montréal REM (ligne A) - Discussion générale

[Morse Attack]

20 hours ago, SameGuy said:

Absolutely. I do not decry them the opportunity taken. Just providing a reality check to anyone waving pompoms claiming the Caisse is the Second Coming because they could build a 67 km transit system for $120M/km.

They aren’t the second coming, but they still did a good job honestly.

I think the public should have trusted them with REM de L’Est.

However, I agree that politicians are getting overexcited.

-REM to Chambly was a ridiculous proposal.

-South Shore REM is the wrong project, and it sucks that REMs success is overshadowing LEEO.

-REM in laval is also not the best idea.

 

[montrealgoalie]

2 hours ago, Morse Attack said:

They aren’t the second coming, but they still did a good job honestly.

I think the public should have trusted them with REM de L’Est.

However, I agree that politicians are getting overexcited.

-REM to Chambly was a ridiculous proposal.

-South Shore REM is the wrong project, and it sucks that REMs success is overshadowing LEEO.

-REM in laval is also not the best idea.

 

REM to Chambly was a bit crazy but not that ridiculous. Just seems so because theres more pressing areas in need and there's not much between Brossard and Chambly, though that could have all been developped in TOD's. It's not that far from downtown Montreal. 

For the south shore REM vs LEEO, it again really depends what the goal is.  Do you want to move a good amount of people during rush hours towards the main REM line and the yellow metro line while also serving main commercial poles of the south shore? Or do you just want to increase tourism of Taschereau boulevard? I think the REM is a better project, the greater Montreal area including the north and south shores really need better east-west mass transit. 

Which brings us to the last point, the REM in Laval.  Laval has and is growing immensly. It might not seem like a good idea today, but 10-15 years from now it'll be a necessity.  Is it always necessary to wait until it becomes a pressing matter?  There is space in Laval to do this kind of project from which good dense TOD can be developed. 

The north shore will eventually need something like that too. Unless we're not actually serious about getting people out of their cars?

[Morse Attack]

21 hours ago, montrealgoalie said:

REM to Chambly was a bit crazy but not that ridiculous. Just seems so because theres more pressing areas in need and there's not much between Brossard and Chambly, though that could have all been developped in TOD's. It's not that far from downtown Montreal. 

For the south shore REM vs LEEO, it again really depends what the goal is.  Do you want to move a good amount of people during rush hours towards the main REM line and the yellow metro line while also serving main commercial poles of the south shore? Or do you just want to increase tourism of Taschereau boulevard? I think the REM is a better project, the greater Montreal area including the north and south shores really need better east-west mass transit. 

Which brings us to the last point, the REM in Laval.  Laval has and is growing immensly. It might not seem like a good idea today, but 10-15 years from now it'll be a necessity.  Is it always necessary to wait until it becomes a pressing matter?  There is space in Laval to do this kind of project from which good dense TOD can be developed. 

The north shore will eventually need something like that too. Unless we're not actually serious about getting people out of their cars?

Im sorry, but running *high frequency rail through pastures to service a town of 30 000 is by far the most ridiculous transportation project ever proposed in Quebec 😂😂

LEEO is a cheaper project that would increase the land value along Taschereau in order to spur redevelopment. There is definitely no one on the planet that is thinking of Taschereau as a tourist destination…😂😂😂. REM is overkill for that area. For feeder service to the REM, its better to have more stops, and for commercial trips to the boulevard its also better to have extra stops, as well as avoiding a large raised infrastructure.

High frequency light rail is good for metropolitan trips, when you want people to travel large distances fast. Its not good for feeder service.
 

Laval is arguable, but it would be more cost effective to close the orange line loop and then have tramway or SRB as feeder. You could TOD around that just as well. REM in laval without direct downtown connection is not ideal.

Modifié 17 septembre 2023 par Morse Attack

[Enalung]

2 hours ago, montrealgoalie said:

Is it always necessary to wait until it becomes a pressing matter?  There is space in Laval to do this kind of project from which good dense TOD can be developed. 

I think that it is far better to build transit first as future TODs can be integrated directly with the transit. The opposite is a lot harder to achieve.

[Morse Attack]

11 minutes ago, Enalung said:

I think that it is far better to build transit first as future TODs can be integrated directly with the transit. The opposite is a lot harder to achieve.

I totally agree with you.

here is an interesting counter-perspective though: https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2018/4/26/why-development-oriented-transit-is-better-than-transit-oriented-development

[ToxiK]

il y a 49 minutes, Enalung a dit :

I think that it is far better to build transit first as future TODs can be integrated directly with the transit. The opposite is a lot harder to achieve.

Not only that but if transit is there first, people will move to the neighborhood because of transit.  If people already live there, not only might they complain about transit as NIMBYs but they might not be interested in using transit at all.  A portion of people will, but many will not.  You then need to wait a generation for these people to move out and be replaced by people who want transit.

It might take, let say, 5 years for développement to follow transit, but it might take 30 years for a renewal of the population from non transit users to transit users.

[montrealgoalie]

1 hour ago, Enalung said:

I think that it is far better to build transit first as future TODs can be integrated directly with the transit. The opposite is a lot harder to achieve.

Yea that's what I'm saying

[Rocco]

Vancouver.

[ToxiK]

Il y a 2 heures, Rocco a dit :

Vancouver.

Hécatombe d'insectes...

[KOOL]

⬆️  Je préfère les coléoptères de Vancouver que les caténaires de Coderre...