Montréal Transit Developments

[NoahB]

The single track segments are located at the terminus of the 2 branches, meanwhile Waterfront has 2 platforms available to eachother. Assuming an ideal 90 second headway on the core section of the line, that leaves the branches with 180 second headways. Simply put, the single track segments don't pose any threat to the line reaching maximum potential.

I've seen some documents showing the layout of Grand-Centrale REM station, and from what I can tell they're making the connection to Bonaventure station quite quick and convenient.
[/QUOTE]

I'm just quoting the TransLink CEO, Kevin Desmond from the Daily Hive article I liked above. But what does he know? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I've seen some documents showing the layout of Grand-Centrale REM station, and from what I can tell they're making the connection to Bonaventure station quite quick and convenient.

But for Édouard-Montpetit people will have to go all the way to the surface, leave the fare paid zone, then enter the other's station, enter their fare paid zone, and then go back down to platform level.

For McGill, they will have to go to one end of the REM platform, walk 50-10mm (cant remember) to the Metro Station.

These transfers have nothing on St George, Berri-UQAM, or Lionel-Groulx. (but to be fair, the latter two were built with knowledge of the other line's plans)

 

[asher__jo]

Is it not normal for the federal government to be on the hook when an airport authority fails to meet its contractual obligations?

I would say no as while the government owns the land the airport itself is owned and managed by a nonprofit.

 

[robmausser]

While the REM (especially the West aka current version) is a pretty awesome plan imo, im surprised that Montreal isn't looking into Electrifying some of their Exo lines like GO-RER, with EMU trains and better than 15 minute all day service.

I could see benefits for inner portions of the St.Jerome (green) line to Saint Teresa, the new Mascouche line to Anjou, the red line to Sainte Anne de Bellevue, and the entire Candiac line as well as the purple line to Saint-Bruno on the south shore.

I know the red line is on CP tracks so that might be the difficulty. Anyone know the ownership of the other lines? I thought St.Jerome was owned by Exo.

 

[sche]

While the REM (especially the West aka current version) is a pretty awesome plan imo, im surprised that Montreal isn't looking into Electrifying some of their Exo lines like GO-RER, with EMU trains and better than 15 minute all day service.
View attachment 289427

I could see benefits for inner portions of the St.Jerome (green) line to Saint Teresa, the new Mascouche line to Anjou, the red line to Sainte Anne de Bellevue, and the entire Candiac line as well as the purple line to Saint-Bruno on the south shore.

I know the red line is on CP tracks so that might be the difficulty. Anyone know the ownership of the other lines? I thought St.Jerome was owned by Exo.

Exo basically owns no important track, only the Deux-Montagnes line which is now being turned into REM and short peripheral bits of the Mascouche, Saint Jerome, and Vaudreuil-Hudson lines. They don't own any of the approaches to the downtown stations either (excepting Deux-Montagnes).

Source: RAC Canadian Rail Atlas https://rac.jmaponline.net/canadianrailatlas/

 

[SFO-YYZ]

No idea how they're planning to get by with 40m trains, unless the frequency approaches that of the Canada Line. I very much doubt the REM de l'Est will have that kind of frequency, though it's theoretically possible.

Would like to expand the discussion a bit more on the 40 m platforms. It immediately came up as an alarm bell for me when I read the specs, because.... Canada Line. And I feel that more scrutiny is needed on this, and the CDPQi needs to explain exactly how they came up with this design and how they intend to account for future expansion needs, especially provisions made for the underground stations to avoid another Canada Line fiasco. At the same time, I also don't think this is an apples to apples comparison to Canada Line because REM L'Est likely won't have to deal with the same level of demand/capacity crunch as Canada Line, due to the fact that it has a direct transfer to future Blue Line extenxion and 2 interchange stations with the Green Line, as well as large sections that run parallel to the existing Green and Orange line metros, therefore creating some redundancy. Whereas Canada Line is pretty much the one and only North-South rapid transit line in the city of Vancouver and between Van and Richmond.

On the topic of the section being elevated in parts of downtown - I feel that there is a growing unhealthy obsession over aesthetics and push by some local BIA organizations to bury the line over Rene Levesque. One activist from Ville-Marie is even advocating turning REM into a tramway on Rene Levesque because it is more "pleasing to the eye" than elevated skytrain by comparing the REM elevated structure to photoshopped tramway pics from Europe.... which really boggles the mind:

AMAVM - Association pour la mobilité active de Ville-Marie | Je suis personnellement très déçu des annonces d'hier et d'aujourd'hui concernant le REM | Facebook

Je suis personnellement très déçu des annonces d'hier et d'aujourd'hui concernant le REM. Non pas sur la théorie qui veut qu'on développe le transport en commun vers l'est, ça c'est excellent! Ma...

www.facebook.com

 

[sacred]

Other than REM extensions to Laval and NDG/Lachine, I'd much rather see investment in passenger-dedicated heavy rail, which could be shared by VIA and exo, on corridors leading to Ottawa/Toronto and Quebec City

 

[SFO-YYZ]

Has that been settled yet? Last I heard Legault said it was a "federal responsibility" so the province didn't need to fund it and they pulled out of the cost sharing after the feds offered to cover the ADM portion.

Ontario can barely get federal funding for their projects, maybe Ford can get the feds to pay 100% of the Eglinton West extension and Finch West extensions since transit to the airport is now apparently a federal responsibility.

Tunneling has already started towards the airport terminal station - https://montrealgazette.com/news/lo...boring-machine-will-soon-be-heading-to-dorval

 

[Xav]

On the topic of the section being elevated in parts of downtown - I feel that there is a growing unhealthy obsession over aesthetics and push by some local BIA organizations to bury the line over Rene Levesque. One activist from Ville-Marie is even advocating turning REM into a tramway on Rene Levesque because it is more "pleasing to the eye" than elevated skytrain by comparing the REM elevated structure to photoshopped tramway pics from Europe.... which really boggles the mind:

AMAVM - Association pour la mobilité active de Ville-Marie | Je suis personnellement très déçu des annonces d'hier et d'aujourd'hui concernant le REM | Facebook

Je suis personnellement très déçu des annonces d'hier et d'aujourd'hui concernant le REM. Non pas sur la théorie qui veut qu'on développe le transport en commun vers l'est, ça c'est excellent! Ma...

www.facebook.com

I think that's more of an on the spot reaction to the news. This group has been very involved in the Faubourgs special planning consultation, especially regarding the René-Lévesque boulevard's lack of greenery and how to fix the mistakes of the past on the Radio-Canada site. Adding an elevated mass transit line contributes to the feeling that René-Lévesque is a boundary.

I think the concerns are valid, and CDPQi/the City/the provincial government have to be extra careful when it comes to the integration of such an infrastructure in the Centre-Sud neighbourhood, I I also think that it's a great opportunity to bring foot traffic to René-Lévesque. With proper urban planning, the line might just be a catalyst for development in that part of the city. It is, after all, the last area close to downtown that is still less developed and lower income.

 

[SFO-YYZ]

I think that's more of an on the spot reaction to the news. This group has been very involved in the Faubourgs special planning consultation, especially regarding the René-Lévesque boulevard's lack of greenery and how to fix the mistakes of the past on the Radio-Canada site. Adding an elevated mass transit line contributes to the feeling that René-Lévesque is a boundary.

I think the concerns are valid, and CDPQi/the City/the provincial government have to be extra careful when it comes to the integration of such an infrastructure in the Centre-Sud neighbourhood, I I also think that it's a great opportunity to bring foot traffic to René-Lévesque. With proper urban planning, the line might just be a catalyst for development in that part of the city. It is, after all, the last area close to downtown that is still less developed and lower income.

I think it's a fair concern for that neighbourhood, and given the neglected state that Rene-Levesque is at the moment. And I agree that it feels more like a knee-jerk reaction - proposing that the REM simply be turned into a downtown tramway pretty much destroys the whole premise of the project - of the REM being a "rapid" transit system (Reseau "Express" Metropolitan).

I also think that there is some outdated notion among many in that group that think that an elevated rail means a massive concrete structure similar to Autoroute 40 or Turcot exchange that dominates the landscape, where as in reality it can be designed with minimal footprint and blended into the urban surrounding seamlessly similar to what we see in Vancouver and Richmond, which in turn can stimulate the local surroundings with new TOD around the station areas:

Richmond Bridgehouse Station on Canada Line

Marine Drive Station on CanadaLine, which is built in the same complex with a Cineplex cinema and WeWork offices:

 

[asher__jo]

I think it's a fair concern for that neighbourhood, and given the neglected state that Rene-Levesque is at the moment. And I agree that it feels more like a knee-jerk reaction - proposing that the REM simply be turned into a downtown tramway pretty much destroys the whole premise of the project - of the REM being a "rapid" transit system (Reseau "Express" Metropolitan).

I also think that there is some outdated notion among many in that group that think that an elevated rail means a massive concrete structure similar to Autoroute 40 or Turcot exchange that dominates the landscape, where as in reality it can be designed with minimal footprint and blended into the urban surrounding seamlessly similar to what we see in Vancouver and Richmond, which in turn can stimulate the local surroundings with new TOD around the station areas:

Richmond Bridgehouse Station on Canada Line

Marine Drive Station on CanadaLine, which is built in the same complex with a Cineplex cinema and WeWork offices:

Technology has definitely progressed, but there's no getting around how visually bulky stations would be in the middle of the street. A good example would be Brentwood station on the Millennium line.

 

[ssiguy2]

The key issue is not the length of the stations at the beginning but rather if they can be expanded. The problem with the Canada Line is that they can only be expanded another 10 meters to accommodate 50 meter trains. This is quite unlike the Expo, Mill, Evergreen Lines which are built to 70 meters but all stations can be extended to 100 meters. Will these stations be built with station expansions in mind? If so, then the 40 meters is not such a concern but if not you end up with a Canada Line made worse by the fact that the entry into both Richmond & YVR are single tracked.

 

[SFO-YYZ]

Technology has definitely progressed, but there's no getting around how visually bulky stations would be in the middle of the street. A good example would be Brentwood station on the Millennium line.

I think these are conscious design decisions, which should be adjusted according to each station's local surroundings. Brentwood is on the extreme end of building a futuristic (yet bulky) station footprint, while other stations like Richmond Bridgehouse, Marine Drive, or Aberdeen can be more discreet and are tightly integrated with their surrounding buildings. I also like how building the Canada Line on No. 3 road in Richmond Centre actually enabled wider sidewalks, parklets, and new bike lanes under the elevated structures. In this case, I would argue that it added to the overall attractiveness of Richmond City Centre.

 

[SFO-YYZ]

The key issue is not the length of the stations at the beginning but rather if they can be expanded. The problem with the Canada Line is that they can only be expanded another 10 meters to accommodate 50 meter trains. This is quite unlike the Expo, Mill, Evergreen Lines which are built to 70 meters but all stations can be extended to 100 meters. Will these stations be built with station expansions in mind? If so, then the 40 meters is not such a concern but if not you end up with a Canada Line made worse by the fact that the entry into both Richmond & YVR are single tracked.

Yes agree. In its current form, Canada Line can add at most a 3rd car into its existing 2-car configuration. I think it may be able handle capacity for another 2-3 decades (?), after which we don't know what will happen. It's also unfortunate that large parts of Canada Line in Vancouver are unnecessarily tunneled under Cambie (a wide boulevard with a huge median with ample room), when in its original design that segment up until downtown were all meant to be elevated. I remember back in the early 2000s when there was very loud opposition along that corridor, as an elevated Skytrain would "ruin" the attractiveness (aka. housing values) of a very wealthy Vancouver neighbourhood with primarily single family homes. Now, those underground stations cannot be expanded. I hope Montreal doesn't make the same mistakes along Rene-Levesque should local groups push the line to be buried.

 

[robmausser]

Yes agree. In its current form, Canada Line can add at most a 3rd car into its existing 2-car configuration. I think it may be able handle capacity for another 2-3 decades (?), after which we don't know what will happen. It's also unfortunate that large parts of Canada Line in Vancouver are unnecessarily tunneled under Cambie (a wide boulevard with a huge median with ample room), when in its original design that segment up until downtown were all meant to be elevated. I remember back in the early 2000s when there was very loud opposition along that corridor, as an elevated Skytrain would "ruin" the attractiveness (aka. housing values) of a very wealthy Vancouver neighbourhood with primarily single family homes. Now, those underground stations cannot be expanded. I hope Montreal doesn't make the same mistakes along Rene-Levesque should local groups push the line to be buried.

I think they still arent running at max headway frequency yet either. So ontop of the additional car they can send a few more trains per hour etc.

Also, they could swap the trains to perimeter aka cattle car seating and allow for more standing room.

 

[SFO-YYZ]

REM has rolled out the first Alstom Metropolis onto Brossard Station (with platform screen doors now completed) - vehicle testing will commence in January in the South Shore tracks:

Réseau express métropolitain - REM

Réseau express métropolitain - REM. 43,301 likes · 48 talking about this. 67 km de métro léger automatique 5 stations en service 26 stations à terme Grand Montréal📍

www.facebook.com