News   Jun 13, 2024
 847     1 
News   Jun 13, 2024
 589     0 
News   Jun 13, 2024
 295     0 

Montréal Transit Developments


Honestly I tend to agree though.... that catenary is ugly. Same with on Crosstown. Its not so much that it is catenary, its just that its horribly over engineered and busy.

The examples he shows that the swiss have done is actually proving the point that the REM cat is ugly. Its so much cleaner.

I realize its a telephoto lens for the REM shot, but it still is really ugly in my opinion, along with Crosstown in Toronto.
 
I'm surprised they still have booths at all.

If it's debit/credit only, why not just have people tap.
The STM wanted to remove the staff, and many were just going around giving tips to people. With the pandemic and empty stations, the staff stayed in their booths mostly for safety and security reasons. People were reassured that if there's something wrong, there's someone in the booth. It's about half the employees now compared to 2019 that work in booths.

Open payment project was cancelled by the ARTM in 2019, as with many other projects (platform doors for Orange and Blue lines etc.).
 
Actually, this opinion piece is more about showing the difference between what CDPQi promised and what it actually looks like in the contexte of them telling us that REM East elevated downtown will look great. It should be taken more as a warning than a criticism of catenary.

And even if it is in the middle of a highway, even I was surprised how ugly it is. The West Island part will look absolutely disastrous...
 
Actually, this opinion piece is more about showing the difference between what CDPQi promised and what it actually looks like in the contexte of them telling us that REM East elevated downtown will look great. It should be taken more as a warning than a criticism of catenary.

And even if it is in the middle of a highway, even I was surprised how ugly it is. The West Island part will look absolutely disastrous...

Same as Portland and Seattle...
 
Actually, this opinion piece is more about showing the difference between what CDPQi promised and what it actually looks like in the contexte of them telling us that REM East elevated downtown will look great. It should be taken more as a warning than a criticism of catenary.

And even if it is in the middle of a highway, even I was surprised how ugly it is. The West Island part will look absolutely disastrous...
And has the author ever even visited HoMa/Montréal-Est? Because lemme tell you, that borough's got 99 problems but an "unsightly" rapid transit line ain't one.
Bring on REM de l'Est.
 
... that borough's got 99 problems but an "unsightly" rapid transit line ain't one.
Bingo.

18-08-13-1417_xgaplus.jpg
 
And has the author ever even visited HoMa/Montréal-Est? Because lemme tell you, that borough's got 99 problems but an "unsightly" rapid transit line ain't one.
Bring on REM de l'Est.
You're missing the point. Just because Mercier-Est (which is where it's a bigger issue in the East, not in most of HoMa or Montréal-Est) isn't up to your standards of beauty doesn't mean we need to make the area uglier with a poorly integrated elevated railway line.
Also, the point the author is trying to make is that we can't do what we did with the first phase of REM, which is let CDPQi tell us how beautiful it's going to be and then let them build however they see fit without keeping them in check.

REM East will go through the eastern part of downtown and centre-sud as an elevated line... Is it too much to ask that it has nice looking structures? I live there and I certainly hope it won't look like what's being built along A-40. And with the experience of REM A, I fully support more government oversight on CDPQi regarding integration and architecture.

Most people by now support REM East (even me, although I was really against it at first), but it has to be done right.
 
Driving along the new line on the A-40, I thought it looked pretty good to me. Though if people are having issues with the centre of A-15 - then they'll never be happy.

REM East has the advantage that they don't have to close a heavily-used commuter line for years - which is the main complaint I hear about the REM.
 
Driving along the new line on the A-40, I thought it looked pretty good to me. Though if people are having issues with the centre of A-15 - then they'll never be happy.

REM East has the advantage that they don't have to close a heavily-used commuter line for years - which is the main complaint I hear about the REM.
It's A-10. And I'm pretty happy most of the time even though I find the A-10 part not very good looking.

From what I understand, constant criticism of REM East led directly to the announcement of parts of it going underground. Could it be that speaking up and criticizing various elements of a project doesn't mean that we're against everything, but rather that we care and want this to succeed as much as possible? Sorry that I'm not excited enough about the word rail to let CDPQi do whatever they want for the sake of money.

As for complaints... talk about confirmation bias... all I hear about is urban integration downtown :O
 
You're missing the point. Just because Mercier-Est (which is where it's a bigger issue in the East, not in most of HoMa or Montréal-Est) isn't up to your standards of beauty doesn't mean we need to make the area uglier with a poorly integrated elevated railway line.
Also, the point the author is trying to make is that we can't do what we did with the first phase of REM, which is let CDPQi tell us how beautiful it's going to be and then let them build however they see fit without keeping them in check.

REM East will go through the eastern part of downtown and centre-sud as an elevated line... Is it too much to ask that it has nice looking structures? I live there and I certainly hope it won't look like what's being built along A-40. And with the experience of REM A, I fully support more government oversight on CDPQi regarding integration and architecture.

Most people by now support REM East (even me, although I was really against it at first), but it has to be done right.
Sure, but then you're missing the other point: we would be better off having an ugly rapid-transit line sooner, rather than delaying it - possibly forever, as these things go - just to make it look nicer.
 

Back
Top