The Great Canadian Transit Thread

[GlassCity]

Has the Pink Line been talked about at all before? Or is this a brand new idea? It's kind of a funny routing in that it doesn't look like it follows any specific street.

It also looks like it would be missing a logical connection at Atwater station.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by SkahHigh

A metro line proposed by mayoral candidate Valerie Plante, serving Montreal-North, Rosemont, parts of The Plateau and, in a second phase, Lachine. Completion for 2028. REM is in light grey on the map. This also include the Orange line extension to the future Bois-Franc REM station and the Blue line extension to Anjou.



Interesting but seems like typical empty promises to me.

The north/eastern phase seems like a no-brainer and fulfills a similar role to the white line that was proposed decades ago. But is there really enough demand for a full metro line on the Lachine side?

[1overcosc]

AFAIK, the Pink Line has never been proposed before. There are a quite a few abandoned proposals for new metro lines in Montreal; the route that will now be the trunk of the REM was supposed to be the Red Line and there was supposed to be a White Line on Pie-IX.

The Pink Line is a good idea; it fills in a key urban service gap in the Metro network. Though it's probably an astronomically expensive proposal.

[SkahHigh]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

The north/eastern phase seems like a no-brainer and fulfills a similar role to the white line that was proposed decades ago. But is there really enough demand for a full metro line on the Lachine side?

There is definitely enough demand in Lachine/Lasalle. Density is very similar to the Saint-Laurent borough which has two metro stations and eventually 6 REM stations. It's a no-brainer.

Montreal-North is also a dense area that has a lot of demand but is far from the metro.

[gunnar777]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

AFAIK, the Pink Line has never been proposed before. There are a quite a few abandoned proposals for new metro lines in Montreal; the route that will now be the trunk of the REM was supposed to be the Red Line and there was supposed to be a White Line on Pie-IX.

The Pink Line is a good idea; it fills in a key urban service gap in the Metro network. Though it's probably an astronomically expensive proposal.

I personally love the plan, especially as it adds a little bit of métro to the part of Plateau that has to rely on buses in the winter (instead of bikes, which work really well in Plateau in the summer). According to Projet Montréal, the cost would be just under $6 billion.
This would be comprised of $700 million for the 5 km surface section, and $5.2 billion for the 16 km tunnelled section. Trains would be automated, and I would assume not rubber-tired, as this is would be the first métro in Montréal with a non-tunnelled section.

[gunnar777]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

Has the Pink Line been talked about at all before? Or is this a brand new idea? It's kind of a funny routing in that it doesn't look like it follows any specific street.

It also looks like it would be missing a logical connection at Atwater station.

Projet Montréal did announce their plans for the pink line a few months ago, but IIRC the proposed line intersected at McGill station, did not continue to the west, and was obviously not as detailed as the current plan.

[SkahHigh]

Originally Posted by gunnar777

I personally love the plan, especially as it adds a little bit of métro to the part of Plateau that has to rely on buses in the winter (instead of bikes, which work really well in Plateau in the summer). According to Projet Montréal, the cost would be just under $6 billion.
This would be comprised of $700 million for the 5 km surface section, and $5.2 billion for the 16 km tunnelled section. Trains would be automated, and I would assume not rubber-tired, as this is would be the first métro in Montréal with a non-tunnelled section.

^well technically the REM is a metro... it's not part of Le Métro but it's a complimentary and similar system.

[gunnar777]

Originally Posted by SkahHigh

^well technically the REM is a metro... it's not part of Le Métro but it's a complimentary and similar system.

Right, I totally agree with that - I suppose I was referring to the way in which the pink line is being marketed in contrast to the REM, though I really dislike when cities segregate their rapid rail systems in arbitrary ways, as it only widens the perceived divide between two functionally-similar lines and I believe it makes people less likely to take transit if a transfer between those two lines is required.

In Vancouver, there's SkyTrain and then there's Canada Line, even though they should both be referred to by the same name - who cares if the underlying technology is slightly different? Metro is metro. Same goes for the TTC Subway and RT. Maybe if it had all been called TTC metro, there wouldn't be such a negative sentiment about the RT in Scarborough right now.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by gunnar777

Right, I totally agree with that - I suppose I was referring to the way in which the pink line is being marketed in contrast to the REM, though I really dislike when cities segregate their rapid rail systems in arbitrary ways, as it only widens the perceived divide between two functionally-similar lines and I believe it makes people less likely to take transit if a transfer between those two lines is required.

In Vancouver, there's SkyTrain and then there's Canada Line, even though they should both be referred to by the same name - who cares if the underlying technology is slightly different? Metro is metro. Same goes for the TTC Subway and RT. Maybe if it had all been called TTC metro, there wouldn't be such a negative sentiment about the RT in Scarborough right now.

Though you do hear TransLink sometimes make a distinction between SkyTrain (Expo and Millennium Lines) and the Canada Line, they do refer to the overall "SkyTrain system" often which includes the Canada Line. Colloquially nobody makes a distinction.

I agree with your point though. Branding is important, and you need consistency in order to brand something.

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by gunnar777

Right, I totally agree with that - I suppose I was referring to the way in which the pink line is being marketed in contrast to the REM, though I really dislike when cities segregate their rapid rail systems in arbitrary ways, as it only widens the perceived divide between two functionally-similar lines and I believe it makes people less likely to take transit if a transfer between those two lines is required.

In Vancouver, there's SkyTrain and then there's Canada Line, even though they should both be referred to by the same name - who cares if the underlying technology is slightly different? Metro is metro. Same goes for the TTC Subway and RT. Maybe if it had all been called TTC metro, there wouldn't be such a negative sentiment about the RT in Scarborough right now.

Actually Projet Montréal explicitely stated that they want compatibility with the REM trains. This is more of a phase 2 of a REM than a new "metro" line.

Fares payment are already integrated in the greater Montréal region, fares themselves will be in 2019.

I always understood that the Canada line is part of Translink's SkyTrain system.

[losername]

I thought that many were opposed to calling a system part of the metro unless the whole line was grade separate (ie Calgary's system). Yet people here want to call the Eglington Crosstown metro because part of it is underground ( the portion built at grade will most likely cause delays as do the parts of downtown Calgary's system).

[caltrane74]

Originally Posted by losername

I thought that many were opposed to calling a system part of the metro unless the whole line was grade separate (ie Calgary's system). Yet people here want to call the Eglington Crosstown metro because 11 km of it is built underground ( the portion built at grade will most likely cause delays as do the parts of downtown Calgary's system).

Fixed for you!!

No one is calling it metro, but it will be included as a line on the Toronto System Map.

[SkahHigh]

Originally Posted by caltrane74

Fixed for you!!

No one is calling it metro, but it will be included as a line on the Toronto System Map.

Exactly, it's just the smart option to market it as part of the whole TTC rail system instead of the LRT moniker.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by caltrane74

Fixed for you!!

No one is calling it metro, but it will be included as a line on the Toronto System Map.

Originally Posted by SkahHigh

Exactly, it's just the smart option to market it as part of the whole TTC rail system instead of the LRT moniker.

Then they should do that to several of the other streetcar lines too.... They are grade separated except at intersections. Hell, even part of the lines that use Queens Quay are underground.

[1overcosc]

The streetcar lines are more like local buses with their frequent stops.

[Innsertnamehere]

The Queens Quay East Streetcar under its current plan would have roughly 3/4 of a kilometre underground. That isn't insignificant.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

The Queens Quay East Streetcar under its current plan would have roughly 3/4 of a kilometre underground. That isn't insignificant.

How much would be considered significant?

[MoreTrains]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

How much would be considered significant?

5/8 of a KM.

[J.OT13]

When it comes to system branding, Ottawa got it right. We've had the diesel O-Train line for 16 years and when we started planning the lrt line and subsequently awarded the contract, it seemed like it was going to be a third transit mode (bus Transitway, diesel O-Train and electric LRT). They decided to instead brand the two rail lines as the O-Train Trillium and Confederation Lines.

What worries me though is what will happen when the rails extend to Gatineau. Will it be like it is today, with Gatineau only displaying the STO map and Ottawa the OC Transpo map? Will we two separate systems; the OC Transpo O-Train and the STO Train-G?

[harls]

ST'O-Train, Sti!