montréal REM (ligne A) - Discussion générale

[mtlurb]

Page 1285 💀

[SameGuy]

21 minutes ago, Rocco said:

"La ligne bleue s'en vient" - Gouvernement depuis 45 ans.

Exactly. Hence my statement above.

[SameGuy]

How many people in this forum have mentioned that we need a RATM instead of an ARTM? That's what I'm talking about. Instead of putting out a call for tenders to contractors who inflate prices to cover their asses and make huge profits, the transit authority needs to become the contractor, hire the right people, buy and lease the equipment, and build the damn things.

[andre md]

il y a 35 minutes, SameGuy a dit :

How many people in this forum have mentioned that we need a RATM instead of an ARTM? That's what I'm talking about. Instead of putting out a call for tenders to contractors who inflate prices to cover their asses and make huge profits, the transit authority needs to become the contractor, hire the right people, buy and lease the equipment, and build the damn things.

Exemple RATP a Paris et Metro Madrid a Madrid  C'est eux meme qui s'en charge de leur travaux. Avec leur propre équipe d'ingénieurs.

Je crois si je ne me trompe que c'est la ville de montreal qui a pris en charge   la construction de premieres stations du metro a l'époque.

 

[ToxiK]

Il y a 5 heures, SameGuy a dit :

But you're omitting the fact that the Caisse's model puts ROI first, even if that means the wrong mode for the areas where it runs, or not integrating with the existing networks because it's cheaper to run it through brownfields or on autoroutes, hoping instead that developments will mushroom around it.

“The Caisse wants people to live where they build the REM, the Caisse doesn’t want to build the REM where people live.”

® © ™ @SameGuy
 

All I'm saying is that we need a transit authority with the muscle to create mandates to which any tendering group must adhere. The ARTM ain't it (as we all know).

I am not omitting that the Caisse is looking for ROI, I am counting on it.  Let's see who are the stakeholders when we want to build a new structuring transit system like the REM de l'Est, and let's look at what each of them truly wants:

-The provincial government wants to pay at little as possible for the new system.

-The federal government wants visibility.

-The STM (if they are operating it) wants to minimize their operating costs.

-The unions want it to need as many unionized employees as possible to maintain it.

-The anti-cars crowd want to use the new transit as an excuse to cut as many space on roads for cars as possible.

-Politicians just want to win the next election...

-The ARTM wants to justify its existence.

-The NIMBYs want not to be bothered by anything, anytime, anywhere all the time.

-The city wants to be calling all the shots but not to foot the bill.

-The OCPM wants to eat oysters (they might not be involved at all with the process, but it is still what they want...).

-The local merchants want to maximize the number of people near their stores.

-The boroughs want developments around the new transit to maximize tax revenues. 

-The neighbours wants "human scale" development so they won't notice anything has changed in their neighbourhood.

-Construction businesses want to secure the contracts and minimize competition for said contracts.

-Rocco wants to complain (prove me wrong...).

-Anti-transit people want no transit to be built at all.

-Environmentalists want the new system to cause zero pollution, not destroy any animal habitat nor cut a single tree, use sustainable materials whatever the cost, be respectful of diversity and so on, all of that while permitting unicorns to run free...

-Anti-tax conservatives want it to cost nothing (unless they make the money, of course...).

Have you noted none of those stakeholders put the users' interests as their priority?  You will say that neither does the Caisse, but the Caisse is happy when it is making money, and it will make money if users are using their transit system.  So, as a user, if the Caisse makes me happy, I will use the REM and they will be happy.  So the ROI motive is the one that is the most aligned with the interest of users.  Not perfectly aligned, but still the closest.

That is why I want the Caisse to lead the next phase of transit development in Québec.  That next step might be a competent transit organization taking over, but with public transit (and the billions it cost) being so political, it might be difficult, if not impossible.  Until then, I will take the Caisse's model as much as it will work.

And for the idea that they want people to live near their transit systems, that is how TOD get built; make transit first and let's built housing according to it.  It is better that trying to adapt transit and insert denser housing in an already built location (NIMBY's gonna NIMBYse...).

[Rocco]

Toxic comme ministre des transports dans mon gouvernement.

[crosbyshow]

Une chance qu'on a le Rem A qui s'est fait assez rapidement car avec les Finances actuelles...et surtout les Conservateurs au fédéral qui risque très fortement de prendre le pouvoir....faudra pas trop compter sur de gros projets de transport en commun

 

Je me répète mais quelle ciboire d'erreur historique d'avoir sorti la Caisse pour le Rem de l'Est.

 

 

[Rocco]

⬆️ Une autre décision minable et à l'emporte pièce de F. Legault. DEHORS!

[johan]

Il y a 6 heures, crosbyshow a dit :

Une chance qu'on a le Rem A qui s'est fait assez rapidement car avec les Finances actuelles...et surtout les Conservateurs au fédéral qui risque très fortement de prendre le pouvoir....faudra pas trop compter sur de gros projets de transport en commun

 

Je me répète mais quelle ciboire d'erreur historique d'avoir sorti la Caisse pour le Rem de l'Est.

 

 

Sorti par la Mairesse de la Mobilité en plus... Rien de moins !

[johan]

Une des militantes anti-REM d'Hochelaga avait de la misère à ouvrir les yeux devant les caméras de Radio-Canada...

😆

~~~~~~~~~

Les derniers plans du REM aérien dans l'est de la ville avait été encensé par tout les urbanistes dans le monde pour être une solution élégante et peu bruyante pour s'intégrer dans un milieu urbain dense...

Avec son mur anti-bruit courbé et integré dans une structure en béton plus effilé.

~~~~~~~~~~

Mais ils ont vraiment eu peur que nuise à l'ambiance du Parc Morgan... Je respecte ça parce que

J'habite pas là ... C'est juste qu'on le voit que CDPQ est capable de s'ajuster et d'enlever le bruit environnant déclenché par ses trains..

La situation semble s'améliorer à Griffintown?

C'est une question rhétorique 😅🐢