News   Dec 23, 2025
Happy Holidays From the UrbanToronto Team!
 743     3 
News   Dec 23, 2025
UrbanToronto Year-End Poll: Vote on the Best Buildings of 2025, presented by Diverso Energy
 1.8K     1 
News   Dec 23, 2025
City Council December, 2025 Zoning Settlements: Large-Scale Housing, City-Wide Policy
 2.6K     1 

Montreal Metro Laval Extension

"Waiting 12 minutes for the train in the evenings kinda sucks too. "

That still beats MARTA and BART where you have to wait 20 minutes at night to travel 60km out to some far-flung parking lot by an Applebees. The construction for those extensions also cost, like, $5 billion.

Those newer US systems make the proposed Spadina extension to Vaughan look like a Downtown Relief line that was built under Queen street with cut and cover stations every 500 meters.
 
The less frequent trains in Montreal are really noticeable compared to Toronto.

Downtown coverage is far superior in Montreal though, although I wouldn't put all up to superiour planning. There are plenty of examples of stations going past property owned by Drapeau's cronies or provincial cronies so sometimes the lines have weird stops and routes. But overall I like the overlapping downtown lines and the urban neighbourhood coverage.

NDG gets the shaft though..there should be a line out that way.
 
The less frequent trains in Montreal are really noticeable compared to Toronto.
Click to expand...

Yes, but it's the horrendous frequencies of the surface routes that's really frustrating.

What's superior about using the STM is the friendlier drivers, the civilised queuing up of riders, the affordable monthly passes and the superior downtown coverage of the Metro. In general though, I think the service sucks and I find it a pain to use.

The other day, exhausted after 36h at work and shivering in the -30C wind, I waited 45 minutes and no bus ever showed. A few frustrated folks flagged down cabs... I decided to walk to the nearest Metro. I find myself cursing the STM almost daily for one reason or another. This never happened in the 9 years I used the TTC.
 
That still beats MARTA and BART where you have to wait 20 minutes at night to travel 60km out to some far-flung parking lot by an Applebees. The construction for those extensions also cost, like, $5 billion.
Click to expand...

Incidentially, I am hoping to try both of these systems out in April. I have a 2 hour 40 minute layover in ATL on my way to LAX, where I am then driving up Highway 1 to SF. I am tempted to do a quick ride on MARTA as far as Five Points or Peachtree Center (one reason is to knock another Metro off my list). I understand that BART is more regional rail than subway, or a subway/commuter hybrid, so 20 minute frequencies make a bit more sense in this regard.

I am very fustrated by many US rail transit frequencies (especially weekends), where a train every 10 minutes is the high end of the typical. Even Chicago has smaller trains at STM-like service levels, and it's almost three times Montreal's size.
 
^Sean,

As a transit fan, I think you'll be in for a treat in LA. AS Dan and I were discussing at the Gladstone, LA is quickly becoming the most transit-progressive city in North America. This is either an indictment of how bad public transit planning is on our continent, or a sign that LA is really making an effort these days. It's a little of both, really.

You might have a chance to ride the MetroRapid system; their VIVA-like express bus system that plies the main arterials within the "relatively urban" part of the city, which is roughly bounded by downtown, Hollywood, Century City and the Santa Monica freeway. A system like this would be ideal for the outer-416, especially along roads like Finch, Jane, etc. LA is designed very similar to Toronto north of Eglinton, with major east-west and north-south roads spaced every mile or so, with a high density that is not entirely urban or suburban. Avenue Road, Bathurst near Lawrence, Eglinton through the old city of York and Jane through Weston are very LA-like in feel. As a result, the two cities could probably stand to learn the most from each other's transit experience rather than from a mid-sized city in Europe or that town in Brazil.

BART and MARTA remain, however, very expensive white elephants. In MARTA's case, the system is forced by law to devote 50% of its budget to operations and 50% to capital expenditures, meaning that the system keeps expanding out to exurban nowhere while providing thinner levels of service.
 
MARTA doesn't even serve some of the Atlanta area's biggest counties, but perhaps they're so sprawlly, it couldn't serve them even if they approved of further expansions.
 
For my two day stay in LA, I'm staying by the airport. One day will be by transit - to check out the Red Line. I might take the Green Line to the Blue Line to Downtown (check out Disney Hall, Bradbury Building, Union Station) then go to Hollywood via the Red Line. The other day would be very much a driving tour as I slowly make my way towards the coast and north. I am attracted to seeing places like Mulholland Drive, the vast freeway system, maybe even Normandie and Florence. So I may end up on one of those red Rapid lines on the bus on the first day, as I will try not to repeat my journey on the same route.

That kind of service is exacly what I would advocate for the City of Toronto to fill in the gaps in the subway and take the pressure off the existing surface system. I posted this before.

All the orange routes would be my "express routes" that would run at least 15 hours a day (7AM-10PM) on the main corridors. It is overlaid on a map of the current TTC network.

TTCPhase1small.jpg
 
LA transit is great if you're near a rapid transit line. However, my grandparents (who live in Monterey park) only have 30 minute rush hour frequency at a bus stop thats over half a mile away.
 
BART is a very interesting system...not really an urban subway in any sense, but also much more developed than your average suburban rail network. It actually serves its purpose--connecting a large number of neighboring cities of about equal size to each other--pretty well. Where it fails totally is as an urban transit system within the city of SF, which in my opinion has totally inadequate public transport. A bunch of trolley busses and a streetcar system about 1/3 as expansive or effective as TO's is all you get aside from the 3 or 4 BART stops. The Central Subway should help, but SF still has a long way to go.

LA is another interesting case, because there you have an example of a city that is aggressively trying to re-orient itself toward transit. Within the corridors served, rail in LA is really quite good--the problem is what you do once the line ends and you're without a car in a city totally designed for it. The other unfortunate thing is that the network is so downtown-centric, since DT LA, as any Angeleno will tell you, is pretty far from being the centre of things. I'm very excited about the pending extension to Mid-Wilshire and, hopefully, beachside Santa Monica, which will go a long way to making MetroRail a real network. Wilshire goes through areas of very high density (Westwood, etc) and also sort of Bloor West-like areas, so I think there will be a decent market for transit.
 
Re LA, might the key behind the success of whatever transit-wise re-orientation be evolving demographics? That is, "Latinization" overtaking the Hollywood/Beach Boys-ian postwar-caucasian-suburban-dream impulse...
 
I laugh though when they claim the Metro offers frequent service though. Though I have not yet rode MARTA!
 
I find the five minute waittimes long. I couldn't imagine 12 or twenty minute waittimes!
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top