I mean, what is so bad about CDPQ profiting from the development of transit? I'm a little confused as to why this needs to be an "us vs. them" conversation.
For a global perspective, I suggest you look at similar operating models in cities like Hong Kong, where the HK MTR Corporation has long been the owner, operator, and investor of HK's metro expansions, operating as an independent corporation listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange. HK MTR, as the transit operator, also happens to the largest real estate developer and investor in HK, where they finance a majority of their transit projects via property development and sales (yes, what a novel earth-shattering concept). What CDPQ is doing is really no different, as this has been a fairly common global standard a lot of cities around the world. The only news is that this is a new model in North America/Canada, and we are all somehow "shocked" how a private entity like CDPQ can quickly build 67 km of new rapid transit in such a short period of time.
I agree with your view on Quebec City tramway project - I think it's a great project that should be built asap. What exactly is the current status of that project?
There's nothing wrong with CDPQ profiting from development. That's how Madrid was able to fund it's transit system so successfully. What's problematic, in my view, is that for the sake of said development we're going to build without proper needs study, running along a metro line and not provide connections to other lines? There's a reason why transit takes long to get built.
As for Hong Kong, not considering the obvious differences in size and population density, it's way ahead of anything in North America when it comes to farebox recovery. They charge by distance, which is not something we do here. Let's not forget also that they have the highest square footage prices in the world, which probably helps when we speak of development charges.
According to Quebec City mayor Labeaume, the government proposed to cut half of the route, including the portion going through Limoilou (a dense neighbourhood north of downtown) and cutting service to the area where the depot was to be built. They also told the city that they wanted to better integrate the tramway project with their Third link project (a freeway tunnel accross the Saint Lawrence river to Lévis). The mayor had signed an NDA about that but considered the government to be in bad faith and went public with this. According to the media, the government seems to be purposely stalling the project because too much money is to be spent on downtown areas (where the line is supposed to be in a tunnel) compared to suburban Quebec City.
I think we should all try to remain a little more open-minded and creative with our transit funding solutions, as there are a lot of global precedents for what the CDPQ is trying to do in Montreal, similar to HKMTR's rail+property funding model. Also, I'm not going to blindly defend the CDPQ as some of their decisions on the REM-B are questionable. However, I do commend them on the new transit investment and operating model they have introduced. Is it perfect? No. Does it need improvements? Yes. Does it get the job done? Maybe, in some areas. Are we getting newly built rapid transit in Montreal at an unprecedented pace? Yes.
As I said, there is no problem with involving private investors in the development of infrastructure. Pointing out what I think are flaws in the model does not mean that I'm against everything CDPQ. There is an issue with social acceptability on this project, especially downtown, and I do think it's a bad idea to build the line elevated. That's especially true after the CDPQi CEO warned of collapsing buildings and metro lines if they dared considering building underground. REM B has merits, but the optics are that this project is being shoved down our throat without much consideration for anything but CDPQ profits and the government's electoral targets.
Well ok, let's take a look at these proposals you have suggested:
> Extending the orange line to Bois-Francs (and connect with the REM A)
Ok, but this is something completely unrelated. The point of REM B is to help redevelop Montreal East and to provide better transit access to Montreal North. Yes this extension should happen, but it has nothing to do with REM B.
> building the René-Lévesque/Notre-Dame line as light rail instead of a fully automated light subway,
And how is this an improvement? No seriously, how is a light rail that is prone to delays due to accidents, that gets stuck behind red lights, will have an overall far slower speed, and far worse headways a better use of the money than a light metro. You seem to have a disdain for the caisse building transit because its transit for the sake of pushing development, but Light Rail is the exact same thing, except worse at being actual transit. If you look at the GTA, the primary purpose of lines such as Finch West, Hurontario, and the York Region Rapidways is to first and foremost push development, and secondary to that is to relieve local bus routes. The Eglinton Line being an LRT was a massive mistake and repeating that in Montreal would be foolish. LRT does have its place, but that place isn't to act as a downtowner line. If you look at cities outside of North America, light rail/trams are only used in 2 situations. 1) To act as a city center transport route. These are tram lines that are built downtown with the purpose of getting people from one highrise or dense center to another section. This works really well with trams because trips are typically short enough that the slow speed of trams aren't a huge issue. 2) As feeder routes to other metro/rail lines. There is a reason why you almost never see Portland/LA style LRT systems outside of North America because Light Rail is horrible at crosstown transit, and automated light metros do that job while at a slightly higher price, far FAR better than trams. The Eglinton Line was a mistake, do not push for another Eglinton Line.
As for your remaining points, see my point about the Orange Line. Should happen, but has nothing to do with the money going to REM B.
For your first and third point. It is relevant because there is a finite amount of money that can be spent on capital projects related to transit in the greater Montreal area, all under the control of our provincial government, which means that if they give 5 billion for REM B, they won't spend that on other projects.
As for your second point. You're right. Maybe a light rail line from Radisson to Pointe-aux-Trembles using a disused railroad right of way with little red lights and car traffic would be a better idea. As has been proposed since the 70s. Heck, you could even extend it north to Anjou station and it's just the same as the two outer branches of REM B!
I might sound cynical, sorry about that. If I can point out positives about REM B, it will serve 2 hospitals and provide some rapid transit to Montréal-Nord, which is where the needs are highest!
