montréal REM de l'Est

[Enalung]

Je suis d'un avis différent. Je l'ai déjà dis à quelques reprises, Taschereau va se faire avant le REM de l'Est. La route sur Taschereau, elle est évidente. C'est un projet qui est beaucoup moins controversé. Il n'y a que quelques détails à ficeler. Je pense que c'est le projet que le gouvernement garde dans sa manche. Ce n'est pas pour rien que le gouvernement a demandé à la CDPQ-I d'étudier Taschereau peu de temps avant cette annonce. Ils savaient que ça serait la réaction.

Entre temps, le débat sur le REM de l'Est va se poursuivre. Voir l'argent aller ailleurs, c'est peut-être ce qui va vaincre les réticences de certains. Ce temps supplémentaire pourrait également permettre à de nouvelles propositions de voir le jour et d'être mis à l'étude.

[vivreenrégion]

Ce que plusieurs ne réalisent pas c'est que Montréal connaît une croissance démographique assez élevée, contrairement à plusieurs villes majeures en Europe qui stagnent. Le Grand Montréal est plus peuplé que Frankfurt. Il faut penser aux besoins lorsqu'on sera 5M vers 2030.

[Né entre les rapides]

il y a 23 minutes, p_xavier a dit :

On peut débattre certes, mais le projet est financé à moitié par la CDPQi

Dans le cas du projet du "REM de l'Est", ça demeure une hypothèse.  Et dans le cas du REM original présentement en construction, le financement des immobilisations ne représente qu'une partie des implications financières du projet.  Parmi ces dernières, on remarquera notamment la rémunération en fonction du nombre de kilomètres/passagers parcourus, ainsi que d'autres dispositions que je n'expliciterai pas ici.  

Ça ne veut pas dire que l'implication de la CDPQ-i soit une mauvaise chose.  Par exemple, je conviens que "sans CDPQ-i il n'y aurait pas de REM point".  Mais ça veut aussi dire que sans le consentement et la participation des gouvernements, il n'y aurait pas de REM non plus.

Ce qui m'apparaît certain, c'est que la CDPQ-i ne s'aventurera pas dans un projet qui n'est pas encore bien ficellé.  A l'heure actuelle, on dispose d'une esquisse qui répondrait à un certain nombre d'objectifs en termes d'amélioration de la desserte par TEC dans l'Est de l'Île, ainsi que d'une estimation des coûts d'immobilisations, mais guère plus.  Ainsi, je ne crois pas qu'il suffirait que Québec et Ottawa s'engagent chacun à contribuer à hauteur de 2,5 milliards pour que la CDPQ-i  décide d'aller de l'avant tout de suite.

[Kodun]

il y a 45 minutes, p_xavier a dit :

On peut débattre certes, mais le projet est financé à moitié par la CDPQi, donc un my way or the highway est plus que fort probable.  C'est toujours plus facile de décider quoi faire avec l'argent des autres.  Sans CDPQi il n'y aurait pas de REM point.  Pour ma part je déteste le BAPE, on a encore vu pour le tramway de Québec que ce n'est pas le bon format pour un projet massif de transport collectif.

On ne parle pas de construire un parc d'attractions ou quelconque projet en vase clos mais d'un projet pour la société et sur laquelle il aura un impact majeur pour les générations à venir.

Plus généralement pour ce thread:

Le chantage, quel qu'il soit, de quel bord qu'il soit, ne devrait pas être accepté, encore moins institutionalisé comme la CAQ, et précédemment le PLQ, semblent se plaire à faire. Nous ne devrions pas avoir à choisir entre l'immobilisme ou la force majeur. Nous ne devrions pas avoir à voter des lois contre les lois et règlements comme si c'était normal..

Tout ceci est le reflet d'une société qui ne prend pas ses responsabilités (ici de planifier et agir conséquemment) et se laisse mener par qui crie le plus fort. Comme on dit, y'a des limites à faire dur.

[FrodoMTL]

Reading through all of the comments, I think for any project of this scale there needs to be adequate public consultation, or rather a "cooling off" period to let the project sink in. I am absolutely sure the CDPQi has anticipated a strong response from both sides, and we should all know that the current proposal is nowhere near final. 

With that said, consultation for the sake of consultation doesn't do anyone service. If all you do is drown yourselves in studies and community consultations, in the end it just ends up being a waste of public funds, especially when nothing gets built (which is what eventually happened to cities like Brampton and Toronto that actually turned down funding $$ because they wanted to "fully study alternative options"). I've seen this happen too many times in transit and other public sector projects in Toronto, where I personally worked on several projects as an external consultant to Ontario's biggest transit agency (I won't name names) from 2016-18. The biggest beneficiaries of these delay tactics will always be the external consultants and "change management" agencies, who are hired by the government to gather data from different community groups, put them in nice presentations, and in the end reach the same conclusions. If the REM were left up to a public agency like the STM or TTC, I can guarantee you the above will happen, millions of $ spent on hiring consultants to do endless studies, before any decision is taken, because public sector agencies in Canada has a long and proud tradition of indecision (no middle-level public servant wants to take the blame for making a quick decision that goes wrong, because they are not incentivized to take quick decisions or risks). 

Whatever your personal opinion on the CDPQi may be, I think we can all agree that one thing they have done right with REM-A so far is to avoid the above trap that public sector agencies so frequently fall into.

 

[Mtlarch]

Le tracé fait beaucoup de sens pour une ligne souterraine... Pour une ligne aérienne, j’imagine le casse-tête des expropriations et ensuite, de la réaction tout à fait normale des gens qui diront: Oui mais pas dans ma cours 😩!

[Mtlarch]

I agret with the fact that it would be nice having it buried underground. We understand that this option will have to be unrealistically deep because of the orange line under Berri street.  Further West toward Place Ville-Marie, there are probably manyunderground rights that will have to be negociate. Juste look at how the tunnel between Centre Eaton & PVM is twisty: thanks to the negociations between the buildings owners, the city and the lawyers 😉

Why not take off  2 lines of autoroute Ville-Marie and have a station under the future expansion of Palais des Congrès. The land is empty, the void exist with highway tunnel and you do not cross any existing underground structure. A compromise which mena that people who use to drive on the 4 lanes of Notre-Dame will continue to do so for about 1 km in the tunnel itself.

Disavantage, the end of the line would not connect directly with thé REM at Central station. But overall, a lot easier to built and still providing services for Eastern / Northern part of the Island.

[Enalung]

53 minutes ago, Mtlarch said:

I agret with the fact that it would be nice having it buried underground. We understand that this option will have to be unrealistically deep because of the orange line under Berri street.  Further West toward Place Ville-Marie, there are probably manyunderground rights that will have to be negociate. Juste look at how the tunnel between Centre Eaton & PVM is twisty: thanks to the negociations between the buildings owners, the city and the lawyers 😉

Why not take off  2 lines of autoroute Ville-Marie and have a station under the future expansion of Palais des Congrès. The land is empty, the void exist with highway tunnel and you do not cross any existing underground structure. A compromise which mena that people who use to drive on the 4 lanes of Notre-Dame will continue to do so for about 1 km in the tunnel itself.

Disavantage, the end of the line would not connect directly with thé REM at Central station. But overall, a lot easier to built and still providing services for Eastern / Northern part of the Island.

It is realistic. They should be able to squeeze in between the orange and yellow line easily. In fact, the green line does precisely that at the Berry station. The only thing might potentially be standing in the way is a tunnel in between the yellow and orange line which allows trains to be moved in between the 2 lines. There's a case to be made that if necessary, they could dig a new access tunnel north of Berry and just abandon the old one. That new tunnel would be a few hundred meters at most. It wouldn't take that long to dig and it only has to be a single lane given that it's only purpose is to allow the movement of trains between lines.

As for Place Ville-Marie... The CDPQ actually owns that building. They also owns the the Reine Elizabeth Hotel. That really doesn't matter. The station tracks for Gare Centrale pass under René-Lévesque, so they have no choice but to go deeper. There's no reason for them to dig under any structures other then those that extend under René-Lévesque, but I'll entertain that through for a moment. Most of the buildings in that section of the city are resting on bedrock, so they should be able to dig safely straight under them safely.

As for the idea to use Ville-Marie. It's been suggested a few times already. There has been a few individuals who raised their hand to say "yeah, I also suggested that idea", but that's as far as that got. There really hasn't been anyone who has gone out of their way to champion the idea. Most couldn't even be bothered to discredit the idea. That fact alone should tell you that it's dead on arrival. I've already said what I though on the subject, so feel free to dig in the thread if you are curious.

[Né entre les rapides]

Il y a 3 heures, FrodoMTL a dit :

Whatever your personal opinion on the CDPQi may be, I think we can all agree that one thing they have done right with REM-A so far is to avoid the above trap that public sector agencies so frequently fall into.

 

True.  But let's not forget that they have done it with the consent and support of the government.  They could not do it on their own.  Here, I am not referring so much to the funding issue, but on the special legislation enacted to enable them to avoid the "traps".  

[Mtlarch]

Il y a 2 heures, Enalung a dit :

It is realistic. They should be able to squeeze in between the orange and yellow line easily. In fact, the green line does precisely that at the Berry station. The only thing might potentially be standing in the way is a tunnel in between the yellow and orange line which allows trains to be moved in between the 2 lines. There's a case to be made that if necessary, they could dig a new access tunnel north of Berry and just abandon the old one. That new tunnel would be a few hundred meters at most. It wouldn't take that long to dig and it only has to be a single lane given that it's only purpose is to allow the movement of trains between lines.

As for Place Ville-Marie... The CDPQ actually owns that building. They also owns the the Reine Elizabeth Hotel. That really doesn't matter. The station tracks for Gare Centrale pass under René-Lévesque, so they have no choice but to go deeper. There's no reason for them to dig under any structures other then those that extend under René-Lévesque, but I'll entertain that through for a moment. Most of the buildings in that section of the city are resting on bedrock, so they should be able to dig safely straight under them safely.

As for the idea to use Ville-Marie. It's been suggested a few times already. There has been a few individuals who raised their hand to say "yeah, I also suggested that idea", but that's as far as that got. There really hasn't been anyone who has gone out of their way to champion the idea. Most couldn't even be bothered to discredit the idea. That fact alone should tell you that it's dead on arrival. I've already said what I though on the subject, so feel free to dig in the thread if you are curious.

Thank you for your comments.

I made a presentation a long time ago for the East Side access tunnel in NYC. Very challenging as the new access run under Park Ave  and around the existing metropolitan train tracks from Central Station toward North. I remember the complaints of the Waldorf who did not want to be disturbed by the work u/g. It was quite clear during the discussions.

So basically, if you have the money and patience , very effective results can be achieved. But those decisions come from the client who is deciding what’s the best ROR they expect financially and politically from the project.

Of course, u/g is much nicer than an aerial link for this segment 👍. Stations at St-Urbain and Labelle might present some challenges in term of depth but in London, they have older stations where access is available with elevators only (referring to Russell station particularly but there are others too).