Under studied transit expansions for Greater Montreal and ARTM new signage / Expansions étudiées pour le Grand Montréal et nouvelle signalisation de l'ARTM

[Enalung]

26 minutes ago, Julpyz said:

@SameGuy So.. should I call this The Big Deblockage?

There's some parts of that map that I just don't understand. For exemple, the U that the tram does to reach Kirkland, or the straight line from Cedar Park to Fairview Pointe Claire. The Fairview Pointe-Claire station is located to the west of the shopping center. 

I'm also not a fan at all of the Laval line and I have to admit that I'm struggling quite a bit with that myself. Laval is a messy city built away from the 440, so I really question the use of putting a line on that axis.

You also place 2 separate metro lines in between the green and the blue line. Do you seriously think that there is actually a sufficient need to support 2 lines? 

Some ideas are more interesting to me, such as cutting straight through Cavendish. I propose a different solution to serve that area, but that's a valid option.

Gare de l'Aiguillage, exactly where is that located? I'm really curious there. You are obviously forgoing Lucien L'Allier, which to be rather honest, I have an iffy relation with when drawing my own maps. I'm guessing it's Côte Saint-Luc.

Gare Lachine, I would close that one outright. If you are adding a line going all the way to the Airport, that stop no longer makes any sense at all.

On the next map I'm going to publish, I'll be giving more space to trains, or what some cities call metro rail. I think that like many others, I may have been too focused on the REM and forgotten that the train does have a role to play for long distances. I think that there is room to expand the train network, assuming that CP and CN are willing to work with us. I'm really tired of hearing that we can't get it done because CP or CN won't give us more space on their tracks. To say it all, I think that a law might be waranted. Theses are compagnies which benefited enormously from land grants and governmental subsidies to build the initial network. They can say what they want, but at the end of the day, they own much of their success to past governments.

[Julpyz]

Quote

There's some parts of that map that I just don't understand. For exemple, the U that the tram does to reach Kirkland

I make the Tram go on St-Charles which is why it need to go quite a bit west and back in order to meet Kirkland station.

Quote

the straight line from Cedar Park to Fairview Pointe Claire. The Fairview Pointe-Claire station is located to the west of the shopping center. 

I'm not sure I follow you here. Unless google maps is wrong, CF Fairview is clearly to the west of Pointe Claire station. The Tram run on St-Jean for the most part and Cedar park is the closest station to that street.

Quote

I'm also not a fan at all of the Laval line and I have to admit that I'm struggling quite a bit with that myself. Laval is a messy city built away from the 440, so I really question the use of putting a line on that axis.

Fair enough. To be frank I don't know much about Laval, my mom always told me to avoid it. So I just kept what was currently envisioned by the CAQ.

Quote

You also place 2 separate metro lines in between the green and the blue line. Do you seriously think that there is actually a sufficient need to support 2 lines?

I'm definitely no expert, but at the same time let's not forget that Le Plateau is the densest borough in all of Canada and that Rosemont is currently second in Montreal (behind le Plateau). Also, the lines cover Mont-Royal, Masson and Rosemont street which are hugely popular, lots of jobs and lots of houses near. TBH Right now this is a crime that this borough doesn't have a good rapid transit solution. Oh, and I don't have the numbers in front of me, but If I recall correctly, Rosemont and Plateau are the borough whit the least car per habitant.

Quote

Gare de l'Aiguillage, exactly where is that located? I'm really curious there. You are obviously forgoing Lucien L'Allier, which to be rather honest, I have an iffy relation with when drawing my own maps. I'm guessing it's Côte Saint-Luc.

Well, It obviously doesn't exist yet, but it would be located in the empty area near Rue de l'Aiguillage in Lachine. I thought that since the exo trains are so well connected to the network, It would remove the need to make the trains go all the way to Lucien l'allier station. At this point It would be faster to exit at any of the connections and either go with REM or Metro to wherever you want to go. Most of the lines are connected to either two metro lines or two REM or a mix of both so it offer plenty of possibilities. 

Quote

Gare Lachine, I would close that one outright. If you are adding a line going all the way to the Airport, that stop no longer makes any sense at all

Fair point

Quote

On the next map I'm going to publish, I'll be giving more space to trains, or what some cities call metro rail. I think that like many others, I may have been too focused on the REM and forgotten that the train does have a role to play for long distances. I think that there is room to expand the train network, assuming that CP and CN are willing to work with us. I'm really tired of hearing that we can't get it done because CP or CN won't give us more space on their tracks. To say it all, I think that a law might be waranted. Theses are compagnies which benefited enormously from land grants and governmental subsidies to build the initial network. They can say what they want, but at the end of the day, they own much of their success to past governments.

Can't wait to see what you come up with @Enalung

Modifié 7 janvier 2021 par Julpyz

[Enalung]

37 minutes ago, Julpyz said:

I make the Tram go on St-Charles which is why it need to go quite a bit west and back in order to meet Kirkland station.

I figured as much. What I'm wondering here is which streets you use to go back to Kirkland.

37 minutes ago, Julpyz said:

I'm not sure I follow you here. Unless google maps is wrong, CF Fairview is clearly to the west of Pointe Claire station. The Tram run on St-Jean for the most part and Cedar park is the closest station to that street.

Since the initial plans were made, this is where it has been moved to.

37 minutes ago, Julpyz said:

Fair enough. To be frank I don't know much about Laval, my mom always told me to avoid it. So I just kept what was currently envisioned by the CAQ.

I really don't like the CAQ plans for Laval, and the fact is that we haven't heard about that one in a while. They might be rethinking those plans. I've kind of decided to stick to A-15 all the way to Sainte-Thérèse and leave it at that. I think it would be far more useful then any line along the A-640.

37 minutes ago, Julpyz said:

I'm definitely no expert, but at the same time let's not forget that Le Plateau is the densest borough in all of Canada and that Rosemont is currently second in Montreal (behind le Plateau). Also, the lines cover Mont-Royal, Masson and Rosemont street which are hugely popular, lots of jobs and lots of houses near. TBH Right now this is a crime that this borough doesn't have a good rapid transit solution. Oh, and I don't have the numbers in front of me, but If I recall correctly, Rosemont and Plateau are the borough whit the least car per habitant.

They do deserve a line. That much I agree with. My ideas on the subject are to use the CP line that loops through the neighborhood. Given my own ideas, and the initial restrictions I gave myself, it's what makes the most sense. I do think that the pink line is another valid option, but the CAQ clearly isn't on board with that idea.

Saint-Martin has been mentioned a few times in official documents produced by Laval. I really didn't like Saint Martin either as an axis , but I'm starting to warm up to that idea slowly. I think that the reason that it's been mentioned at all is that there's a lot of empty land that can be developed on Saint Martin and it's certainly a much better axis then the A-640. It could be built without digging an expensive underground tunnel and could have a spur going to the hospital, so it has it's merits.

With that said, I do think that the solution for Laval is tramways. De la Concorde - Notre-Dame is one axis that is almost a sure bet. The rest can probably continue to to be served by busses until Laval actually starts to properly unify as a single municipality instead of 14 distinct municipalities.

37 minutes ago, Julpyz said:

Well, It obviously doesn't exist yet, but it would be located in the empty area near Rue de l'Aiguillage in Lachine. I thought that since the exo trains are so well connected to the network, It would remove the need to make the trains go all the way to Lucien l'allier station. At this point It would be faster to exit at any of the connections and either go with REM or Metro to wherever you want to go. Most of the lines are connected to either two metro lines or two REM or a mix of both so it offer plenty of possibilities.

Realistically, I think it still does need to go to Lucien L'Allier. The fact is that transfers have an impact on the choice of mode of transport. As much as possible, you want users to be dropped off near their final destination. Lucien L'Allier is far from ideal given that it's a dead end and that there's absolutely no feasible way to create a run through track, but it's still a valid location. 

37 minutes ago, Julpyz said:

Can't wait to see what you come up with @Enalung

Thanks. I'm still working on adding some more ideas to my map and removing others. I'll publish it on my own thread in the next few days. You can kind of get a clue of what it is I'm working on if you take a look at the Montreal Spaghetti of Ideas map I posted in my thread. It's got pretty much every idea I ever worked on, including those I'm working on right now. My map is essentially a copy of that map where I just delete everything  I don't need. It's faster to work by substracting then by adding.

[SameGuy]

2 hours ago, Julpyz said:

@SameGuy So.. should I call this The Big Deblockage?

For clarity: I love this! I wish we discovered diamonds under our city and had $200 B to spend on transit and social projects!

[Enalung]

6 minutes ago, SameGuy said:

For clarity: I love this! I wish we discovered diamonds under our city and had $200 B to spend on transit and social projects!

Assuming that this document is still valid, the CAQ is literally planning to invest 130 Billions in infrastructure over the next decade and Montreal will definitely be getting the lion share of that. We could realistically see at least 2 or 3 of those projects being built.

https://www.tresor.gouv.qc.ca/fileadmin/PDF/budget_depenses/20-21/7-Quebec_Infrastructure_Plan.pdf

[SameGuy]

Not sure they can keep to it after the crisis, but it only shows $8.6 for “transportation” which includes roads. The biggest chunk ($72B) is for maintaining existing infrastructure

[Enalung]

13 minutes ago, SameGuy said:

Not sure they can keep to it after the crisis, but it only shows $8.6 for “transportation” which includes roads. The biggest chunk ($72B) is for maintaining existing infrastructure

Actually, I expect that not only will they keep to that, but the amount will grow significantly. The fact is that the economy is going to be in shambles. Forget the numbers reported by the markets, the fact is that the average person is suffering, and the average person is what ultimately drives the real economy. The government is going to have to prop up the economy, or accept a prolonged crisis. Remember what the US did after the 1929 crash. Roosevelt proposed and implemented the New Deal. There's been plenty of calls in the US and other countries to implement similar measures when we finally pull out of the current crisis. There is also widespread recognition that there is a major problem with the way that much of the wealth goes to the top and that there is a need to deal with that. What we've got is a perfect storm brewing up and it's going to shake things up quite a bit in the years to come.

[SameGuy]

Fingers crossed!

All I’m gonna say is I hope they start with fixing the problems we already have before announcing pre-election pork: for the metro, platform screen doors, upgrade and renovate all the decaying metro stations, needed extensions, more new rolling stock; for regional rail, acquire and build trackage, upgrade and double-up tracks, minimize incursion points by eliminating most level crossings, electrify lines, improve stations and the passenger experience, improve modal transfers; and finally, fix the bus system.

[Enalung]

2 minutes ago, SameGuy said:

Fingers crossed!

All I’m gonna say is I hope they start with fixing the problems we already have before announcing pre-election pork: for the metro, platform screen doors, upgrade and renovate all the decaying metro stations, needed extensions, more new rolling stock; for regional rail, acquire and build trackage, upgrade and double-up tracks, minimize incursion points by eliminating most level crossings, electrify lines, improve stations and the passenger experience, improve modal transfers; and finally, fix the bus system.

Upgrading the signaling system could also go a very long way. For exemple, we don't have any merchandise trains going through Gare Centrale, so we definitely could implement a fully automated signaling system along the viaduct. We obviously can't do that on CP and CN tracks, but even partial implementation would help increase how many trains we can get in and out every hour. Inter compatibility isn't a problem. The Brits have been there and done that. If anything, our transit agencies should stop looking inward and start talking to those running some of those internationally recognised metro systems.