Enlever 2 voies du Centre sur l’autoroute Ville-Marie et arrêter le REM au palais des congrès. Pourquoi se casser la tête pour le faire déboucher à PVM ou la Gare Centrale?
Vous me direz qu’on va manquer la connectivité pour le REM de l’Ouest et que le palais des Congrès n’est pas assez central.
On pourrait transférer facilement vers la ligne verte ou orange à partir de ce point. Le seul désavantage serait qu’on retrancherait une faible portion de l’autoroute qui est en tranchée en faveur d’un transport en commun. On ne défigurerait pas trop les rues adjacentes, on élimine les coûteuses excavations souterraines puisque la tranchée existe déjà et tout le monde aurait accès au CV. En bonus, une station en plein milieu du futur quartier de radio-canada/molson et située plus loin de la ligne verte que si elle était située sur RL.
Ensuite, si on veut favoriser le développement dans l’Est, je ferais une boucle complète entre les 2 branchés nord et est avec quelques stations intermédiaires.
Oui, presque exactement comme le REM-A entre Portal Heights et DM. Des sous passages et des viaducs. Un couple de passages à niveau moins importants éliminés.
I’ve been saying for quite a while that I have yet to see any figures that demonstrate an absolute need for a direct line all the way to the centre of downtown from the East End. If they can show me that so many people from St-Leo or PAT absolutely need to get to Place Ville Marie that it’s worth an extra few billion dollars, then I will sit down and listen. But until then, they are proposing a $10 billion elevated railway with the maximum capacity of a tramway — that doesn’t have any direct interchanges with Metro, exo or VIA! It truly doesn’t make sense. Build a modem tramway at ground level with a few viaducts or trenches to get rid of incursion points, and have those few hundred people an hour that need to go further west into downtown transfer at CdM or Berri.
Je serais bien intéressé à voir les plans de cettre structure d’aération, celle-là et celle-là. Il y a clairement un accès direct à au moins un des deux tunnels à ces endroits, les terrains sont propriété du MTQ et assez grands pour y faire un édicule, et tout ça est définitivement très bien situé.
Si on prend en considération la suggestion de faire passer ça au centre du tunnel, avec une station à Radio-Canada, une au CHUM/Palais des congrès et une à une de ces structures (avec la possibilité après ça de sortir à Guy/Lucien-L’Allier sans entrave), ça me semble un projet pas mal intéressant.
The Caisse/provincial government dream is to create so much business activity on Notre-Dame that thousands of people will need the REM to get in and out of what amounts to another Silicon Valley.
You seem to think the tramway is the best solution for René-Lévesque/Notre-Dame. But by believing so, it’s almost like if we can forget the public transportation demand from Montréal-Nord and the surroundings. So, shall we abandon “Mayor Plante’s dream” to only focus on a Downtown/P-A-T tramway link? It’s probably a good idea, but I don’t think the city would give much interest about any other project further on.
And what about the orange line saturation? Did we forget about that too? That was the good thing about the REM de l’Est tunnel along Lacordaire; it would be a relief to this overcapacity from Berri to Henri-Bourassa stations.
My final idea: make one REM line Downtown/Montréal-Nord, give it a 90-seconds frequency and forget this “14 km” P-A-T antenna for good, whether it’s a subway or a tramway. And don’t worry about how many people will take the REM from Mtl-North at this point. There is plenty of land around ready for construction and they are far more valuable than the contaminated zones from Montréal-Est.
No I agree with you. IMO Mtl-Nord is one of a small handful of seriously-under-served, densely-populated areas in the region, along with Vieux-Rosemont and an array of enclaves west of Décarie and down to the Sud-Ouest/LaSalle/Lachine. Because we’re talking “alternatives” here, I’m still questioning why the REM-B proposal on the table is an “alternative” to prior proposals… other than the often-discussed real estate speculation by the Caisse. I say a tram would adequately serve the Eastern alignment, but that doesn’t mean I think it should be built to the exclusion of any other transit lines elsewhere. The best alignment that serves the most people while also relieving the eastern leg of the Orange line is still the Pink line proposal, but because it would serve social needs of the city instead of the bottom-line needs of a financial institution, it will likely never be built. In its absence, I think a Sud-Ouest LRT and an Angus/Iberville line of some sort would still improve service to a huge part of the population.
Edit: To clarify: I just don’t think the numbers support such a huge investment for the PAT leg as they are proposing right now. A modern tram (LRT) could be built to the east end for a fraction of the REM’s cost, and the bulk of the province’s now-saved investment in REM-B’s PAT branch could be used for better transit where it’s more useful — including a better proposal for RPP/Mtl-N than REM-B.
Lachine (and what’s around it) has its demand for newer public transportation, but I don’t think it is as great as Mtl-North. No bridges, St-Louis Lake is there at large, so south shore is not as predominant as the north shore next to Rivière-Des-Prairies, if it’s only for Mercier Bridge, Châteauguay and Saint-Constant.
And yes, west of Décarie is badly served by the STM. A line like the 105 Sherbrooke, which is full of people and still doesn’t have articulated buses, deserves a much better transit, probably a tramway or an extended blue line of two or three stations going to Montreal-West.
I understand your point about the tram to P-A-T. It is a way better idea than an elevated rail system.
The issue seems to be at the other end of the line, at Elmhurst.
This line went a long way though. When I was living in NDG there were no bus lanes, I lived next to Loyola, sometimes it took 40 minutes just to get from Vendôme to Cavendish.
LOL I spent a good chunk of my teens and 20s in NDG (Westhill/Sherbrooke and Belgrave/Sherbrooke) and Westmount (near City Hall) and I agree! I can’t imagine what it’s like now with bigger, better buses and bus lanes.
You’re right about the traveling time and even with bus lanes, it is still slow. I used to live in NDG 5 to 10 years ago and for all the times I had to take the 105 line, I was saying to myself that I would be better walking. Strangely, express line 420 worked great. But that 105 had to get almost 10 people at EVERY stop. A good thing would be to remove one out of two bus stops on this line. They are too close IMO.
Well, line 51 on Fielding has articulated buses at least, but that was it. The 104 Cavendish is still garbage. and I used to take the 102 Somerled when I lived on Walkley, which was more in time with the schedule, avoiding the 105 nightmare.
Revisiting this idea of using the rail tracks from Notre-Dame street to Angus/D’Iberville: it could be a good thing because it is well located. However in that case, CDPQi would need to acquire those tracks, just like they did with the Tunnel Mont-Royal and the Deux-Montagnes line. The REM de l’Est, in its original format, doesn’t buy anything from railroad companies in order to develop, which is a strong factor.
Dealing with railroad companies for transforming a rail track into a full-time public transportation line takes years of meetings, especially in Montreal. Discussions for the Tunnel Mont-Royal took more than 10 years to finalize the contract.
Il me semble avoir lu que le problème est plutôt que le garage de la STM d’où partent les bus de la 105 n’est pas équipé pour l’entretien de bus articulés
C’est le CT LaSalle et oui, quand on regarde les lignes du coin (NDG, Mtl-Ouest, Lachine, LaSalle) il y a très peu d’articulés voir pas du tout donc c’est logique.
Peut-être que pour la 105, il y a la problématique des virages aux extrémités aussi comme l’avance @Xa1992.
