|
|
|
Regardless, if all of these systems were to be built in Europe, they would be called trams or tram-trains. Only in the Anglosphere did people feel the necessity to invent a brand new term to name these systems.I guess that's one take on it.
Another is that it was sold as a means of getting a higher-order transit system up and running where one didn't exist but was needed, and didn't need the huge initial costs of a full-blown subway system. See San Diego, Buffalo, Calgary, Edmonton, etc.
Dan
Its almost as if the renaissance was spearheaded by a single company, and now that they've been kicked out its back to status quo.Prolongement de la ligne bleue | Encore plus cher et encore plus en retard
N’achetez pas immédiatement votre billet pour la ligne bleue direction Anjou : le projet de prolongement du métro de Montréal sera plus long et plus coûteux que prévu, passant à près de 8 milliards de dollars, selon un document récemment soumis à Québec. Ce dernier prévoit aussi au moins un an...www.lapresse.ca
Blue Line Extention's earliest opening date is now 2031.
Now expected to cost 7.6+ billion.
Only one company bid on the contract and is extracting concessions from the city.
The deadline to sign the core construction contract is July 30.
Montreal's transit-building renaissance seems to have been a mirage.
Yes, by a crown corporation with a vision.Its almost as if the renaissance was spearheaded by a single company, and now that they've been kicked out its back to status quo.
The original modern light rail systems (Calgary, Edmonton, San Diego) are based on the German model of fast high-floor tram implemented in cities like Köln, Essen, Frankfurt, etc. Those systems are known in German as Stadtbahn, which is a brand new term they invented to name those systems.Regardless, if all of these systems were to be built in Europe, they would be called trams or tram-trains. Only in the Anglosphere did people feel the necessity to invent a brand new term to name these systems.
Personally I think it's a shame we don't have high floor LRTs, as it seems like those systems get proper stations built instead of the bare bones stops that Hurontario and Finch got.The original modern light rail systems (Calgary, Edmonton, San Diego) are based on the German model of fast high-floor tram implemented in cities like Köln, Essen, Frankfurt, etc. Those systems are known in German as Stadtbahn, which is a brand new term they invented to name those systems.
The Ontario Line vehicles will not be designed to work in contexts that include cars. That in itself will exclude it from being an "LRT" in the common American/Canadian sense or a Stadtbahn in the German sense.The Ontario Line trains are really high-floor LRTs / Stadtbahn vehicles. The Provincial Govt calls the line a Subway for it's own reasons.
Only having 1 firm bid, where they're able to demand any form of easement they wish.How does a 7km extension in the suburbs turn into $1 billion per km?
They really aren't though. Compare the likes of a Copenhagen or Vancouver to Calgary or Frankfurt. These are the upper end of light metro (of the sort derived from actual metros), not the of tram derived things... which is in no way a slight to somewhere like Frankfurt that makes the lineage works perfectly well in a full metro context, it's just not the same thing.The Ontario Line trains are really high-floor LRTs / Stadtbahn vehicles. The Provincial Govt calls the line a Subway for it's own reasons.
Because the rubber tyre metro technology doesn't do well in snow/inclement weather, as such if it needs to surface it would need to be built similarly to Sapporo where the entire line is covered to protect it from the elements.Question...............Why can't the Metro go elevated? I know it's runner tired but that shouldn't make any difference in snow with the weight and power of a Metro train. I can see slippage in ice but that could be easily resolved by just putting in heat mechanisms on the rails. If elevated, they could build it much faster and much cheaper.