Espèrons que Labeaume, Couillard et les autres politiciens de la Capitale prendront bonne note de cette citation du maire de St-Paul:

« Light rail, Coleman argues, *** brings more economic development than buses—and that includes bus rapid transit ***, often touted as cheaper to build than rail. “If this is purely a mechanism to get people from point A to point B, it is not the most cost-effective,” Coleman says. “But I think you see over and over that fixed rail, a system like LRT, that is more appealing to folks to ride, and more reliable. That spurs the economic development that I think is critical.” »

Signaler ce commentaire

Autre passage très intéressant:

« Several Stops For Us activists traveled to the “Rail-volution” conference in Boston in 2009, buttonholed Federal Transit Administrator Peter Rogoff while he was in line for coffee at the conference hotel’s Starbucks and argued their case. Concerned, Rogoff visited St. Paul, and saw how the rigid cost formula was clashing with civil rights concerns. “It was probably the starkest, in-your-face example of the deficiencies of how the administration was evaluating these projects,” recalls Rogoff, who’s now CEO of Seattle’s transit system, Sound Transit. He found that the cost-effectiveness formula’s focus on time saved per rider valued long-distance commuters more than residents of poorer neighborhoods such as St. Paul’s, because poorer residents tend to take shorter trips—for shopping rather than commuting, for instance. »

Signaler ce commentaire

Merci!

Lecture intéressante. En lisant ce passage, ça m’a fait penser à ce que l’on lit et entend à Québec:

« But opposition to such a line was strong. It included Republican Governor Arne Carlson, the editorial boards of the region’s major daily newspapers and the good-government Citizens League, which considered light rail inefficient and preferred buses and car-pooling. »

Signaler ce commentaire

Les impacts de l’implantation d’un réseau de trains légers à Minneapolis–Saint-Paul. C’est long mais ça en vaut la peine. Et ça laisse sous-entendre que l’insistance de l’administration municipale de Québec à faire passer une ligne de TEC structurante sur Charest ne serait pas nécessairement le désastre annoncé.

Signaler ce commentaire

Signaler ce commentaire

Signaler ce commentaire