Trucking and the Turcot: Balancing urban quality of life with the economic imperatives of truck-based freight transportation

Jacob Larsen

MUP Candidate, McGill University

Proponents of the current proposal to rebuild the Turcot and adjoining interchanges assert that maintaining high capacity for moving transport trucks is essential to the health of the Quebec and Montreal economies. It is beyond debate that transportation of goods is an essential component of Montreal’s economic vitality and that the vast majority of goods are transported by truck. However, the assumption that economic prosperity for the region is contingent on unfettered truck access to the Turcot Interchange remains dubious at best. The growth of trucking as the predominant mode of goods transport in the twentieth century has been linked to environmental degradation and negative health impacts. Critics of truck transport argue for shifting freight transportation to rail; however, the decentralized nature of global transportation renders this decision totally unrealistic; such a policy change is also beyond the scope of local decision-makers. While the negative effects of trucking should be mitigated when possible, it is fanciful to imagine a freight transportation network that does not include trucks. Truck-based goods transport has become an essential component to our modern way of life. If an alternative plan for the Turcot Interchange to that of Transport Quebec (MTQ) is to be considered, it must recognize for the necessity of transport trucks to the economic well-being of cities and make strategic provisions their presence in the Montreal region.

This chapter takes a pragmatic approach to freight transport by suggesting solutions that could form part of a comprehensive plan for trucking in the Greater Montreal Area. Specifically, by developing a strategy for diverting truck traffic away from the centrally-located Champlain Bridge, the proportion of trucks on the Turcot Interchange could decrease dramatically.

Reducing truck traffic on the Turcot Interchange should parallel the modal shift from passenger vehicles to public transport called for in other chapters of this book, however it is important to remember that passenger and freight transport remain two distinct branches of transportation, serving different purposes. Evidence of the separateness of these domains is especially apparent in Western Europe, where freight transport by truck has been increasing steadily over the past 30 years while public transit ridership in European cities is the envy of every North American transportation planner.

While sharing the same road space, automobile and transport truck traffic each warrant separate solutions, tailored to their particular characteristics.

In the case of Montreal, shifts towards public transport together with a strategic plan for truck-based freight transport would make a downscaled interchange a feasible option. Many recommendations have already been made concerning freight transportation in Montreal in recent years; this chapter will highlight some relevant findings from the Nicolet Commission (2003) and draw on precedents from other regions that could be successfully applied to satisfy Montreal’s current and future goods transportation needs. Some possible solutions explored include bypass highways such as the long-awaited Autoroute 30; truck-only lanes on existing routes; and the prioritization of truck traffic across other bridge spans. Careful implementation of some of these measures could result in an abatement of the truck traffic using the Turcot Interchange, effectively relieving the need to rebuild the complex in the same monumental proportions.

A brief history of transport in Montreal

Montreal’s importance as a regional centre in the continental network of truck transport can be traced back to its growth in the nineteenth century, and to the development of two other types of infrastructure: water and rail. The construction of the Lachine Canal in 1825, allowing vessels to circumvent the dangerous Lachine rapids and providing controlled hydro-power for emerging industries, is often cited as a pivotal moment in Montreal’s industrial history. In terms of water-borne transportation, though, the deepening of the St. Lawrence River downstream from Montreal in 1850 and again in 1880 had a greater impact on regional transport, making Montreal an important port for ocean-going vessels and contributing to its development as a major trading centre.

However, Montreal’s predominance in the region was only guaranteed by the completion of the Victoria Bridge across the St. Lawrence River in 1859, a private undertaking providing Montreal firms with year-round access to its closest year-round ice-free port in Portland, Maine. Montreal’s metropolitan status was assured at that point, as competing railways companies such as the Canadian Pacific Railway and Canadian Northern Railway invested massively in the city to compete in the expanding market created by the Grand Trunk Railway (GTR).

The transition from rail to road as the primary mode for freight transport occurred in parallel to the twentieth century rise of the automobile and cannot be traced back to a few decisive infrastructural projects. From a policy perspective, the passage of the Trans-Canada Highway Act (1949) and the National Interstate and Defense Highways Act (1956) in the United States prompted an important modal shift in North American goods transportation. The 1950s also marked the advent of containerized freight and the completion of the St. Lawrence Seaway, which has been linked to Montreal’s diminished importance as a shipping hub as ocean-going vessels gained access to markets located farther west in the Great Lakes basin.

Many critics have accused governments of subsidizing the trucking industry through road infrastructure while privatizing railways and allowing them to be swamped by increasing operating costs. Another explanation for the growth of trucking that should be noted was the steady decrease in real cost for liquid fossil fuel that occurred through the twentieth century; between 1918 and 2002 the real cost of gasoline decreased from $3.50 per gallon to $1.50 (in 2008 dollars) before beginning its steep increase in the past decade.

While many explanations have been given for the growth of the trucking industry, the shift is probably best explained at the global scale by macroeconomic trends; truck transport has become the natural choice in the context of decentralized centres of production and consumption and highly specialized markets.

Montreal’s strategic location

Located between the key markets of Ontario, the Canadian Maritime provinces, and the Northeast United States, Montreal’s location has ensured its importance as a hub in the intercontinental trucking industry. While data on trucking in Quebec are scarce, the MTQ reports that there are 152,000 weekly truck trips entering or leaving the territory of the Montréal metropolitan area, 21% of which are in transit to achieve trade between other regions of Québec or North America.

For these trucks in transit through Montreal, the absence of a southern bypass route makes the Champlain Bridge the most logical link, necessitating heavy truck use of the Turcot Interchange. Of the remaining weekly truck traffic, the same study reports that 68% have their origin or destination on the Island of Montréal, with the St. Laurent industrial park comprising the largest generator of trips; while there is a lack of reliable data on trucking on the Island of Montreal, the MTQ estimates that the St. Laurent industrial park contains 85,000 jobs related to trucking, almost double that of any other area on the island.

Trucks traveling between the St. Laurent industrial park and the South Shore towards destinations in southern Quebec, the Maritimes or the Northeast United States are also most likely to opt for the Champlain Bridge, crossing the Turcot Interchange en route. As shown in figure 1, the strategic location of Champlain Bridge serves as a magnet in the region, attracting high volumes of truck traffic to the Turcot Interchange. The bottleneck of truck and car traffic currently produced in the Champlain Bridge corridor is central to the MTQ’s rationale for rebuilding the Turcot Interchange according to the same specifications. However, there are alternatives; Figure 2 shows an alternative route using the Mercier Bridge, which passes fewer residential areas and could reduce the negative health impacts of truck transport. The two alternatives – the Champlain and Mercier routes – have prompted reflection on other occasions.

The Nicolet Commission

The Commission de consultation sur l’amelioration de la mobilité entre Montréal et la Rive-Sud, hereafter referred to as the Nicolet Commission, was created in January 2001 to study the possibility of building a new infrastructure (bridge or tunnel), in partnership with the private sector, to solve the chronic problem of congestion on the bridges between Montreal and the South Shore. Central to the Commission’s raison d’être was the growing congestion of the Champlain Bridge, which according to the projections used by the Commission would result in a 14% increase in average travel time.

However, in spite of its original directives, the Commission quickly became a forum for debating the entire problem of mobility between Montreal and the South Shore. In part due to the divergent viewpoints between advocates of new infrastructure and the advocates of public transit, the focus of the Commission was expanded to related issues: management of demand, infrastructure funding, greenhouse gas emissions, quality of life and public health.

The Commission also devoted a chapter of its final report to the process of consultation in transportation infrastructure development in Quebec, insisting that the discussion of options and alternatives should take place upstream of the decision-making process. This openness to problem-definition exemplified by the Nicolet Commission stands in stark contrast to the project development process pursued with respect to rebuilding the Turcot and to other recent infrastructure projects in Quebec province.

The focus of the Commission’s final report remained largely on its original mandate concerning specific infrastructure projects. While warning against induced demand, the Commission recommended two additional lanes for road vehicles and two additional lanes for public transit on the Champlain Corridor, the busiest span across the St. Lawrence River. The Commission also recommended the widening the Honoré-Mercier Bridge for two additional lanes for truck transport and public transit and a new bridge connecting the Autoroutes 640 and 30 at the eastern tip of the island, completing a long-awaited bypass route that would allow many trucks to avoid crossing onto the island entirely.

Finally, the Commission recommended a comprehensive plan to manage demand for road space in the city’s downtown core in conjunction with improved public transit, reducing congestion across the river spans through a mode shift. Despite its comprehensive approach and stated goals of increasing public transit, some environmental groups criticized the Nicolet Commission for not going far enough and questioned the privileged consideration of infrastructure projects originating from the private sector.

To date, the Nicolet Commission remains the most comprehensive study of the transportation issues facing Montreal and the South Shore and suggests promising alternatives for dealing with the present challenge surrounding the Turcot Interchange. Not surprisingly, independent transportation experts in Montreal have drawn on the Commission’s conclusions extensively. The Groupe de recherche urbaine Hochelaga-Maisonneuve (GRUHM) cites the Commission’s estimate of a 3% annual increase in truck traffic and argues that an enlarged Mercier Bridge connected to the Autoroute 30 could become the primary truck crossing for the western portion of the island; completing the Autoroute 30 without prioritizing the Mercier Bridge for trucks would result in a 30% increase of trucks on the Champlain Bridge by 2021, meaning over two million additional trucks crossing the Turcot Interchange annually.

Moreover, simply completing the Autoroute 30 bypass would likely result in little if any reduction in trucking on the island; 68% of trips currently originate or end on the island. As revealed in figure 1, the Mercier Bridge provides easy access to the St. Laurent industrial parks and, as mentioned above, has a lower concentration of residential areas nearby, making it the optimal span on the western portion of the island to handle a larger load of truck traffic, provided that consultations with neighbouring Kahnewake community result in mutually acceptable plan.

Elsewhere in North America, other jurisdictions have successfully adopted strategies to deal with the flow of heavy trucks through their territory. Truck-only lanes and differentiated tolls are two such strategies. Truck-only lanes vary in scale and function, providing either access to a particular facility such as a port or an alternate route around an urban area, and have been used in Southern California and are planned in New Jersey.

Provision of such lanes on the Mercier Bridge would act as an incentive for truckers to use that span and effectively direct them away from the Champlain Bridge.

Another study found that differentiated tolls are a more effective than dedicated lanes in managing truck flows.

Time-of-day pricing is one method of differentiated tolls, charging drivers more when crossing in peak periods; this has been implemented at several major access points to Manhattan Island with promising results.

Applied to trucks crossing the Island of Montreal, this disincentive would charge drivers a fee crossing the Champlain Bridge that would not apply to the Mercier Bridge crossing. However, as already noted by Nicolet Commission, the level of congestion that is already found on these two spans would require additional truck facilities on the Mercier Bridge to handle this additional flow. In other words, the “stick” may not produce the desired results unless the “carrot” is made available.

A comprehensive vision for the Turcot Interchange

To describe the Turcot Interchange as a giant knot requiring meticulous disentanglement is an appropriate metaphor for the transportation challenges facing Montreal today. From the air, the many tendrils of its swooping overpasses conjure up such an image, however it also points to the persistent and calculated measures that will be needed to craft a more sustainable transportation strategy for the region.

This chapter argues that a viable alternative to the MTQ’s proposal for the Turcot Interchange is possible and presents several options for truck transport. Drawing on the findings of the Nicolet Commission and proposals by the GRUHM, as well as precedents from other regions, this chapter sketches a few possible alternatives, such as bypass highways around dense urban areas, truck-priority routes and differentiated pricing. It has been repeatedly stressed that opponents to the MTQ’s proposal must face the reality of a continental freight transportation system that is dominated by trucks. Truck transport has become an essential component in our economic system; failure to recognize this basic fact will result in a fatal loss of credibility to any alternative proposed.

As a subset of this larger web of issues surrounding the Turcot Interchange, the transport of goods by truck in the Montreal region warrants consideration on its own merits and requires a distinct plan to be managed effectively. At present, the MTQ has developed no such plan, opting instead for a laissez faire approach to road-based freight transportation, with sporadic, reactionary responses to demand for roads through massive infrastructural investments.

Where the Turcot Interchange is concerned, the MTQ proposes to rebuild a similar structure to accommodate even greater volumes of traffic, while providing no policy directives to guide planning for truck transport in the region. Until such a strategy is defined and implemented, the negative impacts associated with heavy truck traffic will continue to increase.

Conclusion

This chapter represents one attempt to articulate an alternative vision to that proposed by the MTQ by emphasizing minimizing the negative impacts of trucking. The Minister of Transport will require further study of this issue, involving the collection and analysis of more precise data related to trucking, in order to arrive at an optimal solution.

Ultimately, though, the central transportation issue facing Montreal today is not a question of infrastructure or information but one of leadership; at present, it is not advantageous for the governing party to invest its political capital in bringing about a paradigm shift towards sustainable transportation. If progress towards this end is to be achieved, it will require that all levels of government invest both economically and politically. Indeed, it will be up to the public to demand that they do so.