News   Jul 19, 2019
 1K     0 
News   Jul 19, 2019
 960     0 
News   Jul 19, 2019
 1.7K     2 

Montreal to have the largest Subway system in Canada?

SFO-YYZ

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 21, 2016
Messages
69
Reaction score
60
I think one of the posters said it best - the fact that we are even having this conversation indicates some fundamental problems with transit planning in TO, in that there is too much emphasis on "planning" and repeatedly changing those plans by iterative policy makers to the point where we now have an embarrassing rapid transit coverage in the Toronto city proper compared with other global metros on a similar calibre. When visitors from Europe or Asia come to visit me in TO and look at the TTC map, their first impression has always: "so Toronto only has 3 subway lines?" My defense has always been, "but look at the cluster of streetcar lines south of Bloor, and don't forget all-day GO trains that go to Oshawa... and oh yes look at the new PRESTO gates aren't they beautiful" No matter how they spin it - TTC or Metrolinx - this is kind of embarrassing for a supposedly world-class city and the premier metropolis in Canada, a city that prides in phrases like "Toronto vs. everyone else" and "centre of the universe".

If we want to call ourselves "centre of the universe", let's actually act like one.

Back to REM - with the official opening of the new Champlain Bridge set for June 17, the installation of the central corridor for REM trains has also reached completion:

189806
 

nfitz

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 10, 2007
Messages
23,182
Reaction score
3,312
Location
Toronto
I think one of the posters said it best - the fact that we are even having this conversation indicates some fundamental problems with transit planning in TO ...
Not sure how this isn't different in most cities than TO. The Second Avenue subway in NYC started planning in 1919, and initially started construction in 1972 before being suspended from 1975 to 2007, finally opening the first 3 stations (only 3 km!) in in 2017. The second phase will add 2 more kilometres and 3 stations and they hope to have it opened in before 2030 ... the bulk of the line, and 10 more stations into downtown are so far in the future that there's no dates.

London started planning the Jubilee line seriously in the 1960s (after decades of earlier planning), finally completing it in 1999. They started looking at Crossrail in the 1940s, and got serious in the 1970s, and it might finally open in 2020. Crossrail 2 started studies in 1970, with the assumption that it would be built as a tube line after the Jubilee line ... it won't open until at least the 2030s if they don't delay it again.

This thread - about the 2009 announcement of the Monteal Blue Line, Orange Line, and Yelllow line extensions surely is more of the same. Two of those were reannouncements of extension that had been discussed since the 1970s, and had even appeared on Metro maps in trains in the mid-1980s. Still nothing has been built. Meanwhile the REM is finally progressing after plans for the central /Deux Montagnes section since the early 1960s, and about 2000 for the piece from Central to Brossard.

Toronto isn't in a special place ... yes it's a problem. Yes, politics is a lot of it. But it's hardly unique to Toronto. The grass isn't greener everywhere else.
 

CityStay

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 1, 2019
Messages
59
Reaction score
76
Jeez guys, will you give nfitz a break? An alarm sounds every time someone posts here - let the guy get some sleep!

I could wallpaper my entire house with seemingly bi-annual Toronto transit plans. They come and go. A grandiose scheme is announced then quickly forgotten. A pretty map is published and, if lucky, a truncated portion of one of the proposed lines may be built (usually the most useless bit, never the DRL) and then the next scheme is hatched. This Ford thing is still just scribbles on a stack of napkins. Not getting my hopes up.

At any rate, the fact that a city of 500 km/sq, 2.1 million population has a system of roughly similar size to a city of 630 km/sq, 2.9 million population tells you all you need to know about the state of affairs in Toronto.

nfitz in 5...4...3...2...1...
 

nfitz

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 10, 2007
Messages
23,182
Reaction score
3,312
Location
Toronto
I could wallpaper my entire house with seemingly bi-annual Toronto transit plans. They come and go. A grandiose scheme is announced then quickly forgotten.
And how is that different than other cities? This thread is about Montreal's 2009 "fake-news" announcement about 20 km of Metro expansions that have yet to progress one inch. And you use this thread to complain about Toronto?
 

p_xavier

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 17, 2018
Messages
114
Reaction score
102
Location
Alexandria, ON
Digging into the numbers - you list 150 buses per hour, plus "dozens of Exo departures per hour. Let's call it 200 buses an hour. About 50 people per bus - about 10,000 riders an hour at peak. With 24 trains per hour and a design capacity of 600 per train, that's a capacity of 14,400 an hour (and 24,000 an hour with the ultimate capacity at every 90 seconds).

With those numbers, there should be space to board at Nun's Island ... though no seats. But I don't think anyone gets seats on most lines 2 stops before the main downtown station!

Wow, I don't think I'd realized just how much the bus service to the south shore had grown. What's going to become of that bus terminal near Bonaventure after this opens?

One concern I see is the 24,000 ultimate capacity with the 76-metre trains. Compare to a heavy rail subway - the TR trains here are 138-metres long with an 1,100 capacity - however the platforms can handle a 152-metre long train - which if you scale the capacity, is about 1,200 a train - exactly double the REM trains in both length and capacity. So with the ultimate every 90-second frequency, the ultimate capacity if 48,000 an hour.

Have they designed the underground REM stations to allow them to extend the platforms? I'd be concerned that they may be creating a bottle-neck, particularly through the Mount-Royal tunnel, if they want to keep adding more spurs into the service.
I totally disagree about the use of rapid transit in the last posts and I won't continue arguing on the subject. The Deux-Montagnes line would have been rapid transit...

REM's maximum design capacity is 780. https://rem.info/en/news/rem-seating-and-capacity

An engineering friend on the projet told me that underground stations were indeed built with 100m platforms for futureproofing.

The Bonaventure bus terminal was already at over capacity, buses are parked in the street. I guess these buses (from other cities like Bromont, St-Jean) will use continue to use the terminal as they are not Under obligation to go to a REM station for transfers unlike othe South Shore ciites.

On the reflection of Toronto actually gettings things built, most cities in Canada have the same governance problems. (see LRT/Skytrain debates in Vancouver, metro extensions in Montréal) The only reason Montreal is getting new transit build quickly is because it's the CPDQi that runs the show exclusively. Hence why the government is even giving new projects directly to the CDPQi and not the ARTM, which is its official mandate.
 

nfitz

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 10, 2007
Messages
23,182
Reaction score
3,312
Location
Toronto
That's crush capacity, not capacity used for planning service. You can't design a very frequent service based on crush capacity, because the delay with everyone trying to squeeze in and out of the trains extends the dwell time, so you can't achieve 90 second frequency. To obtain the ultimate capacity at 90-second frequencies, you have to use the 600 number. You can observe a case study on this at the Line 1 Bloor platform every day!

780 will work fine at 5 minute intervals, and probably (barely) at 2.5 minute intervals. But travel times will be quicker if they can get it to 600 maximum rather than 780.

An engineering friend on the projet told me that underground stations were indeed built with 100m platforms for futurproofing.
That's good to hear. Aren't the current platforms 76.2 metres (250 feet) for 4 cars? Is it possible that they were futureproofed for 114.3 metres (for 6 cars)?

The only reason Montreal is getting new transit build quickly is because it's the CPDQi that runs the show exclusively. Hence why the government is even giving new projects directly to the CDPQi and not the ARTM, which is its official mandate.
Yes, that's an interesting experiment. Similar in some ways of how 407 got built so fast, with the 20-year construction timeframe under the NDP collapsing to 2-3 (more) years once it was privatized. Though in the long-term it's lead to astronomical tolls of over 56 ¢/km at rush hour - compared to 30 ¢/km on the extension owned and built by the government. It will be interesting to see how people feel about this line, and the fares, 20 years from now. Hopefully the contract is better written than the one the conservatives did when they sold the 407!
 
Last edited:

nfitz

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 10, 2007
Messages
23,182
Reaction score
3,312
Location
Toronto
As an aside, it's interesting to compare the reported dimensions, capacity, and seating of the REM rolling stock to the newest Toronto subway TR cars.

The REM rolling stock uses 2.95-metre wide cars that are 19.05 metres long. They will run in 4-car consists (two pairs) giving a 76.2-metre long train. Each train has 128 seats.

The TTC TR trains use 3.12-metre wide cars that are 23.19 metres long. They run in either 4-car consists (Line 4) giving a 92.8-metre long train with 256 seats or a 6-car consist (Line 1) giving a 139.1-metre long train with 392 seats.

For capacity let's compare the shorter 4-car Line 4 TTC trains.

With a peak capacity of 600, the REM has 2.67 riders/m² compared to 2.57 riders/m² on the 740-passenger TTC train. However with 128 seats compared to 256 seats, only 21% are seated on the REM compared to 35% on the TTC.

With a crush capacity of 780, the REM has 3.47 riders/m² compared to 3.28 riders/m² on the 950-passenger TTC train¹.

The additional capacity per square metre of the REM trains seems reasonable, as they got a lot less seats per square metre (0.57/m² on the REM compared to 0.87/m² on the TTC TR).

Here's the REM floor plan for a 2-car pair:
189948

¹ Based on the Bombardier numbers of 165 standing in a A (cab) car, and 182 standing in a B/C car, and the TTC numbers of 60 seats in a cab car and 68 in the other cars. This would give a crush capacity of 1450 for a Line 1 train. Actual capacity might be slightly higher as Bombardier reports 64 seats in cab car, while TTC reports 60; presumably the number of standees is higher with 4 less seats).
 
Last edited:

begratto

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 19, 2008
Messages
56
Reaction score
40
It will be interesting to see how people feel about this line, and the fares, 20 years from now. Hopefully the contract is better written than the one the conservatives did when they sold the 407!
Fares are determined by the ARTM, not the CDPQ infra / REM.

The Quebec government will pick up the tab for the difference between what's collected with the fares and the expected return on investment.
 
Last edited:

nfitz

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 10, 2007
Messages
23,182
Reaction score
3,312
Location
Toronto
Fares are determined by the ARTM, not the CDPQ infra / REM.
Ontario thought they had the power to set 407 tolls - until they lost a series of court battles with the owner.

Though even with the power to set fares - isn't the key issue how much the government has to pay out for each rider? How that changes over time that will be interesting - and how much the government is willing to subsidize this. And what else comes with this ... does it forbid the STM for finally extending the Orange line to Poirier and Bois-Franc which they've been promising for 40 years? (which would be a very convenient interchange with the REM) (or Cartierville and into Laval, which was promised 10 years ago, starting this thread). What restrictions does it make on other upgrades into Dorval airport? (how there isn't a final station south of the airport at Dorval Circle I don't know - that would have been useful!)
 

begratto

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 19, 2008
Messages
56
Reaction score
40
(...) And what else comes with this ... does it forbid the STM for finally extending the Orange line to Poirier and Bois-Franc which they've been promising for 40 years? (which would be a very convenient interchange with the REM) (or Cartierville and into Laval, which was promised 10 years ago, starting this thread). What restrictions does it make on other upgrades into Dorval airport? (how there isn't a final station south of the airport at Dorval Circle I don't know - that would have been useful!)
No the agreement doesn't prevent the Orange line extension to Bois-Franc, for which, incidentally, the Quebec government has asked the ARTM to accelerate the studies.
 

nfitz

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 10, 2007
Messages
23,182
Reaction score
3,312
Location
Toronto
No the agreement doesn't prevent the Orange line extension to Bois-Franc, for which, incidentally, the Quebec government has asked the ARTM to accelerate the studies.
What's left to study after 40 years! :)

Hmm, other options include "completing Cavendish Boulevard and revising the "functionality" of Highways 15 and 40." I remember hoping that Cavendish would be completed soon when I was in high school, as it would have been convenient to get to Place Vertu - a significant shopping mall back then (haven't been there in decades ... I've no idea what it's like now). Amazing how much some things never change ...when did planning on that begin - the 1950s? At one point it was supposed to be open for Expo 1967!
 

begratto

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 19, 2008
Messages
56
Reaction score
40
What's left to study after 40 years! :)
They need to update the costs. And to assess the impacts of Bois-Franc being a transfer station with the REM. Good new is that the new minister responsible for the region of Montreal, Chantal Rouleau, is not the type to study things eternally. She seems the type that gets things done.

Hmm, other options include "completing Cavendish Boulevard and revising the "functionality" of Highways 15 and 40." I remember hoping that Cavendish would be completed soon when I was in high school, as it would have been convenient to get to Place Vertu - a significant shopping mall back then (haven't been there in decades ... I've no idea what it's like now). Amazing how much some things never change ...when did planning on that begin - the 1950s? At one point it was supposed to be open for Expo 1967!
Well, that's pretty much Côte-Saint-Luc's faults, they were opposed the extension of Cavendish for decades and essentially blocked it.

Only relatively recently did the CSL city council change its mind.
 

p_xavier

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 17, 2018
Messages
114
Reaction score
102
Location
Alexandria, ON
That's crush capacity, not capacity used for planning service. You can't design a very frequent service based on crush capacity, because the delay with everyone trying to squeeze in and out of the trains extends the dwell time, so you can't achieve 90 second frequency. To obtain the ultimate capacity at 90-second frequencies, you have to use the 600 number. You can observe a case study on this at the Line 1 Bloor platform every day!

780 will work fine at 5 minute intervals, and probably (barely) at 2.5 minute intervals. But travel times will be quicker if they can get it to 600 maximum rather than 780.

That's good to hear. Aren't the current platforms 76.2 metres (250 feet) for 4 cars? Is it possible that they were futureproofed for 114.3 metres (for 6 cars)?

Yes, that's an interesting experiment. Similar in some ways of how 407 got built so fast, with the 20-year construction timeframe under the NDP collapsing to 2-3 (more) years once it was privatized. Though in the long-term it's lead to astronomical tolls of over 56 ¢/km at rush hour - compared to 30 ¢/km on the extension owned and built by the government. It will be interesting to see how people feel about this line, and the fares, 20 years from now. Hopefully the contract is better written than the one the conservatives did when they sold the 407!
Yes, but the DT stations will be the ones overwhemingly used so it will be good to factor the dwell time but I'm pretty certain they did.

80m for 4 cars. 100m for 5 cars. There were some discussions with the CDPQi has to have 5-cars trains for a 80m platforms with a bit of overhang on each side. I'll try to find more info if the platforms are exactly 80m or 76.2m to fit the trains.

here's still some waste because the current trains will be in two pairs configuration instead of one long train. Basically it's the same as Vancouver where they have different types of configurations. The Mark III are boas and are more efficient in space.

As for the contract, the provincial government has kept a first-right-to purchase option.
 

CityStay

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 1, 2019
Messages
59
Reaction score
76
And how is that different than other cities? This thread is about Montreal's 2009 "fake-news" announcement about 20 km of Metro expansions that have yet to progress one inch. And you use this thread to complain about Toronto?
I'm not holding up any Canadian city as an example of great transit planning, that would be foolish, but Toronto is particularly chaotic.

I first got excited about transit when Network 2011 was announced in 1985 while I was a young Ryerson student. That resulted - 17 years later - in a grand total of 2 new stations and the next-to-useless Sheppard line.

You go on and on about Montreal's 2009 "fake news" announcement , have you been following events here?

In that same timeframe we've had:
Transit City
RoFo's subway plan
One City
Smart Track
and now, DoFo's "who knows WTF is happening" subway plan

Still don't know how many stations on the Scarborough line
Still don't know what "new technology" is being used on the Ontario Line
Still don't know when the DRL will get going
Presto still doesn't work properly
ATC is still be installed - on one line only
A laughable partial cell phone network has been installed in a few downtown tunnels available to Freedom customers only

At least Montreal has successfully tackled the last 3, a long time ago in 2 cases, and their REM is being built.

Nobody knows what the hell is going on here, as usual.
 

Top