Comments on: The Caisse is Rushing ahead with REM,Ignoring concerns

By: Jack 47

Jack 47 — Sat, 16 Jul 2016 22:41:29 +0000

Given the speed at which the Caisse is proceeding, political intervention would need to be forceful and rapid. Given the (very few) transit-user associations around Montreal, which one is the most effective?

Can automation place further limits on directional capacity? What makes them think that a fully automated system can outdo a system that has trains with human operators? Take a close look at Montreal’s Metro phenomenal PPHD capacity, and the benefit of having human train operators to “rush” a metro train’s progress along the line. The train operator can decide to close the doors without undue delay, and furthermore can switch from automatic to manual driving mode to extract every bit of acceleration and braking from a high-performance train with rubber tires. If you are in doubt, go on YouTube to compare the station dwell times of trains on the Paris automated Metro lines and that of Montreal’s Metro.

I would recommend something off-the-shelf and heavily winterized: A winterized version of the Washington DC Metro or San Francisco BART (both a blend of metro and regional rail) running under 25 kv catenary.

By: ant6n

ant6n — Sun, 10 Jul 2016 19:51:12 +0000

@Peter
It is an actual project, the caisse is following some mandate by the government, the general contract specifying how the government and caissse work together are public, the specific mandate that they got for this particular project is not, at least not in writing. The only thing we have is some PR event with the government saying ‘Champlain, West Island, airport’.

That the Caisse is now doing infrastructure projects in Canada is partly specified by a law passed in the Quebec National Assembly, bill 38: http://www2.publicationsduquebec.gouv.qc.ca/dynamicSearch/telecharge.php?type=5&file=2015C17A.PDF

It says that the ministry of transport will expropriate land ‘on behalf of the Caisse’. Right now there are just land reserves, meaning people can’t sell the land. Presumably these lands will be expropriated later. Some of it looks like land that will be expropriated just so the Caisse can sell it later for more expensive, after the project has finished. Some of this land is on or very close to suppossedly protected agricultural land.

The Caisse is saying they’re not doing this for the real estate development, that they’re just selling development rights. I’m not really convinced.

By: Peter L

Peter L — Sun, 10 Jul 2016 17:00:31 +0000

I saved your initial REM article in a browser tab, well, pretty much since you published it. Finally read it today and skimmed the subsequent posts. Your realization that this is some sort of fantasy mirrors the same growing realization that took place on another Montreal transit forum in which I participate.

Here’s what I wrote back on 4/25:

“If I were closer to the city, I’d maybe have a better idea of the
point of this whole operation. It’s like they needed a project and
decided to take the constant talk of replacing the XBL on the
Champlain with LRT, the constant talk of an airport train, and the
occasional talk about some sort of train to some point on the West
Island and strung them together as one big project.

“If you accept the premise that this isn’t a real project (like I do!)
then what is it for? Is it for the CDPQ brochure when they go out
looking for business? “Look, we’re experienced – see this plan we’re
doing for Montreal?””

I can’t help but think that this “project” was drawn up for some other reason, maybe to have a “portfolio” of projects to show potential customers in other regions? I am especially excited to see that you *actually* did the math to point out that this is not only a fantasy, but if actually built as drawn (and it’s mostly just renderings) that it would be a *net negative* in terms of transit service provided.

The single most disturbing thing (aside from the hatred of the West Island displayed in some comments on some of the posts here!) is that they (CDPQ) are actually putting these “holds” on property along some of the proposed rights-of-way! Not having lived in Montreal in 30+ years and not being familiar with property rights (or lack thereof) in Canadian law, I was surprised to see what they were able to do (under the US Constitution, doing what they did would constitute a “taking” and require “just compensation” assuming they even had the legal standing to do it in the first place) but once I was past that, it dawned on me that at some level they are serious.

And that’s bad for transit in Montreal.

Keep fighting with facts.

By: Michael

Michael — Wed, 06 Jul 2016 03:47:05 +0000

It’s nice to see that you’ve come round to understanding the major flaws present within this billion dollar project. It’s an irresponsible use of public money and I honestly believe that the fixation on light rail and comparison with the SkyTrain is because SNC-Lavalin will be ultimately awarded the contract.

Regardless, here is my alternative to the plan… it involves investment in the metro, primarily and also cost effective use of existing tracks around Montreal.

http://imgur.com/a/MtxCW

By: kclo3

kclo3 — Wed, 06 Jul 2016 01:43:20 +0000

Where has AMT and VIA pushback been on cutting off Mt. Royal tunnel access? I can’t believe they would be blown aside this easily after AMT spent years trying to purchase it from CN. If they can wring a concession of shared access from CDPQ, then CDPQ will be forced to look at mainline-compatible equipment, which in turn will hopefully lead them to adhere to current loading gauges, high platforms, and retention of AC electrification. The usage or potential for high-capacity regional rail stock or even MR-90 compatibility is then assured. The crux of the issue here is a huge gadgetbahn syndrome from people like Andlauer, who see the automated Lyon/Lille light metros as unquestionably importable onto a legacy rail system, which is pretty ironic considering these were directly inspired by the Montreal Metro. And then they decide to spend the least amount of effort designing West Island/Brossard spurs w/o public consultation and negotiation, letting this cutting-edge technology perform lowly park-and-ride duties guaranteed to cause huge mid-day ridership imbalances. It’s incredibly frustrating that no one at CDPQ can simply recognize the RER as the true solution, provided everyone works hard to play nice with CP/CN. But at this stage, hard political maneuvering is probably what’s needed now to get the Caisse off its high horse.