SameGuy

Soooo.... electrify the railways? 🤪 Don’t need “trams” to accomplish that.

Before the thread gets forked: I’d love to be shown one single instance of modern rapid transit lowering property values. One. Anywhere in the world.

Perhaps Mr Shaw would like to start a new thread in one of the off-topic areas. Here we are discussing the REM-B/REM-2 proposal and what we think about it, and we can speculate on aspects of the design or engineering choices, or even the routes. Delving into hearsay and conspiracies and all that would be better off in its own thread in another forum, just like the tangential discussion about possible east end transit alternatives was forked off into its own thread in “Proposals/Visions.” 👍🏼💯 Agree — I’ve said pretty much exactly this more than once since September. The only spot where I do agree with others here that it would be obtrusive is in front of the cathedral and bisecting Place du Canada and Dorchester Square. It would need to be a good 20 metres up for clearance but then the integration with the other transit systems is even more cumbersome.

Lol

Yup. It’s everywhere and it’s as bad as ever, if not worse. It’s like they designed it with larger, more prominent surfaces and gave the delinquents much easier access. Look at the ramp from the 15N to the 136E near the MUHC. 🤦🏻‍♂️

Just playing Devil’s advocate for a moment, for again, if one cares to read a bit in these fora, one might actually see that we aren’t all in favour of elevated trains any more than we are all in favour of walls of skyscrapers across the cityscape. Most of René-Lévesque west of de Lorimier is eight road lanes, a median, and two wide sidewalks. It is anywhere from 36 to more than 50 metres across from building façade to building façade. Even using the fairly simple design of the West Island — vertical circular columns and a guideway constructed with profiled voussoirs — the columns could fit in the median, and the overhead structure would be less than 7 metres wide and would “shade” no more than two lanes. Just based upon the dimensions of the West Island elevated structure, a guideway along the median wouldn’t even span as far as the width of the two inside lanes. On the other hand, the station structures will likely be cumbersome, regardless of how lithe the guideway appears. But again, only two stations are currently planned for the core of downtown, and it’s just the one at Central that would be aesthetically and functionally problematic; a station at St-Urbain (or even Berri) would have little impact on the “beauty” of the surroundings. Of course, those are just my opinions. I also strongly believe that we should still consider going underground somewhere near Radio Canada if possible, even if it increases the cost of the whole project by a billion or two.

The whole “Chicago L crime” fear-mongering argument just sounds so laughably MAGA and Trumpian, and has absolutely nothing to do with any sensible discourse on modern transit design.

This. Period. SkyTrain is underground in the very centre of downtown but is at grade and elevated very close to downtown, even in heritage areas. And outside of downtown there is massive real estate investment along the Expo and Millenium lines.

Didn’t realize he’s no longer a lobbyist for hire. ETA: ah! It was announced just yesterday! 😄

Je suis entièrement d’accord. Just like the December announcement, we become dazzled and distracted by the glitz and glamour promised by these proposals, that we usually fail to see what’s missing until the politicians have sold away our best interests; so-called “public consultations” are nothing more than poster sessions where developer reps tell us what we want, while our real suggestions and concerns are largely ignored. So much passing the buck, too.

Lol

We should be improving what we already have. We still have zero information about possible active transport crossings of the 40 at each of the West Island stations, which would be an immediate benefit to all four stations as well as to present and future communities on either side of the highway. Some 12,000 people work in the Baie-d’Urfé industrial park yet the only way to the Anse station is a series of winding roads to the Morgan overpass and then a 1200 m hustle to the station! A pedestrian/bicycle overpass and safe, lit paths in the industrial park would be a huge benefit. Want another one? Finish Morgan on the other side at the Baie-d’Urfé exo station. Kirkland will improve the Ste-Marie overpass to make it much safer for all users, but we haven’t actually seen any plans yet, with the branch set to open in three years. We’ve already discussed all the possible new roads and connections for Fairview, while who tf knows what’s planned for des Sources, which is really poorly located overall. There are many improvements that should be looked at on the main line as well. So while we are already dissecting and criticizing the proposed REM-B, let’s not get ahead of ourselves and talk about expanding it to serve St-Pie-de-Sac-à-Popcorn just yet.

Never gonna happen. Bien sûr que Vaudreuil agrandit mais Vaudreuil-Dorion au complet ne compte que ~45,000 réparties sur 70 km² (650/km²), et l’MRC que 150,000 sur 900 km² — presque deux fois la superficie de l’île de Montréal! Envoyer un métro dans les champs n’est ni efficace, ni réaliste. Idem à l’autre bout de l’île.

👍🏼 Ball’s in your court, Val.

Pas d’accord du tout. Le REM n’est pas un train de banlieue, nonobstant le fait qu’il remplacera celui entre la Gare Centrale et Deux-Montagnes. Ça ne fera pas de bon sens traverser 12 km de terrain agricole vers Vaudreuil pour desservir une petite population répartie sur une grande superficie qui a déjà accès au train exo1. Les voies réservées sur la 40 et le pont Île-aux-Tourtes serviront parfaitement bien pour rabattre à la station Anse-à-l’Orme.

It just seems the pendulum is swinging completely the other way right now. Transit should offer a balance of serving dense existing population centres as well as promoting responsible new development, without contributing to urban sprawl. Between the REM-B proposal and a whole bunch of fantasies tossed around before (and since) the last election, we see that those dense areas are largely ignored and that governments are happy to oblige developers with promises of barrels of cash to build metros and trams to lower-density areas or potential new suburban developments.

Agree. If there were zero prospect for TOD in Kirkland (Centre RioCan as it were), the branch to the West Island should’ve likely stopped at CF/IC’s golden goose at Fairview; but would it have even been worth it? Now we await the reconfiguration of bus routes throughout the REM-A catchment areas, fingers crossed that buses moved away from express and long distance service are used properly along direct, grid-based routes perpendicular to the REM.

💯💯💯

I suppose if the McMansions in Kirkland are served by a metro, then the McMansions in RDP should be as well. 🤷🏻‍♂️

If there are parks and residences on top, it’s already decontaminated. 😉

Just daydreaming, mais je me demande si qq ici a accès à des chiffres O-D pour un dessert St-Léo-centre-ville. @p_xavier? Je sais que la Caisse a comme but le développement de terrains le long du trajet, mais si je peux me permettre... il y a déjà un corridor parfait pour l’implantation d’un métro léger, sans devoir creuser un tunnel sous Lacordaire, qui aura comme avantage le dessert d’Angus, VR, de Lorimier, RPP: l’emprise QMOO entre Hochelaga et CP-Outremont via Angus. Un tunnel débutant au niveau d’Iberville serait plus court que celui proposé pour Lacordaire et pourrait mieux desservir le nord-est (VSMPE, Montréal-Nord). Residents in the northeast need better transit altogether, but how many in the proposed alignment actually (or potentially) have to go to the epicentre of downtown, compared to the already-evident need of the neighbourhoods mentioned above?

I’m withdrawing my most recent opinion (that an elevated guideway downtown on RL would be unacceptable) and reverting to my earlier one from before the announcement that predicted it would go exactly there and wouldn’t be too bad. I drove past the future Kirkland station today and I agree with @Decel that if high enough, even the columns and profiled voussoirs we see in the West Island wouldn’t be bad at all on RL. My only real objection continues to be in regards to such a system’s poor integration with REM-A and exo regional trains at Central; a station platform 15 or 20 m above RL, with the anticipated volumes of a terminal downtown station will be cumbersome, to say the least. Maybe if the hotel business gets clobbered they can just go right into the John & Yoko suite and build the station there. September. 🙂

Me semble ce n’est pas encore complété. Il y a un tas de plinthes et cadrages là bas.

I wish we saw more of these lighting plans that are simple and clear. La plupart de ces plans d'illumination que nous (le grand public) pouvons voir ce sont des croquis flou ou imprécis.

I was floored the first time I saw the completed UQAM Kennedy building. It’s not really tall but it imposes itself so much on the area that it looks friggin huge.