Transports en commun - Discussion générale

[champdemars]

Il y a 5 heures, geraldshaw a dit :

Deadlines for the design decisions  for REM-Est have been mentioned. This is Montreal. The extensions of metro lines average 15 years  of  delays. Moreover, if REM-Est goes ahead with the above ground on R-L, there  will be 5 years in delays due to court challenges by the parties who will try to prove injury due to lost values of buildings from Robert-Bourassa and East for several kms. Claims will be at least $1 billion.  

1 millards $ en dommages ? On est carrément dans le délire là. Probable que certains chiâlent mais c’est assez facile pour le gouvernement de passer une loi pour régler ça. La réalité est que la « perte en valeur » liée à l’esthétisme est facilement compensé par le gain en valeur lié à une meilleure accessibilité en transport en commun, même si le secteur est déjà bien couvert. On s’entend que René-Lévesque c’est largement du commercial et institutionnel.

[Fortier]

Il y a 6 heures, geraldshaw a dit :

Deadlines for the design decisions  for REM-Est have been mentioned. This is Montreal. The extensions of metro lines average 15 years  of  delays. Moreover, if REM-Est goes ahead with the above ground on R-L, there  will be 5 years in delays due to court challenges by the parties who will try to prove injury due to lost values of buildings from Robert-Bourassa and East for several kms. Claims will be at least $1 billion.  

Attention de ne pas essayer de propager de fausses rumeurs. Ce n’est pas un groupe Facebook de complotistes ici, on demande un minimum de sérieux.

[geraldshaw]

The total $ claims for injury due to the  lost value of the sum of all the dozens of  buildings' claims may well fail in the courts - the points are  that the delays that  these  dozens of civil actions and appeals  by various  buildings owners will take years to complete and the history of transport extension  delays in the past in Montreal are controlling facts that one can pretend to ignore. Blue line extension - after 20 years of a promised shovel  is the best example and it is an underground  project -- already Cadillac is fighting the expropriations at their Anjou property.  This is not China or the Middle East when new projects are easily expedited. Cheerleading for quick first shovel for a REM-Est  is fine, but it will not expedite first shovels.

[LexD]

32 minutes ago, geraldshaw said:

The total $ claims for injury due to the  lost value of the sum of all the dozens of  buildings' claims may well fail in the courts - the points are  that the delays that  these  dozens of civil actions and appeals  by various  buildings owners will take years to complete and the history of transport extension  delays in the past in Montreal are controlling facts that one can pretend to ignore. Blue line extension - after 20 years of a promised shovel  is the best example and it is an underground  project -- already Cadillac is fighting the expropriations at their Anjou property.  This is not China or the Middle East when new projects are easily expedited. Cheerleading for quick first shovel for a REM-Est  is fine, but it will not expedite first shovels.

I think you're right, The REM - A (Brossard/West-Island) had bill 137 to expedite easily, it gave the CDPQ all power. Earlier this year bill 61 failed and i Believe bill 66 has not been adopted yet. I am speculating and assuming at this point since I dont know much at all on the subject. Maybe others on here do?

[Decel]

il y a 36 minutes, geraldshaw a dit :

The total $ claims for injury due to the  lost value of the sum of all the dozens of  buildings' claims may well fail in the courts - the points are  that the delays that  these  dozens of civil actions and appeals  by various  buildings owners will take years to complete and the history of transport extension  delays in the past in Montreal are controlling facts that one can pretend to ignore. Blue line extension - after 20 years of a promised shovel  is the best example and it is an underground  project -- already Cadillac is fighting the expropriations at their Anjou property.  This is not China or the Middle East when new projects are easily expedited. Cheerleading for quick first shovel for a REM-Est  is fine, but it will not expedite first shovels.

Counter-argument: REM (actual, the one being built). It's going surprisingly rather well

[mtlmonti]

18 hours ago, SameGuy said:

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.

Rene Levesque is not a pretty street in the first place. So if there was an elevated rail line on it I would remain indifferent. With that being said, logically I would still put the REM station underground on Rene Levesque so that the connection with the REM A would be more fluid and direct. I'm just glad that this train line might be built.

[p_xavier]

Il y a 2 heures, geraldshaw a dit :

The total $ claims for injury due to the  lost value of the sum of all the dozens of  buildings' claims may well fail in the courts - the points are  that the delays that  these  dozens of civil actions and appeals  by various  buildings owners will take years to complete and the history of transport extension  delays in the past in Montreal are controlling facts that one can pretend to ignore. Blue line extension - after 20 years of a promised shovel  is the best example and it is an underground  project -- already Cadillac is fighting the expropriations at their Anjou property.  This is not China or the Middle East when new projects are easily expedited. Cheerleading for quick first shovel for a REM-Est  is fine, but it will not expedite first shovels.

That's why there's now a law preventing these appeals.

[SameGuy]

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.”

2 hours ago, mtlmonti said:

Rene Levesque is not a pretty street in the first place. So if there was an elevated rail line on it I would remain indifferent. With that being said, logically I would still put the REM station underground on Rene Levesque so that the connection with the REM A would be more fluid and direct. I'm just glad that this train line might be built.

👍🏼💯 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.

[SameGuy]

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.

[Julpyz]

51 minutes ago, SameGuy said:

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.

https://financialpost.com/real-estate/does-new-public-transit-boost-home-prices-if-its-underground-the-answer-is-usually-yes

"Similarly, a Masters thesis completed in 2018 at Concordia University explored whether proximity to elevated transit stations in Toronto and Vancouver carried a lower price premium than proximity to below-grade transit. The research found that properties listed near the “elevated TTC subway and SkyTrain stations had, on average, lower listing prices while properties located in proximity to underground stations had higher listing prices.”

Above-grade rail transit generates noise and is often not visibly appealing. Thus, the price premium was found to be lower for properties near above-grade stations compared to below-grade stations."