montréal REM de l'Est

[Enalung]

2 hours ago, Decel said:

Selon ce que j'ai vu, la négociation n'est pas viable avec le CN/CP. Si je me souviens des anciens articles, même quand il y avait priorité des trains de passagers sur un tronçon les cies prenaient aléatoirement des décisions de faire rouler un train de marchandise.

Vue plus globalement:

• L'AMT n'a jamais eu un meilleur service du CN/CP
• EXO n'a pas pu négocier plus de fréquence
• VIA n'arrive pas à négocier plus de fréquence

Ça commence à faire une tendance.

J'aimerais bien savoir il font comment à Toronto avec leur service GO.

[mk.ndrsn]

il y a 49 minutes, Enalung a dit :

J'aimerais bien savoir il font comment à Toronto avec leur service GO.

They own the majority of the segments they operate on.

[SameGuy]

31 minutes ago, mk.ndrsn said:

They own the majority of the segments they operate on.

And how did that happen?

[mk.ndrsn]

il y a une heure, SameGuy a dit :

And how did that happen?

By aggressively buying them out because trying to negotiate priority for passengers with CP/CN is a complete waste of time, they are the worst.

[Enalung]

1 hour ago, SameGuy said:

And how did that happen?

Quite a bit of those tracks were bought from CN and CP. Quite a few other portions runs besides the tracks of the CN or CP implying that CN and CP probably owned that land initially. based on what I know from the region, almost none of it is greenfield. There are industrial zones and old spurs visible along most corridors currently owned by GO. Many of those are in fact still in use. For exemple, CN does not own any of the rail which gives access to this railyard.

Right now, there are groups advocating for a connection from the CN track north of the airport, along the 407 to the CP track north of Mississauga. The goal is to remove most merchandise trains from the CN owned segment which goes to Georgetown. Go owns the rest of the track on both sides. Some go a step further and correctly point out that this would allow all of the track owned by CP going from Scarborough to Mississauga to be bought for use by GO.

This type of thinking could be a blueprint for Montreal. Toronto worked hard to remove almost all merchandise trains from its city center. It would be costly, but we certainly could remove a portion of merchandise trains from the island. We do have our own missing link on the south shore. This link was cut when the use of the railway going through Kahnawake was discontinued. Any train that does not need to be resorted at the CN and CP yard on the island could instead bypass the island if this link was rebuilt along highway 30.

[Enalung]

Even without going that far, it is factually correct to say that there is space along the existing CP and CN right of way for at least 2 more tracks. Right now, the stations are along the CP right of way. Bypasses could be built so that merchandise trains can go around those stations. Those bypass would only need to be 300 meters long and would allow better sharing of the track.

The CN right of way which goes through Montreal Nord only has 1 track along much of its length. It might not be that wide, but there is certainly space for at least a second track, and perhaps even a third.

There is an old rail sub which goes to Chambly and has been completly abandoned. It could be revived to provide commuter service.

I've been told that there is still plenty of capacity on the existing Victoria bridge, but, if negotiating more service proves problematic, we could always choose to build a new bridge right besides it.

There are solutions which we have not yet explored and which merit more attention and proper studies. The way I see it, we have been treating CN and CP as an excuse and an obstacle to improving service for way too long. Improving an existing railway is not sexy. There is no "ribbon cutting ceremony", very few "big announcements" when all you are doing is adding capacity. Politicians like things that they can promote and take take credit for. The way I see it, this "CN and CP won't negotiate" is more of a convenient political excuse for not doing anything then anything else. Can we please start calling this problem for what it is?

[andre md]

il y a une heure, Enalung a dit :

Even without going that far, it is factually correct to say that there is space along the existing CP and CN right of way for at least 2 more tracks. Right now, the stations are along the CP right of way. Bypasses could be built so that merchandise trains can go around those stations. Those bypass would only need to be 300 meters long and would allow better sharing of the track.

The CN right of way which goes through Montreal Nord only has 1 track along much of its length. It might not be that wide, but there is certainly space for at least a second track, and perhaps even a third.

There is an old rail sub which goes to Chambly and has been completly abandoned. It could be revived to provide commuter service.

I've been told that there is still plenty of capacity on the existing Victoria bridge, but, if negotiating more service proves problematic, we could always choose to build a new bridge right besides it.

There are solutions which we have not yet explored and which merit more attention and proper studies. The way I see it, we have been treating CN and CP as an excuse and an obstacle to improving service for way too long. Improving an existing railway is not sexy. There is no "ribbon cutting ceremony", very few "big announcements" when all you are doing is adding capacity. Politicians like things that they can promote and take take credit for. The way I see it, this "CN and CP won't negotiate" is more of a convenient political excuse for not doing anything then anything else. Can we please start calling this problem for what it is?

I'm curious to know how they negotiate with the CN when they displaces the rails to built the turcot interchange. 

[danny12345]

4 hours ago, Enalung said:

The CN right of way which goes through Montreal Nord only has 1 track along much of its length. It might not be that wide, but there is certainly space for at least a second track, and perhaps even a third.

From the REM Cote-de-Liesse station (aka A40) to the A25, they would need to double/rebuild 15 viaducs, with costly expropriations alongside.  Not saying it is impossible, but definitely not easy nor cheap

[IluvMTL]

/R E P E A T -- Media invitation - REM de l'Est - Technical Briefing and Project Update/ Français

NEWS PROVIDED BY

CDPQ Infra Inc. 

Sep 02, 2021, 09:00 ET

Date: 

September 2, 2021

Time: 

12:45 p.m.

Address: 

Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec

Room B1.01

1000 Place Jean-Paul-Riopelle, Montréal, QC, H2Z 2B3

MONTRÉAL, Sept. 1, 2021 /CNW Telbec/ - CDPQ Infra invites media representatives to an update on the progress of the REM de l'Est project in the company of Jean-Marc Arbaud, President and CEO of CDPQ Infra, Harout Chitilian, Vice-President, Corporate Affairs, Development and Strategy, Christian Ducharme, Vice-President, Engineering, and various technical experts.

 Agenda:

•

12:45 p.m.:   

Arrival of media

•

1:00 p.m.:   

Beginning of press conference

(in person and virtual; see below)

•

2:30 p.m.:   

Question period

•

3:00 p.m.:   

End of conference

COVID-19 measures: 
To avoid gatherings and to comply with the physical distancing rules, only one camera and one photograph for all media will be allowed on site (camera pool).

The conference will be broadcast on the Digicast platform. To participate in this virtual press conference, you must first register using the contact information below to receive login instructions. If you wish to attend the conference in person, please let us know. 

A media kit containing a press release, a technical presentation, and two technical reports will be sent to media attending the conference. 

REGISTRATION IS REQUIRED 

SOURCE CDPQ Infra Inc.

For further information: Emmanuelle Rouillard-Moreau, Advisor, Communications and Media Relations, Cell: +1 438-881-1884, Email: erouillardmoreau@rem.info

Related Links

http://www.cdpqinfra.com/

[IluvMTL]

https://www.ledevoir.com/societe/629250/pour-votre-info-quoi-surveiller-aujourd-hui

Le REM de l’Est

Tunnel ou passerelles ? Peut-être en saurons-nous un peu plus cet après-midi. CDPQ Infra prévoit faire une « mise à jour sur le projet du REM de l’Est afin d’y présenter un statut d’avancement du projet ». Le p.-d.g. de l’organisme, Jean-Marc Arbaud, y sera, ainsi que plusieurs hauts dirigeants et experts techniques.

Le projet du REM de l’Est a fait couler beaucoup d’encre depuis quelques semaines, surtout son segment au centre-ville, prévu se faire sur des structures aériennes que plusieurs critiquent. De récents avis d’experts de ministères du gouvernement du Québec y voient un projet « peu esthétique » qui pourrait avoir un effet négatif sur la « convivialité » des rues avoisinantes et sur l’image touristique de Montréal.