They want to do that but they can’t due to the ban on building in the forest
They also got told they can’t build on the parking lot.
From what I’ve seen I think Roxboro and Sunnybrooke stations were the least finished last year, but you can already see some tiling inside and the catenary cables are up everywhere. In a few stations you see 4x8 instead of a glass panel, but that’s an easy fix I think. Honestly they all seem to me very well to be finish for the end of the year easily.
And as for parking I wouldn’t be surprise if the mall put ups a paid parking spots for people who take the REM. But not a free one like what the REM is doing where they own their parking.
Also there will be 500 parking spot at Des Sources apparently. So yeah the stations west of Des Sources will surely lack parking spots if nothing is done.
2 « J'aime »
Check the list of lobbyist at the city. I’m willing to bet that they’ve got a high paid lobbyist working on this. Given just how much that land is now worth, I would be highly surprised if they just take no for an answer over a ban on building on a parking lot. Heck, I would also be lobbying Québec if I was them and ask the province to create laws that would mandate densification near stations and impose a minimum requirement for zoning near stations.
As far as the forest goes, i don’t think it will remain as it is for long. With the REM station near, its likely going to attract the wrong type of attention which is going to force the city to do something. They are going to either let developers build, or turn it into a park.
4 « J'aime »
Eventhough it would be a smart use of ressources, I highly doubt this will happen. Pretty much everywhere in North America,malls next to transit stops strictly prohibit use of their parking to riders. They often agressively tow cars, like at the Norgate mall next to Cote Vertu metro, Tyson Corner mall in DC, St Laurent mall in Ottawa, etc.
As you say these stations are in well established neighbourhoods, with an established ridership from the DM train era (parkings were at capacity pre-covid), although further from the 40 corridor, thus why I kept them apart.
Their role might become a bit more local as the main commuting corridor along the 40 will be served by the new branch.
This is concerning if true, and will clearly negatively impact ridership. Apart of “ideological” reasons, there is no rationale to have 3000 spots at Brossard station which is way closer to downtown, but only a few along the WI branch. It is such a low hanging fruit wheras the branch is litteraly in a highway corridor and mostly in an industrial area.
It is not normal that Bois Franc which is in a denser area in the middle of a major urban transfromation will have more surface parking than Anse or Sources.
4 « J'aime »
They put parking at Brossard because
- They had a huge plot to fill, and the development project failed
- It allows the station to be a P+R allegedly aimed at users from far away south shore communities, that have easy access with the highway.
They didn’t put parking at l’anse because they didn’t own the land, and far away commuters from the west should not be incited to drive to the rem when the bridges are a bottleneck.
2 « J'aime »
Same goes for potential users living in Vaudreuil Soulanges far fetch communities.
I dont see why it is ok for a Chambly/Carignan resident to be able to drive to the REM at Brossard but not for a Hudson/St Lazare resident
With the land currently used for the 200 spots parking, they can easily build a stacked garage over it
Instead, they will still drive on the bridge and continue driving to points east (WI, VSL, Downtown). Exo 11 frequencies are just unacceptable for anyone needing the tiniest bit of flexibility.
It is a low hanging fruit to catch some of these drivers right on the side of the highway with a good P+R.
The REM frequency and travel speed is ultra competitive with driving on that
segment, all is left to do is to give access to it to all potential riders.
We paid 7 billions for this thing, lets fill it up instead of nit picking on parking vs bus access. Its not a question of OR but a question of AND.
There should be one good regional P&R on the western branch, ideally the one with the less development potential.
If at least a good central Bus/HOV bus lane was build in the middle of the 40 between the 30 and Morgan, with improved direct access to the Vaudreuil terminal and some smaller parking lots along the 40 and the 20 west of Vaudreuil with frequent all-day service to the REM we could discuss about foregoing parking at the REM itself.
We all know that the best we will get is a bus to Vaudreuil every 30 to 60 min, up to 7:30 PM which is not attractive enough to a lot of people. Miss your bus and your commute just doubled in time.
And all the bridge will have is that “shoulder use” which is nothing.
2 « J'aime »
“We” didn’t. The public paid 2.5 billions, 2.7 with Hydro-Québec’s share. And the Caisse, who paid the other 5.3, didn’t feel like dropping 90 million per thousand spots in a parking garage that would bring them minimal revenue.[1]
Transit money is limited, dropping 9000 dolalrs for one (1) additional daily rider, is simply not it. Regardless of who’s paying, those 9000 bucks could have been better invested in actual transit that brings more riders to the station, and does it by further reducing vehicle miles travelled.
It’s always a question of AND in a world with limited budgets.
[1] Costs on par with Bloomington GO parking station
9 « J'aime »
Brossard essentially just replaced the chevrier parking lot & the spaces removed at Panama. The west island branch didn’t have a large P&R to replace therefore no reason to build a big P&R when they didn’t have to.
The caisse is a state corporation, the same way as HQ, 100% owned by the Quebec government and it manages public pension plans, so “We” paid the 7 billions, just a part from our right pocket and a part from our left pocket.
Yes, but there is a limit, specifically when trying to serve low density off-island suburbs with the level of service which would actually get people out ot their car. They struggle to fill up a mini bus a couple of times a day, yet no one would really ditch their car for a service like this:
The cost of effectively serving further fetched areas with frequent transit, when taking in consideration capital cost of the vehicules, fuel, (often unionized and expensive labor) would be astronomical.
That being said, I dont support subsidizing parking at the REM, it should be provided at cost, so the option is there, without dipping into the transit budget itself.
If we take your 90k capital cost per spot, amortized on a 40 year lifespan, thats 2250$/spot/year of depreciation expense.
For maintenance, we can account 500 USD/year, which is the higher end of the range according to the below site. Thats 675$ CAD.
Extending the life of your parking garage with preventative maintenance.
This brings us to an annual cost of 2925$, if we charge only on 250 work days per year, thats 11.70$ per day.
Add in some management fees, and call it a 13-15$ deal, which a lot of people will happily pay instead of relying on low frequency busses or having to drive all the way in the city.
It is in the same ballpark than the Indigo lot at Brossard (10.39$/day) which gets filled every day.
Not always, the paid parking never get full as some people will continue to drive downtown when they don’t find free parking.
Then they must have free or under market rate spot at their destination or are carpooling.
If you consider an occasional user, parking at brossard (10.39$) + a 2 trip AB fare (9$) thats 19.39$
A 10 hour parking at PVM is 26$, plus gas.
Anyways, it is not a bad practice to have a bit of excess spaces in such parkings so there is a spot available for people coming later.
2 « J'aime »
Il y a quand même une bonne différence entre Saint-Lazare et Chambly. À vol d’oiseau, le premier est à 45km du centre-ville tandis que le deuxième est à 23km. La distance séparant Saint-Lazare du centre-ville est environ la même que celle qui sépare Saint-Césaire et Saint-Denis-sur-Richelieu du centre-ville. C’est proche aussi de la distance qui sépare Saint-Hyacinthe du centre-ville.
En fait, Chambly est aussi proche du REM que Vaudreuil.
Je ne pense pas qu’on s’attende à construire du stationnement pour des personnes vivant auss loin.
1 « J'aime »
If you are curious how successful a bunch of parking around train stations are, you can look at the silver line in Washington DC. They spent millions of dollars on multilevel parking lots around stations, and they’re almost completely empty. The ridership is lower than they were expecting too, and the line follows a highway median similar to the REM West Island. It economically does not make sense to built multi-storey parking lots for public transit, and makes more sense to expand bus networks instead
8 « J'aime »
And Anse a l’orme portion should be open by the end of 2024???.. I know that the work can be speed up, but Deux montagne portion seems pretty much ready compared to Anse a l’orme portion (Des Sources, Fairview, Kirkland and Anse). I begin to wonder if a delay will be announced soon. Or if Deux montagnes till Bois Franc, will be open before all the other stations. Till Bois Franc, due to the delay under Mont-Royal. And here is the link to what we were talking before, a fuGGinG extension of the métro to Bois Franc. But it is a redundant story I know…
5 « J'aime »
Parking i feel like it’s an easy job, just paving and it can probably be done in a week or so.
You need to also remember that DM used to be a rail way so it being at level makes it much easier.
West Island branch being all elevated must complicate stuff
2 « J'aime »
It’s been mentioned many times on the forum, opening will be in mid-2025 approximately. It just hasn’t been announced yet.
2 « J'aime »
I am talking about an official push mentioned by CPDQi, I know that we already talked about it in the forum.