mk.ndrsn

Don’t forget making studies, it’s a whole industry.

The ARTM says they don’t do politics, but the way they spin this as a better option than a larger scale metro for the same cost but without sharing risk and cost with an institutional partner is a master class in strategy, negotiation and PR.

Slower, with essentially the same stations but no downtown link, the ARTM PSE tramway can somehow have double the modal transfer of the previous project 🤨

The cult of tramways won. Speed estimates appear grossly inflated considering road speed limits on the alignment, station spacing and proposed curves. They’ve also conveniently omitted the Montreal-East station around the area the agglomeration and the province want to develop (and is the true reason for this project).

VIA VITE: What VIA Should Have Done Paige Saunders In 2015 VIA Rail proposed high frequency rail, the lethargic line that Canadians had to say “Well okay, jeese, I guess, that's what we get”. We already know it's unambitious but the selling point was how “sensible” this choice was about service improvement now, rather than grand designs of high speed rail. But if cleaning up and getting on the right track is the goal, is this a good way to do it? High frequency rail was initially about getting dedicated tracks for VIA. Even if they’re slow, slower than Uzbekistan at this point[1], at least when we give passenger rail a separate space for services instead of walking on eggshells in the house of freight. Service will be more reliable, more better and better more. And with tracks finally under VIA ownership, we can start chipping away and upgrading the speed to over 200 kilometers per hour. But wait a minute, VIA Rail already does own tracks! They have owned these between Ottawa and Montreal since 1999[2]. So given that they’re at the door asking us for money again, it’s fair to ask, what have the d-d-d-d-done, done with the tracks they already own? According to my research they have done sweet **ck all[3], a real odd choice given the arrival of new trains from Siemens capable of blowing past with loads at 200 AND ONE kilometers per hour, but which have their speed capped below 160 kilometers per hour (and usually much slower) on all Via’s current infrastructure[4]. So what have they NOT done to speed things up? The first thing you need to do is remove crossings. For the speeds we are talking about this is mostly about avoiding “trains versus car” situations. Trains usually win the battle but lose the war on that one, slaying citizens isn't a good look for a public sector operator. Currently there are 202[5] crossings on the route between Montreal and Ottawa, with an average cost of 80 million to remove each[6]. Ouch! The second thing is, I guess also physics: Straightening the line: The straighter the line, the higher the speed. You can't be rapidly turning left and right. At the very least passengers are going to be throwing up, but at some point the train… throws up itself. Line straightening is quite challenging, all about land acquisition and future planning, but you need a curve with at least a 2 kilometer radius. Looking at this bendy piece of S**t[7], you can see there is some work to do. So back in 2015 when VIA Rail was putting together its high frequency rail proposal, and knowing these deficiencies with its existing infrastructure. I started to wonder. What if instead of trying to expand their S**t network buying more bendy lines speckled with crossings, they went to rehab and put in the sober work of making what they already have good first? And while talking about this with Reece we had a holy S**t moment “this is what they should have been doing” So, here’s the pitch. We’re going to call it: Via fast, oh wait they used that one?[8] Via Vite So the first and biggest problem to address with the current High Frequency Rail project was all political. When the project was initially pitched, and VIA Rail were looking for private sector funding it was to be... “Strictly Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal” [9] This is the golden triangle for any intercity rail project in Canada, and honestly, I liked it as a quick way to get going for a modest 3 billion dollars[10]. But when VIA realized that they weren't going to be able to get the “fiscally prudent” version funded by the private sector[11], they adapted the pitch to sell it to the government by adding Quebec City. There was no way that the federal government was going to fund a project where almost all of the rail lines were in the province of Ontario, with nothing in Quebec. So they extended the proposal to Quebec City, to balance the trackage, but it fundamentally changed the project from this one that attempted “Economic rationality, maximum ridership per dollar spent” into something just totally detached from it. But was there another way to balance the equalization equation? What if instead of going big but bad, VIA went better? By investing in that connection between Ottawa and Montreal. These two cities about 200 kilometers apart are highly interconnected, Montreal is the regional “big smoke” for Ottawa residents. Across the river from Ottawa is Gatineau, Quebec’s interface with the rest of Canada. For the largely francophone residents a trip to mothership Montreal is a frequent one. Residents of Gatineau take VIA from Ottawa… Well actually… they drive because the infrequent and slow train is unsurprisingly unpopular, but they want to! Any service connecting Ottawa and Montreal checks the federal funding criteria box for appeasing voters in both provinces. But it is SO much cheaper to achieve federal funding fairness by connecting Montreal to Ottawa-Gatineau than it is to connect Quebec City to Toronto. But now, what to do with the saved money from not buying 100s of kilometers of freight tracks? It’s time to plant some high speed seeds. Seeing as VIA are already buying train sets that go 201 km per hour from Siemens[12], the plan would be to upgrade the entire line from Ottawa to Montreal so that it can hit those speeds. Is it doable for a similar amount to that first proposal?[13][14] The first problem to tackle is the actual route, VIA doesn’t own all the rail from Ottawa to Montreal, so you have to choose which freight operator you will work with to take ya home. Communauté urbaine de Montréal Nuts of Cheese Pizza? Cheese Nachos or Cheese Pizza? Canadian National or Canadian Pacific? Metrolinx has shown that you can negotiate priority usage and additional rails added to the easement[15] which is what we’re going for with Canadian Pacific. I went with Canadian Pacific for several reasons. Switching at De Beaujeu cuts 5km[16] off the trip, but it also massively cuts level crossings, immediately reducing the number between De Beaujeu and the Islands of Montreal from 44 to 8.[17] Despite this we still have 167[18] level crossings between Ottawa and Montreal and this incredibly bendy crossing riddled line from the junction up to Casselman. Which is where the second part of the plan happens: The Casselman cutoff. Look at the number of crossings between Casselman and the junctions, look at the bendiness. Now look at the number of crossings on the Canadian Pacific line running parallel, look at how straight it is. investing in just 12km of new greenfield line here to connect to CP earlier is a gamechanger[19]. At a price of 55 million per kilometer that works out to 660 million[20]. The number of crossings for the equivalent trip goes from 104[21] to 21[22] crossings, with 4 of those being new. After doing this a very minimal amount of straightening needs to happen. This is now a 176km line that is straight enough to run over 200 kph once crossings are removed and the route is maintained. 12km of new VIA rail, 59km of existing VIA line and 105km of Canadian Pacific Freight rail. And these maneuvers have brought the crossing count way down to 84[23] on the whole route, but there’s more to trim. 47[24] of these crossings don’t need to be removed with a bridge or tunnel, they can just be terminated. 17 of these are private crossings on farmland[25]. Deals and land swaps need to be brokered with farmers[26], in some places, just buying land either side of the railway at an above market rate for straightening projects or sidings, it’s much cheaper and actually useful to the public to buy off a farmer for a few million than it is to spend tens of millions on a crossing removal project. For the remaining crossings I applied a simple set of rules, aggregating crossings so people have an option to cross within 5km and never leaving a community divided without a crossing to the other side. It’s also important to remember you can always add crossings back in later when traffic flows settle and choose cheaper crossings like pedestrian walkways. After all this we are left with 37[27] crossings to remove, with 20 of them on the infrastructure VIA owns[28]. Removing the ones VIA owns adds up to 1.6 billion[29]. That means you can now run the first 71 kilometers at close to full speed. VIA’s new Siemens trains are capable of going 201 km an hour so they'll be making good use of this infrastructure. Ordering 5 more to service this route is reasonable at a price of 175 million in total[30]. But for this specific route, I’d suggest a commuter configuration with more passengers per car, something you can get away with because you’re on it for shorter times. And the way this train operates matches the seats. It's made for the masses, to transport a lot of voters, not the luxury travel option we currently have that gets undercut by buses. It leaves every hour, you don't book ahead of time, you can just show up and go to Montreal or Ottawa. With staffing costs of just one driver and one customer service person who keeps an eye on the train. People walk through a turnstile and scan a card, like transit. Did you miss the train, or this train has no seats and you don’t want to stand? Don't worry there's another one coming soon. Why This Works So why would this work? Initially, because it's way faster than driving. This modest upgrade lets you travel at 200 kph for the first 71 kilometers, then 100 kph for the last 105 kilometers[31]. Factoring in acceleration and deceleration you can get from Ottawa to Montreal in 1 hour and 36 minutes[32] which demolishes the 2 and a half hours it takes to bus or drive[33]. And who wants to have their car in Montreal? Seriously “come to Montreal for a weekend, get a ticket”. Especially when both cities have large and growing Transit Networks all well connected to their stations. The bridge going into Montreal from Ottawa is also being rebuilt at the moment[34], for the next 10 years traffic is going to be horrible pushing those times up closer to 3 hours, so the train will blast past. Then there's the airport, giving passengers the option to fly out of Montreal instead of Ottawa for their international flights, because yes, that train goes right past Dorval so “Airport specials” can be hooked up. You may also have noticed this plan is cheap, 2.435 billion[35] which is significantly less than the initial HFR proposal. But it gets VIA on the correct alignment, so money can be actually invested, bringing up speeds by doing things like removing those remaining 17 crossings[36]. So assuming the 2015 proposal would be around 4 billion today[37], what would the remaining 1.5 billion get you? We could remove all remaining crossings into Montreal[38]or we could also electrify the whole line[39], but I think we run into this problem of paying to improve freight infrastructure. Rather, by making a deal with Canadian Pacific we can start building a dedicated passenger rail line on their corridor. Going down the line, removing crossings and replacing bridges for CP which is what is in it for them, and building VIA infrastructure another 25 km towards Montreal for us[40]. That would bring the travel time down further, to 1 hour and 28 minutes[41]. GO trains in Toronto have many people commuting for much longer than that. This investment effectively unifies Ottawa and Montreal into labor market of over 6 million people[42], giving Canada a second Toronto sized economic region. That’s the political benefit for a maligned entity like VIA, putting themselves as the critical piece of the puzzle in creating that economic value. Becoming an indispensable service. Right now VIA is not GO. People in Toronto like the GO train and it’s been well funded and grown as a result. You end up with voters on your side when you create a thing they actually use. Quickly creating an unbeatable service for around 20% of Canada's population[43] for a minimal investment, will literally and politically get a large number of people on board. This all creates a foundation to expand on for VIA. Once this works, they can go to the government and say we made a popular thing, people want us to improve it in the same way that GO in Toronto has succeeded in securing absolutely massive amounts of funding and expansion, by having large number of voters using the product. It’s much easier to push for higher speeds when voters are onboard and thinking “that’d save me an hour every day”. The first obvious place that would have support is dedicated track and crossing removals all the way to Montreal, trips could be down to an hour if the remaining 80km were upgraded. Want to get up to 300kph? This 18km bypass of Casselman[44], a few minor straightening projects and electrification[45] would have people traveling between the two cities even faster for around just 2 billion more, not a lot to ask when people are already benefiting from the service. But at the same time, why not expand on the success. The first obvious choice would be improving the lines to the west of Ottawa that VIA also already owns. Building and upgrading rails between there and Toronto, gradually bringing down the travel time more and more. If trains could travel reliably between Toronto and Montreal though Ottawa at that higher speed, the travel time would be reduced to just over 3 hours[46]. It goes without saying, with the route now known, the government should be strategically buying land for things like an Ottawa bypass, and of course, further straightening projects. So why didn't they do this? Why has it never been suggested? I think it’s because there is something broken with VIA. Their relationship with the Canadian taxpayer always seems to see doing better as expanding what they’re already doing rather than reforming. Finding the next fix instead of fixing themselves[47]. Their financials put “Compensation and employee benefits” under one $339.5 million dollar line item[48] you have to use access to information requests to get any reasonable breakdown on what they do with over a quarter of a billion dollars each year. They sent back these 3D pie charts that indeed show high on-train staffing costs. It’s not a surprise they’re high, VIA has a lot of very labor intensive customer service practices. VIA still makes you line up to check your ticket before boarding, staff stand to point you to your train car like you can’t read, then when you get on the train, you have to show them your ticket again and then do a safety briefing if you’re sitting beside the smashing hammer. It gives the staff something too, because they staff every single carriage, but when you realize that staffing is by far their largest expense, you can see they’re not even trying to spend money efficiently and keeping things this manual is making it worse for citizens. I also asked VIA for any reports or analysis they have done on how on-train operations could be more efficient and... That analysis does not exist. They spend $77.7 million dollars a year for on-train and station staff who perform some pretty weird tasks by international standards, and they haven’t even... looked into it. Even to ask the government to fund faregates, ticketing systems upgrades or electronic signage to reduce long term costs. Because they can’t see their own shortcomings, they can’t see the opportunities that exist to improve beyond more more-of-the-same. Why propose a radically different sort of service that gets voters' support with commuter rail and then leverages it to achieve high speed when what you are doing is awesome and just needs to be done more. Well, **ck you VIA Rail. Next time you ask for money, you better also be ready for rehab.

VIA VITE What VIA Should Have Done Paige Saunders In 2015 VIA Rail proposed high frequency rail, the lethargic line that Canadians had to say “Well okay, jeese, I guess, that's what we get”. We already know it's unambitious but the selling point was how “sensible” this choice was about service improvement now, rather than grand designs of high speed rail. But if cleaning up and getting on the right track is the goal, is this a good way to do it? High frequency rail was initially about getting dedicated tracks for VIA. Even if they’re slow, slower than Uzbekistan at this point[1], at least when we give passenger rail a separate space for services instead of walking on eggshells in the house of freight. Service will be more reliable, more better and better more. And with tracks finally under VIA ownership, we can start chipping away and upgrading the speed to over 200 kilometers per hour. But wait a minute, VIA Rail already does own tracks! They have owned these between Ottawa and Montreal since 1999[2]. So given that they’re at the door asking us for money again, it’s fair to ask, what have the d-d-d-d-done, done with the tracks they already own? According to my research they have done sweet **ck all[3], a real odd choice given the arrival of new trains from Siemens capable of blowing past with loads at 200 AND ONE kilometers per hour, but which have their speed capped below 160 kilometers per hour (and usually much slower) on all Via’s current infrastructure[4]. So what have they NOT done to speed things up? The first thing you need to do is remove crossings. For the speeds we are talking about this is mostly about avoiding “trains versus car” situations. Trains usually win the battle but lose the war on that one, slaying citizens isn't a good look for a public sector operator. Currently there are 202[5] crossings on the route between Montreal and Ottawa, with an average cost of 80 million to remove each[6]. Ouch! The second thing is, I guess also physics: Straightening the line: The straighter the line, the higher the speed. You can't be rapidly turning left and right. At the very least passengers are going to be throwing up, but at some point the train… throws up itself. Line straightening is quite challenging, all about land acquisition and future planning, but you need a curve with at least a 2 kilometer radius. Looking at this bendy piece of S**t[7], you can see there is some work to do. So back in 2015 when VIA Rail was putting together its high frequency rail proposal, and knowing these deficiencies with its existing infrastructure. I started to wonder. What if instead of trying to expand their S**t network buying more bendy lines speckled with crossings, they went to rehab and put in the sober work of making what they already have good first? And while talking about this with Reece we had a holy S**t moment “this is what they should have been doing” So, here’s the pitch. We’re going to call it: Via fast, oh wait they used that one?[8] Via Vite So the first and biggest problem to address with the current High Frequency Rail project was all political. When the project was initially pitched, and VIA Rail were looking for private sector funding it was to be... “Strictly Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal” [9] This is the golden triangle for any intercity rail project in Canada, and honestly, I liked it as a quick way to get going for a modest 3 billion dollars[10]. But when VIA realized that they weren't going to be able to get the “fiscally prudent” version funded by the private sector[11], they adapted the pitch to sell it to the government by adding Quebec City. There was no way that the federal government was going to fund a project where almost all of the rail lines were in the province of Ontario, with nothing in Quebec. So they extended the proposal to Quebec City, to balance the trackage, but it fundamentally changed the project from this one that attempted “Economic rationality, maximum ridership per dollar spent” into something just totally detached from it. But was there another way to balance the equalization equation? What if instead of going big but bad, VIA went better? By investing in that connection between Ottawa and Montreal. These two cities about 200 kilometers apart are highly interconnected, Montreal is the regional “big smoke” for Ottawa residents. Across the river from Ottawa is Gatineau, Quebec’s interface with the rest of Canada. For the largely francophone residents a trip to mothership Montreal is a frequent one. Residents of Gatineau take VIA from Ottawa… Well actually… they drive because the infrequent and slow train is unsurprisingly unpopular, but they want to! Any service connecting Ottawa and Montreal checks the federal funding criteria box for appeasing voters in both provinces. But it is SO much cheaper to achieve federal funding fairness by connecting Montreal to Ottawa-Gatineau than it is to connect Quebec City to Toronto. But now, what to do with the saved money from not buying 100s of kilometers of freight tracks? It’s time to plant some high speed seeds. Seeing as VIA are already buying train sets that go 201 km per hour from Siemens[12], the plan would be to upgrade the entire line from Ottawa to Montreal so that it can hit those speeds. Is it doable for a similar amount to that first proposal?[13][14] The first problem to tackle is the actual route, VIA doesn’t own all the rail from Ottawa to Montreal, so you have to choose which freight operator you will work with to take ya home. Communauté urbaine de Montréal Nuts of Cheese Pizza? Cheese Nachos or Cheese Pizza? Canadian National or Canadian Pacific? Metrolinx has shown that you can negotiate priority usage and additional rails added to the easement[15] which is what we’re going for with Canadian Pacific. I went with Canadian Pacific for several reasons. Switching at De Beaujeu cuts 5km[16] off the trip, but it also massively cuts level crossings, immediately reducing the number between De Beaujeu and the Islands of Montreal from 44 to 8.[17] Despite this we still have 167[18] level crossings between Ottawa and Montreal and this incredibly bendy crossing riddled line from the junction up to Casselman. Which is where the second part of the plan happens: The Casselman cutoff. Look at the number of crossings between Casselman and the junctions, look at the bendiness. Now look at the number of crossings on the Canadian Pacific line running parallel, look at how straight it is. investing in just 12km of new greenfield line here to connect to CP earlier is a gamechanger[19]. At a price of 55 million per kilometer that works out to 660 million[20]. The number of crossings for the equivalent trip goes from 104[21] to 21[22] crossings, with 4 of those being new. After doing this a very minimal amount of straightening needs to happen. This is now a 176km line that is straight enough to run over 200 kph once crossings are removed and the route is maintained. 12km of new VIA rail, 59km of existing VIA line and 105km of Canadian Pacific Freight rail. And these maneuvers have brought the crossing count way down to 84[23] on the whole route, but there’s more to trim. 47[24] of these crossings don’t need to be removed with a bridge or tunnel, they can just be terminated. 17 of these are private crossings on farmland[25]. Deals and land swaps need to be brokered with farmers[26], in some places, just buying land either side of the railway at an above market rate for straightening projects or sidings, it’s much cheaper and actually useful to the public to buy off a farmer for a few million than it is to spend tens of millions on a crossing removal project. For the remaining crossings I applied a simple set of rules, aggregating crossings so people have an option to cross within 5km and never leaving a community divided without a crossing to the other side. It’s also important to remember you can always add crossings back in later when traffic flows settle and choose cheaper crossings like pedestrian walkways. After all this we are left with 37[27] crossings to remove, with 20 of them on the infrastructure VIA owns[28]. Removing the ones VIA owns adds up to 1.6 billion[29]. That means you can now run the first 71 kilometers at close to full speed. VIA’s new Siemens trains are capable of going 201 km an hour so they'll be making good use of this infrastructure. Ordering 5 more to service this route is reasonable at a price of 175 million in total[30]. But for this specific route, I’d suggest a commuter configuration with more passengers per car, something you can get away with because you’re on it for shorter times. And the way this train operates matches the seats. It's made for the masses, to transport a lot of voters, not the luxury travel option we currently have that gets undercut by buses. It leaves every hour, you don't book ahead of time, you can just show up and go to Montreal or Ottawa. With staffing costs of just one driver and one customer service person who keeps an eye on the train. People walk through a turnstile and scan a card, like transit. Did you miss the train, or this train has no seats and you don’t want to stand? Don't worry there's another one coming soon. Why This Works So why would this work? Initially, because it's way faster than driving. This modest upgrade lets you travel at 200 kph for the first 71 kilometers, then 100 kph for the last 105 kilometers[31]. Factoring in acceleration and deceleration you can get from Ottawa to Montreal in 1 hour and 36 minutes[32] which demolishes the 2 and a half hours it takes to bus or drive[33]. And who wants to have their car in Montreal? Seriously “come to Montreal for a weekend, get a ticket”. Especially when both cities have large and growing Transit Networks all well connected to their stations. The bridge going into Montreal from Ottawa is also being rebuilt at the moment[34], for the next 10 years traffic is going to be horrible pushing those times up closer to 3 hours, so the train will blast past. Then there's the airport, giving passengers the option to fly out of Montreal instead of Ottawa for their international flights, because yes, that train goes right past Dorval so “Airport specials” can be hooked up. You may also have noticed this plan is cheap, 2.435 billion[35] which is significantly less than the initial HFR proposal. But it gets VIA on the correct alignment, so money can be actually invested, bringing up speeds by doing things like removing those remaining 17 crossings[36]. So assuming the 2015 proposal would be around 4 billion today[37], what would the remaining 1.5 billion get you? We could remove all remaining crossings into Montreal[38]or we could also electrify the whole line[39], but I think we run into this problem of paying to improve freight infrastructure. Rather, by making a deal with Canadian Pacific we can start building a dedicated passenger rail line on their corridor. Going down the line, removing crossings and replacing bridges for CP which is what is in it for them, and building VIA infrastructure another 25 km towards Montreal for us[40]. That would bring the travel time down further, to 1 hour and 28 minutes[41]. GO trains in Toronto have many people commuting for much longer than that. This investment effectively unifies Ottawa and Montreal into labor market of over 6 million people[42], giving Canada a second Toronto sized economic region. That’s the political benefit for a maligned entity like VIA, putting themselves as the critical piece of the puzzle in creating that economic value. Becoming an indispensable service. Right now VIA is not GO. People in Toronto like the GO train and it’s been well funded and grown as a result. You end up with voters on your side when you create a thing they actually use. Quickly creating an unbeatable service for around 20% of Canada's population[43] for a minimal investment, will literally and politically get a large number of people on board. This all creates a foundation to expand on for VIA. Once this works, they can go to the government and say we made a popular thing, people want us to improve it in the same way that GO in Toronto has succeeded in securing absolutely massive amounts of funding and expansion, by having large number of voters using the product. It’s much easier to push for higher speeds when voters are onboard and thinking “that’d save me an hour every day”. The first obvious place that would have support is dedicated track and crossing removals all the way to Montreal, trips could be down to an hour if the remaining 80km were upgraded. Want to get up to 300kph? This 18km bypass of Casselman[44], a few minor straightening projects and electrification[45] would have people traveling between the two cities even faster for around just 2 billion more, not a lot to ask when people are already benefiting from the service. But at the same time, why not expand on the success. The first obvious choice would be improving the lines to the west of Ottawa that VIA also already owns. Building and upgrading rails between there and Toronto, gradually bringing down the travel time more and more. If trains could travel reliably between Toronto and Montreal though Ottawa at that higher speed, the travel time would be reduced to just over 3 hours[46]. It goes without saying, with the route now known, the government should be strategically buying land for things like an Ottawa bypass, and of course, further straightening projects. So why didn't they do this? Why has it never been suggested? I think it’s because there is something broken with VIA. Their relationship with the Canadian taxpayer always seems to see doing better as expanding what they’re already doing rather than reforming. Finding the next fix instead of fixing themselves[47]. Their financials put “Compensation and employee benefits” under one $339.5 million dollar line item[48] you have to use access to information requests to get any reasonable breakdown on what they do with over a quarter of a billion dollars each year. They sent back these 3D pie charts that indeed show high on-train staffing costs. It’s not a surprise they’re high, VIA has a lot of very labor intensive customer service practices. VIA still makes you line up to check your ticket before boarding, staff stand to point you to your train car like you can’t read, then when you get on the train, you have to show them your ticket again and then do a safety briefing if you’re sitting beside the smashing hammer. It gives the staff something too, because they staff every single carriage, but when you realize that staffing is by far their largest expense, you can see they’re not even trying to spend money efficiently and keeping things this manual is making it worse for citizens. I also asked VIA for any reports or analysis they have done on how on-train operations could be more efficient and... That analysis does not exist. They spend $77.7 million dollars a year for on-train and station staff who perform some pretty weird tasks by international standards, and they haven’t even... looked into it. Even to ask the government to fund faregates, ticketing systems upgrades or electronic signage to reduce long term costs. Because they can’t see their own shortcomings, they can’t see the opportunities that exist to improve beyond more more-of-the-same. Why propose a radically different sort of service that gets voters' support with commuter rail and then leverages it to achieve high speed when what you are doing is awesome and just needs to be done more. Well, **ck you VIA Rail. Next time you ask for money, you better also be ready for rehab.

Délire du côté d’Action Gardien

Ce qui est lourd avec Beaudet, ce n’est pas ses propos, mais comment aucun média ne semble les remettre en question. Il y a eu quelques moments à Radio Canada ou des animateurs l’on challenger un peu, mais sinon Le Journal de Montréal, La Presse, Le Devoir, La Gazette et la plupart des radios on solidement embarquer dans le narratif apocalyptique de Beaudet et autres anti-REM.

Peut-être les coupables sont reliés au CEM-E, Trainsparance/syndicats, ou autre groupe réactionnaire NYMBY se cachant sous un vernis pro-mobilité… Peut-être qu’il s’agit d’un loup solitaire dynamisé par le maire Peter Malouf, ou d’autres boomers déconnectés comme Gérard Beaudet, Michel C Auger, Jean-Francois Lisée… Peut-être c’est toute la couverture déplorable du Journal de Montréal sur le projet qui a poussé des riverains au sabotage; l’hystérie collective par rapport au niveau sonore aura aussi certainement effet de couler bien des projets ferroviaires à l’avenir, dont le TGF/TGV et même les tramways (qui ne sont vraiment « silencieux » qu’à leur vitesse les plus basses😉)

Ce n'est pas une question d'être spectaculaire ou non. L'idée avec ce projet est de construire (ou de commencer à construire une partie) une ligne d'échelle métropolitaine, mais aussi une opportunité pour que le réseau de métro s'éloigne du pneumatique, qui est la raison pour laquelle les lignes actuelles ne peuvent pas être prolongée autrement que sous terre (plus couteux). Le tramway est efficace pour une desserte fine, mais ce que le rapport de l'ARTM conclue, c'est que les besoins en déplacements sur le territoire étudié sont sur de longues distances. Il y a justement une étude du groupe de recherche "TRAM" à McGill qui le confirme. Le tramway peut très bien fonctionner à Montréal, mais pas pour les même fonctions qu'une plus petite ville comme Québec

C'est drôle, mais avec le REM de l'Est et la station Viauville, les gens de Mercier-Hochelaga-Maisonneuve auraient possiblement été épargnés du terminal de Ray-Mont Logistiques et de l'intensification du trafic ferroviaire lourd. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I think the damage is done. The ARTM indulged so much this sort of “elevated rail moral panic” that it will be impossible to build anything. That doesn’t only hurt metro expansions, but all other sorts of transit projects. Think HFR or HSR, tram-trains, or just commuter rail. Imagine if we wanted to have Montreal-West station grade separated to improve safety, reliability and permeability. People would loose their mind.

Trams like Hurontario LRT are great for a more inter borough coverage, but I think the idea here was to build (or start build part of) a regional scaled line, since it’s assumed that CN and CP are to much of an obstacle to implement a network like GO.

« On sent la politique derrière le rapport » FRANCIS VAILLES En gros, les hauts dirigeants de l’ARTM frustrés contre CDPQ et le mode métro léger ont décidé de sacrifier l’est de Montréal pour leur chicane de clocher.

Legault aurait put simplement décider que le provincial payerait pour enfouir les segments plus controversés du REM de l’Est. En annulant le REM de l’Est et en donnant le mandat du PSE à l’ARTM-STM-Projet-Montréal il a enhardi tous les anti-metros de surface.

Encore Gérard Beaudet qui nourrit la panique du métro aérien https://ici.radio-canada.ca/ohdio/premiere/emissions/Le-15-18/segments/entrevue/448518/rapport-final-artm-rem-de-lest-montreal-souterrain-36-milliards-analyse

Dans le sondage précédent, l’appuie était à son plus faible dans l’Ouest de l’île, avec un appui de 62%

Malgré le brûlot de l'ARTM et la fronde médiatique douteuse contre CDPQ et le REM de l'Est, l'appui au projet, maintenant annulé, s'est maintenu.

Elle dit du même souffle qu’il faut évaluer toutes les avenues possibles, mais que d’entrée jeu QS s’opposera à un métro aérien…qu’il faut s’en remettre à l’expertise de l’ARTM (tant que leur conclusions sont en ligne avec nos positions?)… la liberté de pouvoir dire tout et son contraire lorsqu’on sait que notre parti ne gagnera jamais le pouvoir et n’aura jamais à gérer des fonds public. https://www.journaldequebec.com/2022/05/23/pas-de-structure-aerienne-pour-le-rem-de-lest-promet-quebec-solidaire

Let's expand on that. Those speeds are achieved thanks to the longer interstation distances, the rolling stock specifications, the extent of the grade separation, and the lower frequency; lower peak frequency that is itself a feature of the line partial at-grade treatment. Those longer interstation distances are rather sensible for places like sprawling, density averse, Los Angeles, or Sidney, but would that be the case for Montreal-Nord, or the east end and the concerted municipal and provincial efforts to densify it and attract businesses? Let's say those parameters are amenable for our next line, that's great, but it just seems like, when talking about trams and its derivatives, we amalgamate positives from a very broad and diverse class of systems, and neglect to contextualize those systems and their particular trade-offs. Aside from that, speed, frequency and reliability do come up often in those discussions, maybe annoyingly so, but that's because they're truly integral to commuter behavior.

On obtient d'une ligne de TC autant de ce qu'on est prêt à y investir, quel que soit le mode. Au fur et à mesure que les optimisations se glissent dans un projet de bus à haut niveau de service ou de tram, pour le rendre le plus compétitif que possible à un métro, l'écart de coût se réduit assurément.

C'est une vision micro, à la pièce. Le centre-ville atteint, la porte est alors ouverte pour un prolongement vers le sud-ouest (NDG, Lachine, Lasalle) et toutes leurs opportunités de développement et revitalisation, rejoindre 2 pointes de l'île et plusieurs destinations comme jamais auparavant.

Exact. Mais j’ai des doutes sur la disposition de la STM à délaisser le pneumatique et à accepter l’automatisation complète d’une de ces ligne, ce que nécessitait la ligne rose, et peut-être pourquoi la STM et l’ARTM n’ont jamais vraiment partagé l’enthousiasme de Plante ou fait la promotion de l’idée.

Il ne faut pas sous-estimer les pertes en coûts d’opportunité et le manque de vision à rejeter complètement cette approche. Il faudrait aussi déjà pouvoir densifier autour des stations de la STM et d’exo et atteindre les seuils établis par la CMM sans s’attirer les foudres nimby. Sinon, vivement les développements en zone verte/friche et les lignes de TC comme outil de développement du territoire.

Plante, que j'apprécie généralement, ne savait pas plus de un an après la présentation du projet que le REM de l'Est de CDPQ se connectait à la ligne bleu et la ligne verte, alors même que la STM confirmait à ses coté que le REM s'y connectait effectivement. Toute cette fronde anti-REM n'était que mystification pour maintenir le statu quo. Et Michel C. Auger qui festoie devant un nouveau déboire en transport en commun. Absolument détestable; malheureusement il ne s'excusera jamais d'avoir participer au sabotage du projet et de Montréal.