Quote:
Originally Posted by roger1818
Yes, it can be done, but engineering costs go way up when you do that. Normally it would be done either as a showcase bridge or when the terrain makes installing piers impractical (or both).
Then of course there is the question of where can we build a new bridge. I can't think of any places downtown for a new bridge unless the line is tunnelled and comes out of the cliff (which would also add to the cost). The would the NCC accept it?
A better option might be to use a different existing crossing (potentially widening or replacing it) that is more centrally located.
|
I don't think a new bridge is needed at all. The fundamental problem with inter-provincial transit is not a bridge capacity problem (the bus lanes on the Portage bridge are nowhere near capacity) is that the two cities do not agree on what form rapid transit should take. The push to try to convert a derelict old bridge into a bus bridge or rail bridge seems to be driven more by the fact that it is there rather than any particular need to move passengers at that location.
If the problem you want to address is getting STO buses off of downtown streets (and I am not convinced this is a big problem that needs addressing) then to me some sort of Maisonneuve/Portage/Wellington/Lyon surface LRT would be more in line with where transit users want to go.
If the problem you want to address is the unfilled demand for a link between the Rapibus and Trillium Line (and as I have already stated I am not convinced this demand exists) then building a new bridge (even at the same location) would probably cheaper and would certainly be more beneficial then trying to set up some complicated system of bus timing.
Threaded Mode