SFO-YYZ
Active Member
Exactly. Just hire a Chinese architecture firm and the whole thing would be done in 3 months. Ugly? What ugly? It's a transit guide way, not the Louvre.
|
|
|
Montréal Transit Developments
- Thread starter Ansem
- Start date
robmausser
Senior Member
I agree except for Chinese labour practices. So it would take 6 months if you removed that variable. Still faster though.
asher__jo
Active Member
The main problem here is they chose René Lévesque. A minor street would not have nearly as much blowback.The two architecture firms hired by CDPQ to design the REM2 decided to quit, to dissociate themselves from the inevitable ugliness of the elevated section on R-L.
Des architectes du REM quittent le navire
Ils jugeaient inacceptables les structures aériennes au centre-ville de Montréal.www.journaldemontreal.com
KhalilHeron
Active Member
a minor street also wouldn't be as wide and would draw slightly lower ridership
begratto
New Member
There are basically only 4 east/west options in Montreal's city centre :
- René-Lévesque, the widest street
- Ste-Catherine, which is currently being rebuilt (similar to the Yonge st project), so it wouldn't be acceptable to reopen the street for a few more years.
- De Maisonneuve, but the métro's Green line runs under it
- Sherbrooke, another major east/west axis. This would could be an alternative
sacred
Active Member
Oh lord. Imagine walking under the elevated structure right in front of McGill. I don't think there's a good choice other than RL.
nfitz
Superstar
I always liked Gauchetierre to Beaudry and then down to Viger and the old Ville Marie alignment along Notre Dame myself.
Closing Gauchetierre to most traffic. But then someone went and built a hospital on it near St. Denis. Though elevated LRT THROUGH the hospital would be cool ... but unlikely.
Though simply using Viger (bonus points if it goes into Place Bonaventure) might work.
begratto
New Member
The Orange line already runs under Viger from Champ-de-Mars to Bonaventure
nfitz
Superstar
Which is why Levesque or Gauchetierre are really better options. Though I still think underground, west of Berri is the best option.
p_xavier
Active Member
The same urban "experts" want a NY high line equivalent downtown and scream at this project. I have no good things to say about these urbanists.
Xav
Active Member
The problem is also that they don't plan on providing good connections to any other transit line downtown (transferring at Berri involves walking 200m outside, there won't be a direct link to REM A at Robert-Bourassa), so it's basically a people mover for some east end residents (who already have the Green line), a few people in low density Saint-Léonard and one stop far from the most dense area of Northeast Montreal (Montréal-Nord).
There's also no plan (or possibility?) for an extension west of the Robert-Bourassa terminus, which involves headway issues as the trains will have to switch at the stub end.
The government basically drew a line on a map to link ridings where they have MNAs, didn't involve ARTM (which was created for the purpose of making transit apolitical), and are ready to scar downtown Montreal so the Caisse can make a profit.
But hey! It's one third of the price of the pink line! Take that Valérie Plante!
There's also no plan (or possibility?) for an extension west of the Robert-Bourassa terminus, which involves headway issues as the trains will have to switch at the stub end.
The government basically drew a line on a map to link ridings where they have MNAs, didn't involve ARTM (which was created for the purpose of making transit apolitical), and are ready to scar downtown Montreal so the Caisse can make a profit.
But hey! It's one third of the price of the pink line! Take that Valérie Plante!
ARG1
Senior Member
To be fair this isn't the end of the world. The transfer at Spadina is also 200m, and there are many systems in the world that frequently have transfers at that distance, London and Moscow come to mind. Since the line is elevated, there shouldn't be too many issues extending the REM B west if at all, and if Robert-Bourassa is connected to the Reso, the walk from Robert Bourassa to Gare Centrale would be quite similar to Bonaventure to Gare Centrale.
Also, Scar downtown? You can make elevated guideways downtown without scarring it, no problem. Reece Martin has an entire thread showcasing elevated rail in all sorts of different environments that don't "scar" the areas they're in:
Finally price, yes, one third of the price of the pink line is a big deal. The difference between an expensive and "better" line and a cheaper but "worse" line is that the latter can actually get built. You can have the greatest alignment for a transit line that you could ever imagine, but if after 10 years you can't find funding for it, your proposal is literally no different than doing nothing at all. Sure the pink line is arguably better than REM B, but REM B has people with money willing to pay for it, the Pink Line does not even after multiple provincial and federal governments. A worse line that gets built is better than a better line that won't.
SFO-YYZ
Active Member
2 things:
- No transit agency in the MTL area likes working with ARTM (or Exo, whatever they are called now since they keep having re-orgs every 2 years).
- Only Point-aux-Trembles and Bourget have CAQ MNAs. All other 5 electoral ridings where REM-B passes through in east Montreal are hardcore Quebec Solidaire or Liberal territories where QS or Liberals have traditionally won landslides. Let's not get into conspiracy theories - this isn't some "electoral grab" to serve on CAQ voters.
Agree with the problem of transfers downtown. For now, all we've seen are maps - no specific planning or design renderings have been released.
Lastly, let's all be realistic - the Pink Line was even more of a political gimmick, proposed by Plante's campaign team in 2017, and we all know it has very little chance of getting built.
Xav
Active Member
Getting off a train, going outside, walking 200m to reach the entrance of a metro station and walking another 100m inside to another train is not what I call an optimal transfer. Spadina sounds like a pleasant walk compared to that. Same goes for transferring at Robert-Bourassa (where at least you don't have to walk outside).
As for "scarring" downtown. You're right... it's a very subjective thing. My opinion is that I don't trust la Caisse at all on this.
And then there's price. While I don't believe the pink line is a viable option because it's too expensive, there are better ways to spend 10 billion than on REM B. Extending the orange line to Bois-Francs (and connect with the REM A), building the René-Lévesque/Notre-Dame line as light rail instead of a fully automated light subway, extending REM A to Dorval station, increasing the reach and frequency of bus networks all over Greater Montreal... All this would probably generate more ridership than REM B and would improve the overall network.
Xav
Active Member
You're right... I forgot the part where REM has to run where there is empty land so la Caisse can profit off of development! Seriously... CAQ is doing the same thing in Quebec City, where they're litterally sabotaging the tram network for political gain. It's not a conspiracy theory, it's what this government has been doing time and time again since they were elected.
I'm not against REM, but I think there are better ways to spend our money on infrastructure. I also think having it elevated along René-Lévesque will be a disaster.
Fortunately for those who approve of this project, the CAQ isn't going anywhere and this project will go forward. It will be interesting to see what happens after the municipal elections.