Quote:
Originally Posted by Aylmer
That actually brings me to the final reason why I think the NCC is more bullish on the tram option; the NCC likely sees it as a vehicle for radically improving the landscape. From their submission, it's clear that they're less interested in the transportation aspect and far more intrigued by the prospect of being able to completely refresh Confederation Boulevard in its look and function. Not only can they get rid of the tourist buses, SUVs, and tractor-trailers running in front of Parliament, but they'd get hundreds of millions of dollars to re-do the somewhat tired-looking boulevard for the first time in almost half a century. They'd probably love it more if the trams weren't there, but they know that they wouldn't get the opportunity nor the financial means without the transit component.
|
I actually think that your final reason is likely the biggest factor. The NCC is seeing this primarily from a tourist perspective, showcasing the capital and all of that. Surface trams are a much better way to show off the attractions on Confederation Boulevard to visitors who aren't as likely to try to navigate the full transit system. This allows them to fulfill that mandate while still providing a useful transportation link.
Threaded Mode