rive-sud Pont Samuel-De Champlain

[Davidbourque]

Exact, tu peux même les faire circuler sur ton réseaux de Tramway et faire des stations communes.

 

Les trains lourd, c'est adapté au longues distances. Mais la rive sud est dans le fond à 2 pas du centre ville. Ton train léger, tu peux le faire passé sous ou sur des viaducs facilement, tu peux avoir des rayons de braquages plus courts. Tu peux le faire passé dans un tunnel ou sur des voies aériennes.

 

Tu passe dans un tunnel ou dans les airs ou que c'est très denses et tu reste au niveau du sols dans les zones moins denses pour sauver des coûts. Tu peux ainsi développer ton réseaux de transport a bien meilleurs coûts que le métro.

 

Le métro, c'est idéal dans les zones très denses à denses, ensuite vient le tramways et les train léger de dense à peu dense et dans les zones peu et très peu dense ou tu as de la place pour construire un gigantesque stationnement (De toute manière, ces places la, tout le monde a un autos, pas le choix....) le train de banlieue est idéal.

[cprail]

Là on se perd dans les termes.

Lisez l'étude (un peu dépassée maintenant) de l'AMT sur le projet de train léger: ce n'est pas un tramway, c'est plus ou moins un métro aérien. D'ailleurs, si l'AMT veut vendre le projet, elle devrait la marketer pour ce qu'elle est: une extension du métro.

[MtlMan]

David: merci de tes explications. On en apprend plus sur le sujet!

 

Finalement, ce train léger pourrait peut-être également stimuler le projet de tramway, et même y être connecté? Ça me semble encourageant.....

[Davidbourque]

Là on se perd dans les termes.

Lisez l'étude (un peu dépassée maintenant) de l'AMT sur le projet de train léger: ce n'est pas un tramway, c'est plus ou moins un métro aérien. D'ailleurs, si l'AMT veut vendre le projet, elle devrait la marketer pour ce qu'elle est: une extension du métro.

 

Oui bien en réalité, c'est entre le métro et le Tramway que le Train léger se situe réellement. Il y a même 2 sous division entre les deux, les français disent les tram-train et les train-tram, mais bon les 2 sont très proche un de l'autre. Leur principal avantage est une plus grande flexibilité qu'un métro et une plus grande capacité et vitesse qu'un tramway qui lui est plus destiné au courte distance.

 

Mais les tramway moderne se rapproche beaucoup des trains léger versus ceux de l'époque à un seul wagon circulant dans les voies routières.

 

On se perdra pas dans les terme puisque les 3 sont très très proche, mais on peux quand même dire que les train léger sont un hybride entre le métro et les tramway. Plus flexible qu'un métro, plus rapide et gros qu'un tramway.

[Habsfan]

D'ailleurs, si l'AMT veut vendre le projet, elle devrait la marketer pour ce qu'elle est: une extension du métro.

 

Très bon point que tu apportes! Ça vendrait le projet plus facilement si ils le marketait comme étant une extension du métro!

[LindbergMTL]

World’s Most Expensive Bridge

 

 

California’s James “Sunny Jim” Rolph Bridge, more commonly known as the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge, is a five-lane toll bridge spanning 8.4 miles from San Francisco to Oakland via Yerba Buena Island. The bridge opened six months before the opening of the Golden Gate Bridge in 1936. It didn’t become the most expensive bridge in the world.

Construction of the replacement span began in January 2002. The project will cost an estimated 6.3 billion dollars, making it second only to Boston’s Big Dig as the most expensive public works project in the US, and is scheduled to be completed in 2012.

A series of controversies, ranging from whether to retrofit or entirely replace the offending section of the bridge to whether funding for the project should come from the Bay Area or the entire State of California, delayed construction on the bridge. Finally, it was decided that the Eastern span of the bridge would be replaced and the project would be funded in part by a toll increase from $3.00 to $4.00. As approximately 280,000 cars cross the bridge per day, this is a rather significant source of funding for the project.

 

http://www.privilegedclub.com/tag/california%E2%80%99s-james/

[Maisonneuve]

Now that we're in an election, maybe we can get a new Champlain Bridge out of this. I for one will be writing the MP for Brossard-La Prairie, where I use to reside, where my relatives still reside and cross that Bridge everyday, to press the Federal government to invest in a new Champlain Bridge. I'm encouraged that the South Shore mayors feel it's important. I'm encouraged that most of the mayors in the Montreal area feel it's important. And I'm encouraged that the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, Chuck Strahl, understands the importance of that bridge to the economy of Montreal, Quebec and Canada.

 

However, lets zoom out for a second.

 

Champlain Bridge needs replacing, which means a new Bridge will have to reach the island by a different trajectory.

 

Turcot will be under reconstruction.

 

Mercier - should probably end up being a new bridge, but I can't see that happening (but if it does, build it down river so it can't be tampered with).

 

Pont Jacques Cartier has its own issues.

 

Bonaventure Expressway to be demolished and repositioned.

 

Looks like the next 20 years will be a traffic nightmare like we've never seen in Montreal.

 

As for the St. Lawrence crossings: I wouldn't mind seeing them build small ports on either side and cut passages through the seaway wall and have ferries take you back and forth. Works in Vancouver, with the Seabus to North Vancouver which is almost the same distance across the St. Lawrence in the vicinity of the Champlain Bridge. Works in Toronto, though the Toronto Island ferry is short and only lasts about 30 seconds. They should look into a ferry system, but of course during the winter and early Spring it would be impassable because of the ice.

 

And then there's the architectural appeal of all these structures which I hope will be up to the standards of the Pont Jacques Cartier at least.

Modifié 26 mars 2011 par Maisonneuve

[Cyrus]

The Mercier Bridge is currently undergoing renovations, it is supposed to be redecked and the structure securized and then be "good for another 75 years". Of course most of the complex was built in the late 1950's and 1960's and not the 1930's. To date, they have rebuilt the ramps on the mainland side but haven't started work on the bridge (which is the worst part, at least for your suspension).

 

That said there is no capacity improvement planned on that corridor which is just tragic. I couldn't believe how bad it was trying to get around Airlie and the way the 138 jams up sucks so much.

 

The big problem with Montreal is that the Saint Lawrence is so wide and deep, there aren't many places suitable for a crossing. The existing bridges/tunnel are basically the only feasible points of access, so you need them to be really big and high-capacity which they aren't really. The position of downtown right against the SS also makes cross-river travel very interesting and thus with a high demand. Compare to say Laval, where the river isn't so bad and you can just throw up as many bridges as you want anywhere along the coast...

 

Cyrus suggestion : learn to swim or modify your automobile into a schwimmwagen! You can make a sealed underpan / hull, and fit some kind of turbine-shape fittings that protrude from the wheels, with a four wheel drive car, you can likely make a nice seafaring vehicle at low cost and say good bye to bad traffic jams so much

Modifié 26 mars 2011 par Cyrus

[Cyrus]

I don't know if the actual report was posted here before, but here it is from the JCCBI website:

 

Impressions of Bridge:

http://www.pjcci.ca/Francais/champlain/DRAFT%20Report%20%20Impressions%20of%20the%20Champlain%20Bridge%20with%20photos%20DEC%2015%202010.pdf

 

Overall, our impression of the bridge is that it is in a condition which requires extreme

vigilance in order to maintain it safely in service over even a relatively short term. Some of

the deterioration which has been observed is very severe. Deterioration such as this tends

to progress exponentially, the rate of increase of deterioration increasing itself with time,

hence increasing concern with regard to this bridge. A number of repairs have been carried

out to the prestressed concrete girders with a view to compensating for known loss or

increasing the load-carrying capacity of the bridge both in bending and in shear. These,

however, must be considered to be measures which are not appropriate for long-term

service. Rather, they are intended to help secure the bridge in the short term until

something more substantive can be implemented. It has been recognized that there is a

risk of partial collapse of the bridge, or even the collapse of a span, given the structural

configuration of the prestressed concrete girder and diaphragm grillage which comprises the

superstructures in Section 5 and Section 7. This is combined with concerns with regard to

the condition and load-carrying capacity of the pier caps and the poor condition of some of

the pier stems as well as concerns with regard to the condition of the foundations. The

possibility that there will be a partial or complete collapse of one span given all of these

negative aspects of the bridge, cannot altogether be ruled out. It is a risk which is being

borne and managed at this time.

 

oooh

 

Theoretically, it is considered, based on investigations carried out by others, that some

of the beams should have failed, but the fact is they are not yet apparently failing. They

may, however, be quite close to failing and, indeed, might have failed if restorative

measures had not been applied previously. Earlier investigations have shown that in

order to prevent a failure in flexure, 16 of the original 24 longitudinal post-tensioning

tendons are necessary to be in service in order for the concrete girders to survive

(whereas, it is noted above that in at least one case only 15 of the 24 cables have

survived). The integrated nature of the bridge has likely prevented a complete failure,

so far. However, this is a very serious concern.

 

Future of Bridge:

http://www.pjcci.ca/Francais/champlain/DRAFT%20Report%20%20Future%20of%20the%20Champlain%20Bridge%20with%20photos%20DEC%2015%202010.pdf

 

hmm:

 

Life cycle costing studies have shown that the cost of maintaining the bridge in service

in the order of 15 years, that is, the relatively short term, and then replacing it with a

new bridge, is virtually the same as the cost of maintaining the existing bridge in service

for some 50 years. This is an unusual finding in the context of a bridge in reasonable

condition and it suggests that this bridge is in very much poorer condition than would be

typical for bridges of its age and importance. It suggests also that the costs of

maintaining this bridge in service will be very large while, at the same time, risks associated with maintaining the bridge in service cannot altogether be eliminated and

will almost certainly be greater than the risks associated with a new bridge.

 

It is understood that the bridge is functionally deficient in respect of current traffic and

transit demands as well as traffic and transit demands expected in the medium and long

term.

ding ding ding ding! Modifié 27 mars 2011 par Cyrus

[Aurélien]

On va probablement en savoir plus durant la campagne électorale. Que vous le vouliez ou non, le Pont Champlain est aussi un enjeu politique.