Montréal Transit Developments

[jje1000]

I personally don't know why people are fussing so much.

Transit of all semantic forms are being built around Canada and even Toronto- we have light rail projects and GO RER underway, and the DRL is being worked on. That's decent overall progress in my books.

If Montreal's REM does well, great! We can put that into our best practices book and apply that to future projects. If it becomes a boondoggle, well we can put down as a case study.

 

[felix123]

The connection at Central looks like an improvement. It wasn't clear to me where the accessible path was though to Metro Bonaventure. Currently I don't think there was one (that I could find anyway lugging a suitcase recently ... despite the new elevators in the Metro station). Perhaps one will be able to go from the main concourse in Central, through the REM platforms and into Metro Bonaventure steps free?

McGill looks like it could have done with more planning. Comparing the work they are doing at Eglinton station to move the existing subway platforms to centre better with the new LRT platforms to make transfers easier ... the McGill transfer location looks just sloppy and rushed design. (Central to Bonaventure is always going to be difficult, with the combination of the elevated REM platforms in Place Bonaventure, the topography, and the very deep Metro station - but there's less excuse for it McGill. I must say though, I hadn't realized that the CN tracks run over the Green Line - which seems relatively shallow itself compared to many Metro stations.

Based on your adamant opinion in the face of a dissenting majority, I think the real point of this thread should be to figure out what exactly happened to you in Montreal that has left you so sore.
The REM is by any stretch a metro. Metropolitan Montreal also has a little over half the population of the GTA, but is on track to have a way more extensive rapid transit system, with better connectivity. Why don't we look at what we can learn from Montreal (and Vancouver) here in Toronto? Should Toronto be approaching pension funds to build the DRL?

 

[WislaHD]

Should Toronto be approaching pension funds to build the DRL?

Our transportation agencies aren't even smart enough to figure out to sell the air rights above the stations/lease the land for development.

They are good at building parking lots adjacent to stations however.

 

[nfitz]

80-meter high floor trains with two bogies per car Definitely not light rail, irrespective of what the media and government want to call it.

The number of bogies per car has nothing to do with capacity ... you might say that's bogus!

That's how it's being marketed.

Once again the trains are both wider and heavier than numerous trains operating on metro and subway networks internationally.

ROTFLMAO ... light rail has nothing to do with the weight of the vehicles.

Or the rails LOL!!

Based on your adamant opinion in the face of a dissenting majority,

My opinion is we should call the systems, what they are called locally. Ottawa calls it Light Rail, even though it's clearly intermediate. So we call it light rail. In the 1980s, Toronto and Vancouver called the exact same technology and vehicles "RT" and "Skytrain". So we call them that.

Montreal is consistently calling this new line Light Rail. So we call it light rail.

If they decide to brand it as "Red Elephant Manticore" we call it a Manticore. Perhaps that's why the old Metro map almost 60 years ago shows this line as Red ...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Line_(Montreal_Metro)

Montreal is a great city, and enjoyed living there, and still visit. Which is why I'm well aware that this line is being called Light Rail by people and by the media. After being promised significant upgrades on this line for over a half-century, they finally deserve this. It is a shame that so little transit wise has happened since I last lived there. There were so many Metro stations openings when I lived there, you figured that was normal.

 

[ssiguy2]

Montreal will have the largest Metro in the country. The REM is a Metro in every sense of the word...…...frequent, electric, grade separated urban transit. The vehicles used or technology have absolutely no bearing on whether a system is considered a Metro whether they are 4th rail, 3rd rail, monorail, ART, LRT, or even standard train gauge. The only other real qualification is that the system does not run on freight tracks. It can share track with other passenger services and can even use the same rail ROW but cannot share the same tracks.

Toronto could EASILY have the nation's largest Metro system if it would get a move on with electrification and would stop spending all it's time and money on parking garages and more on under/overpasses and getting rid of all grade interaction. RER could be a full Metro/subway in every sense of the word if Metrolinx got it's priorities right.

 

[nfitz]

Montreal will have the largest Metro in the country. The REM is a Metro in every sense of the word...

While all that may be true, I think you are forgetting how this debate started.

I simply referred to it as Light Rail, because that's how the media, government, and developers are referring to it. And I was told I must call it Light Metro because that's how you'd translate it from the French.

The discussion was about branding. And no one (developers, governments, media) is calling the line "Metro" in either language.

Call it what you want, I don't care. I simply objected to someone telling me I couldn't call it Light Rail even though that's how it's being branded by everyone involved with it.

The obsessive-compulsive reaction here is just unnecessary. Is there a forum somewhere where anytime anyone says "Light Railway" in discussing the DRL in London, stops and says one must call it Metro?

 

[Kyle Campbell]

I actually do get your point, but why bring it up in the first place? If we want to really talk branding the only Metro in Canada is Montreal, and the only LRT in Canada is Edmonton. Elsewhere we have skytrains, c-trains, o-trains, IONs, RTs and subways.

It's all tangential. We also seem to be conflating longest rail system with the best rail system, ignoring metro population size. You could make a case for Calgary being the best, as it has 56km for a metro of 1 million people, versus 79km for 2.5m in Vancouver, 69 km currently in Montreal for 3.5m, and 76km for 5 million in Toronto

 

[jje1000]

Toronto could EASILY have the nation's largest Metro system if it would get a move on with electrification and would stop spending all it's time and money on parking garages and more on under/overpasses and getting rid of all grade interaction. RER could be a full Metro/subway in every sense of the word if Metrolinx got it's priorities right.

Agreed on this, which is why RER is probably the project I'm hoping can stay on track and get underway as soon as possible- even a bit more so than DRL, which is still a ways off.

It doesn't matter how beautiful the stations are or how sleek the rolling stock is- if all the physical groundwork is achieved in transforming commuter rail into a semi-frequent rapid transit system (electrification, signalling, grade-separation), the next steps are going to be more incremental in improving things like frequency or harmonizing fares.

 

[nfitz]

I actually do get your point, but why bring it up in the first place?

Good question ... I simply said "The LRT is finally going ahead in Montreal and someone was all over me that it was called "light metro" not "light rail". And then someone else was insisting it should be called "metro" not "light metro".

Personally, I could argue that on a Toronto-based group we should be using Toronto English ... but that would be obsessive.

Surely we can all agree that it's okay to call a system how it's referred to locally - or else we'll be calling:

• Line 3 - the Scarborough Skytrain
• Vancouver Expo Line - the Expo subway
• Waterloo Ion - the Kitchener streetcar
• Ottawa Light Rail - the Ottawa Metro
• London DLR - the London Light Metro

 

[WislaHD]

Personally, I could argue that on a Toronto-based group we should be using Toronto English

Slippery slope there bud ?

 

[nfitz]

Slippery slope there bud ?

Touché

 

[ssiguy2]

The thread is about Montreal having the biggest Metro which it undoubtedly will and with Vancouver's SkyTrain extensions Toronto will be waaaay back in 3rd place. LRT can be Metro/subway just as easily as heavy rail, ART, or monorail can. Technology, vehicles, and tracks are completely irrelevant. Manilla's LRT, Vancouver's ART, Chongqing's monorail, London's 4th rail, and Tokyo catenary are all considered Metro/subway due to their grade separation while Edmonton's LRT isn't even though a good chunk is underground because it's not 100% grade separated.

As long as the service is frequent, urban, and doesn't share freight tracks there is one very easy way to determine if a system is a subway/Metro...………………...if the system, hypothetically, can be automated or not.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Good question ... I simply said "The LRT is finally going ahead in Montreal and someone was all over me that it was called "light metro" not "light rail". And then someone else was insisting it should be called "metro" not "light metro".

Personally, I could argue that on a Toronto-based group we should be using Toronto English ... but that would be obsessive.

Surely we can all agree that it's okay to call a system how it's referred to locally - or else we'll be calling:

• Line 3 - the Scarborough Skytrain
• Vancouver Expo Line - the Expo subway
• Waterloo Ion - the Kitchener streetcar
• Ottawa Light Rail - the Ottawa Metro
• London DLR - the London Light Metro

The oldest subway tunnel in North America was in Boston (Tremont Street subway), dating from 1897. From link. It used streetcars.

Missing from our list of rapid transit lines for Toronto is the streetcar subway up Bay Street between Queens Quay and Union Station.

 

[BurlOak]

As long as the service is frequent, urban, and doesn't share freight tracks there is one very easy way to determine if a system is a subway/Metro...………………...if the system, hypothetically, can be automated or not.

With autonymous vehicles, even running in mixed traffic can be automated in the near future.

Here's my table.

 

[nfitz]

The thread is about Montreal having the biggest Metro which it undoubtedly will and with Vancouver's SkyTrain extensions Toronto will be waaaay back in 3rd place.

Not sure if it's a competition or not. Not sure Vancouver is going to overtake Toronto anytime soon - the next extension - which I'm not even sure there's shovels in the ground yet, is the 5.5 km six-station Millenium line extension to Arbutus - which they are scheduling for 2025. That still puts Vancouver at less than 60 stations. Toronto is already at 75 stations, even if nothing else opens before then! Meanwhile there's 25-km of rapid transit lines already under construction.

As long as the service is frequent, urban, and doesn't share freight tracks there is one very easy way to determine if a system is a subway/Metro...

That seems rather an arbitrary definition. So the Waterloo LRT isn't a metro, with it's sharing with freight. And I thought they were still going to be able to move freight over some of the West Island REM track - perhaps that's changed!

Convenient that definition manages to preclude the UP Express - which provides as much frequent service than some of these proposed new "metro" lines. Probably precludes some lines that have always been considered "Metro", such as some of the suburban London Underground services.