News   Nov 25, 2024
Work Advances at Line 5 Condos Near Yonge and Mount Pleasant
 668     0 
News   Nov 25, 2024
Pinnacle Resubmission Bumps Heights of Lakeside Project at Sherbourne and Lake Shore
 931     0 
News   Nov 25, 2024
Toronto’s Construction Boom: Prioritizing Worker Safety in High-Risk Environments
 443     0 

Montréal Transit Developments

Here's an idea discussed on another forum:

Why not build a grade separated wye between the two branches and create a third service from Montréal-Nord to Pointe-aux-Trembles:

e3707f2965f64a60d3951a72f5b765c2af869785.jpeg


That way people from Pointe-aux-Trembles/Tétreaultville can reach both the green and blue line, both hospitals serving the east end, the larger shopping centre of the area and Marie-Victorin CEGEP
 
I can't see that working unless the demand for those heading downtown versus up the other way is relatively equal.

And even then, the extra convenience for those who'd use that trip, is probably outweighed by the ones who'd have to change trains.

Why the left-side running?
 
officedweller said:
It's posted now:

Agreement between CDPQ Infra and CN on the Souligny railroad right-of-way in the heart of Mercier-Est​

In response to consultations with citizens and stakeholders held over the past year, CDPQ Infra is today announcing an important solution optimizing the route of the REM de l’Est. CDPQ Infra has secured an option to purchase from CN a segment of the Souligny railroad right-of-way in the heart of Mercier-Est, which will avoid the need for a section of route on the Sherbrooke Street East commercial corridor. This adjustment to the route of over more than 4.5 km provides a solution to one of the main issues to come out of public consultations, and follows discussions and work conducted since last fall.

By bordering the Tétreaultville neighbourhood, the REM will be able to serve a substantial population pool lying farther away from the green line of the métro, reuse an existing railroad right-of-way, and incorporate the route into a broader transit corridor, thereby reducing impacts in this sector. The agreement between CDPQ Infra and CN signed on December 30, 2021 covers a segment situated between Honoré-Beaugrand Street and Georges-V Avenue.
REM_de_lEst_JAN2022_Souligny_CARTE_ZOOM_EN.jpg

cdpqinfra.com

Agreement between CDPQ Infra and CN on the Souligny railroad right-of-way in the heart of Mercier-Est

A major optimization for the REM de l’Est
cdpqinfra.com cdpqinfra.com
Click to expand...

Im actually for this. The transfer at the Green Line was redundant imo, both lines go in generally the same direction and I don't think it served a very big purpose.

Putting this transit further south covers a new area of the city with transit options instead.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Xav
nfitz said:
I can't see that working unless the demand for those heading downtown versus up the other way is relatively equal.
Click to expand...

In Montreal, most trips between downtown and the north or east end are already mostly done by metro (+ another mode). There's actually more trips done between the north end and the east end, than downtown, and most of those trips are done by car because they're not really practicable by transit. There's a massive potential for new users with a direct east-north service. In this case the radial, downtown bias, is counterproductive; it's not the best way to get the highest ridership or modal shift.

nfitz said:
And even then, the extra convenience for those who'd use that trip, is probably outweighed by the ones who'd have to change trains.

Why the left-side running?
Click to expand...

Why change train? just pick the right one like on any branched line...
 
nfitz said:
I can't see that working unless the demand for those heading downtown versus up the other way is relatively equal.

And even then, the extra convenience for those who'd use that trip, is probably outweighed by the ones who'd have to change trains.

Why the left-side running?
Click to expand...
Because a wikimedia image was used. See original here

It doesn't have to be equal. Say you send 1/3 trains, it could work too. In fact, this is what is already done at peak on the orange line at Henri-Bourassa for trains heading to Laval. It's for a different reason but the effect is the same.
 
mktransit said:
Why change train? just pick the right one like on any branched line...
Click to expand...
Recall how badly that worked here.

Also, if service is infrequent, then it's a long wait. If service is frequent, then you end up getting irregular spacings. There's a reason that most systems are moving away from such things, except near the outer terminii.
 
nfitz said:
Recall how badly that worked here.

Also, if service is infrequent, then it's a long wait. If service is frequent, then you end up getting irregular spacings. There's a reason that most systems are moving away from such things, except near the outer terminii.
Click to expand...

No so much of an issue with modern ATO honestly.
 
nfitz said:
Is that 2 minutes downtown, and 4 minutes on the branches?

What's off-peak?
Click to expand...
Yes, 2 minutes on the interlined section, 4 minutes on the branches. It doesn't seem like off-peak frequency has been confirmed yet.
https://cdpqinfra.com/fr/actualites/articles/5-choses-a-savoir-sur-le-rem-de-lest

I find the new route to be a bit disappointing. Perhaps Mercier-Est will be better-served, but it would be nice to have an urban rail system in the country with some redundancy, and the original alignment served as an eastern extension of the green line.
On the other hand, I understand that no rapid transit system in Canada can actually afford redundancy right now, because we're so underserved with so many rapid transit deserts in our biggest cities.
I think that REM will result in the first Canadian city where it becomes normal to complete a typical trip entirely on rapid transit, but that it will still be a far cry from London, Berlin, New York, Tokyo, etc, which have both extensive networks and redundancy.
 
felix123 said:
Yes, 2 minutes on the interlined section, 4 minutes on the branches. It doesn't seem like off-peak frequency has been confirmed yet.
https://cdpqinfra.com/fr/actualites/articles/5-choses-a-savoir-sur-le-rem-de-lest

I find the new route to be a bit disappointing. Perhaps Mercier-Est will be better-served, but it would be nice to have an urban rail system in the country with some redundancy, and the original alignment served as an eastern extension of the green line.
On the other hand, I understand that no rapid transit system in Canada can actually afford redundancy right now, because we're so underserved with so many rapid transit deserts in our biggest cities.
I think that REM will result in the first Canadian city where it becomes normal to complete a typical trip entirely on rapid transit, but that it will still be a far cry from London, Berlin, New York, Tokyo, etc, which have both extensive networks and redundancy.
Click to expand...
Line B still runs just 0.5-1km away from the green line along half its length. The city has more pressing transit needs, so even the level of redundancy here is questionable, but this transit deficit also means you take what you can when you can.
 
nfitz said:
Is that 2 minutes downtown, and 4 minutes on the branches?

What's off-peak?
Click to expand...
Couldn't get a definite answer from CDPQ. In one of their PR event/public consultation, they mentioned they were expecting off-peak frequency to be almost as high as peak frequency, but they've also unceremoniously reduced line A Anse-à-l’Orme branch original off-peak frequency a few years ago, so who knows ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 
I suppose if it's automated, that the cost of providing higher frequency is a lot lower ... oh well, time will tell.

Automated elevated lines are one thing - how has the automated Canada line functioned with suicides in that extensive tunnelled section?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top