montréal REM de l'Est

[Né entre les rapides]

il y a 56 minutes, Cataclaw a dit :

For the dense neighbourhoods SameGuy identified, in the short term:

• reduce car dependence and increase active transportation by implementing traffic calming, building the cycling network, widening sidewalks, etc.
• improve bus service (better shelters, greater frequency, and new BRT lines)

Long term:

• to reduce car dependence we will eventually need to build new rapid transit for these neighbourhoods (LRT/metro)

For the medium density neighbourhoods (e.g. Longueuil), it's essentially the same formula.

To ultimately increase active and collective transportation mode-share, we need to provide the infrastructure for it. We're joking about yellow line extensions, but we actually do need that to happen eventually. Large capital projects take time and our plate is already full, so for now we need to improve existing bus service, densify, and make areas more livable and walkable.

If we had guts, we would toll highways, implement congestion pricing, raise the gas tax, and accelerate this process. Unfortunately, It's politically unpopular to do so. Most people are unaware of urban planning concepts like induced demand and negative externalities which are often counter-intuitive.

Thanks for your elaborate response.  Makes sense. I like that you are willing and able to distinguish between short term actions and others which will necessarily take time (and money) to implement.  

For my part, I would also put a lot of emphasis on measures aiming to minimize the need for long distance commuting using motorized transportation (whether private or public).  This is obviously a long term proposition.  Amending zoning regulations would help (allowing more places for businesses in hitherto strictly residential neighborhoods); set local service centers;  only centralize operations that have that sort of requirements.  Large privately-owned businesses in the service sector have the opportuniy to do likewise.  (Manufacturing and other large scale industrial operations do not  have the same degree of flexibility, but they now account for a comparatively small share of total employment).

Measures involving the "punishment" of private car drivers will only make sense once efficient public transit alternatives are in place.  Presently, most commuting to and from downtown is (already) effected by public transit; what is lacking are alternatives for reaching other destinations.  This is true in the off-island suburbs, but also, to a considerable extent, within the Island of Montreal.  There is also a need to take note of the large (and increasing) number of Montreal's residents who  commute daily to a suburban place of work and/or shopping. 

Given the size of the Montreal urban area, the daily use of private cars will never be eliminated.  Notice that this is even the case in denser urban areas having  more advanced public transit systems.  So we do not simply need more public transit, we also need better urban planning.     

[mk.ndrsn]

Il y a 23 heures, amos404 a dit :

La perte de la correspondance avec le Métro Honorée Beaugrand doit être compensé par un accès direct (1 train sur deux) au métro L'assomption sans avoir à faire de correspondance à Viau lorsque l'on arrive de Pointe-aux-tremble.

 

[mk.ndrsn]

Il y a 23 heures, ymenard a dit :

Plus on analyse le REM B, plus on se demande la densification se fera où exactement autour des stations?  C'est souvent 99% construit et très low-density.  On est loin des possibilité de TOD à Brossard et Ville St-Laurent ici.

Upzoning, SPP, just like we need to do around STM stations that are surrounded by low density development.

[Cataclaw]

2 hours ago, mk.ndrsn said:

Upzoning, SPP, just like we need to do around STM stations that are surrounded by low density development.

Yes absolutely.

I would also point out that we don't just build rapid transit to develop and densify. We also do it to provide a public good, increase social equity, reduce car dependence, etc. The social, economic and environmental benefits of transit alone make it "worth it". The development is a bonus.

As I recall, transit spending in North America yields an average ROI of $5 for every $1 spent. (Interestingly, this ROI is actually negative for new highway infrastructure.)

[SameGuy]

3 hours ago, mk.ndrsn said:

 

Like French mainline trains, sens inverse.

2 hours ago, Cataclaw said:

I would also point out that we don't just build rapid transit to develop and densify. We also do it to provide a public good, increase social equity, reduce car dependence, etc. The social, economic and environmental benefits of transit alone make it "worth it". The development is a bonus.

This is the ideal; REM misses the target by light years.

[Né entre les rapides]

Il y a 6 heures, SameGuy a dit :

This is the ideal; REM misses the target by light years.

That was your reply to a view expressed by @Cataclaw.    I am sure you can elaborate a little more. 

[TurboLed]

Le 2022-01-25 à 21:39, Julpyz a dit :

Updated my map, It look indeed cleaner without the weird Honoré-Beaugrand alignment. I took a guess for the new station location.

Really nice. But the Brossard-Nuns Island part should be corrected On the map it looks like Nun's island is closer to downtown than it is from Verdun...

Modifié 27 janvier 2022 par TurboLed

[mk.ndrsn]

Le 2022-01-25 à 21:39, Julpyz a dit :

Updated my map, It look indeed cleaner without the weird Honoré-Beaugrand alignment. I took a guess for the new station location.

🤩

autres modifs:

• Rolland a été substituée il y a un an pour une station à l'angle Henri-Bourassa/Lacordaire
• Honoré-Mercier a été substituée il y a un an pour une station à l'angle Couture/Lacordaire
• Selon le point de presse de CDPQ cette semaine, la station qui remplacerait celle à Contrecœur serait proche de l'angle Pierre-Bernard/Dubuisson  

[SameGuy]

14 hours ago, Né entre les rapides said:

That was your reply to a view expressed by @Cataclaw.    I am sure you can elaborate a little more. 

I think I’ve shared the succinct summary of my opinion on this forum a few too many times, to the point where even I no longer find my clever one-liner cute nor funny.

[Né entre les rapides]

il y a une heure, SameGuy a dit :

I think I’ve shared the succinct summary of my opinion on this forum a few too many times, to the point where even I no longer find my clever one-liner cute nor funny.

I must agree that you shared your opinion several times.  Unfortunately, this has not prevented some contrary opinions (like the one you quoted in your previous post) to subsequently emerge.  I sympathize with you (but you are not the only one), and I wonder if there is an alternative to the endless repetition of views expressed with a complete disregard for other opinions which had been supported by solid arguments.  Having the last word in a discussion should not be left to whoever post the last comment regardless of its quality or lack thereof.  It reminds me so much of family meetings or parties with friends or colleagues, where everyone talks and nobody listens -- a behaviour which is strongly disapproved in my (cultural) community, but one that I needed to adapt to in order to survive in the broader society.

What's happening on this forum is not unique, it is  extremely common.  Yet, MTLURB remains one the best, in terms of members duly taking into account the views previously expressed by others.  Can we become even better!