pierre-Laporte Bridge: the replacement of the lines will be accelerated
• Read also: Bad condition of the Pierre-Laporte bridge: the trade industry feels “held hostage”
• Read also: State of the Pierre-Laporte bridge: we must “accelerate” the construction of the 3rd link, insists Lehouillier
Questioned at the beginning of the afternoon, on the sidelines of a session of the Metropolitan Community of Quebec, Bruno Marchand first affirmed that it was necessary to “take seriously” the revelations of Radio-Canada on the degradation of the lines of the Laporte Bridge that threaten to “give way at any time”.
“What I’m asking the Ministry of Transport is to reassure people. Since this morning, there are (some) people who challenge me with their concerns (which are) understandable in the light of the information that is shared, ”he reacted.
Unlike his Lévis counterpart, who sees in it another eloquent illustration of the relevance of the Québec-Lévis tunnel project, Mayor Marchand believes that we must avoid using the setbacks of an existing bridge to promote the construction of new infrastructure further east.
Another bridge in the same place
In the worst-case scenario, if one day it were necessary to replace the Laporte bridge, it would be necessary to rebuild one in the same place, he pleads.
“If we need to replace the Pierre-Laporte bridge, it’s to the west that we need to have another bridge, as we did in Montreal (with the Champlain bridge) (… ) From the moment we realized that a bridge was in disrepair and that it had to be replaced, it’s another bridge that will take place there. For me, this analysis is done independently of the third link, ”he added.
The exit of Gilles Lehouillier hardly surprised him. “It’s fair game,” he says. “For me, it’s independent. The debate on the third link, it continues, ”he added, saying that he was still waiting for concrete data on the impacts of such a tunnel in Quebec and specific details on the planned exits on the North Shore.
“If the Pierre-Laporte bridge can no longer be used, a third link will not fully meet the needs we currently have. I name the trucking but also the traffic west of the city, both in Lévis and in Quebec. It’s not a third link that will answer that. Hazardous materials, it’s not a tunnel that will answer that. That’s why I tell you it’s independent, ”insisted the mayor of Quebec.
Maintenance before development
The Leader of the Opposition at City Hall, Claude Villeneuve, also gave a speech similar to that of the mayor.
“We are still going to be told that we have aging bridges in Quebec and that a third link is needed. We must revise the story on board. We are ignoring all the links that currently exist, and I include the ferries. Then the government, its attention is on a third link that will arrive in 10, 12 or 15 years. Before thinking about doing development, he should take care of maintaining what we already have, ”he insisted.
“The third link, at least as it is presented, has neither the capacity of Pierre-Laporte nor the possibility offered by the Quebec bridge to circulate the trains. If there is a problem with the Pierre-Laporte bridge, that means that the solution is to rebuild another Pierre-Laporte bridge next to it, not to build a third link that will never replace this that the Laporte bridge does,” added Mr. Villeneuve.
Reference-www.journaldequebec.com