The Great Canadian Transit Thread

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by begratto

You will probably not notice a lot of difference downtown, but there's been tons of new developments (and more to come) in the central boroughs like Plateau-Mont-Royal, Rosemont/La Petite-Patrie, le Sud-Ouest, Verdun, Mercier/Hochelaga-Maisonneuve. The bike path network is much more dense in these boroughs compared to downtown.

In the city centre, we're supposed to get new protected bike lanes on Peel and Guy, but only once they have completed the major roadworks on these two streets.

Montreal bike paths map
Yellow : on-street protected bike lane
Red : off-street protected bike path
Blue : Painted bike lane

There is the new Uber bike share that started recently. First city in Canada.

[SFUVancouver]

Happy to see the Montreal Blue line extension receive some federal funding, but I am curious why it will cost so much more than the Broadway subway extension in Vancouver. The distances are almost identical, the trainsets have nearly identical cross sections, and the number of new stations is the same too, but the Blue will cost well into the 4 billion-range while the Broadway subway has a $2.9B budget and is in the RFP stage right now.

[GreaterMontréal]

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

Happy to see the Montreal Blue line extension receive some federal funding, but I am curious why it will cost so much more than the Broadway subway extension in Vancouver. The distances are almost identical, the trainsets have nearly identical cross sections, and the number of new stations is the same too, but the Blue will cost well into the 4 billion-range while the Broadway subway has a $2.9B budget and is in the RFP stage right now.

• 5 new accessible métro stations and 5.8 kilometres of tunnel
• 2 bus terminals and 1 park-and-ride lot with 1,200 spaces
• 1 underground pedestrian tunnel providing a link to the future Pie-IX BRT
• Several operational infrastructures: 6 auxiliary structures housing operational equipment, 1 power station, 1 métro garage, 1 attachment centre for housing track maintenance vehicles and 1 service centre for infrastructure maintenance
• Estimated budget: $3.9B

the stations costs are probably not the same. Much more complex in Montréal.

[SFUVancouver]

Originally Posted by GreaterMontréal

• 5 new accessible métro stations and 5.8 kilometres of tunnel
• 2 bus terminals and 1 park-and-ride lot with 1,200 spaces
• 1 underground pedestrian tunnel providing a link to the future Pie-IX BRT
• Several operational infrastructures: 6 auxiliary structures housing operational equipment, 1 power station, 1 métro garage, 1 attachment centre for housing track maintenance vehicles and 1 service centre for infrastructure maintenance
• Estimated budget: $3.9B

the stations costs are probably not the same. Much more complex in Montréal.

Those are some good reasons. Thank you.

[SkahHigh]

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

Those are some good reasons. Thank you.

Longer platforms too (Montreal’s stations are for 9-car trainsets).

[SFUVancouver]

Originally Posted by SkahHigh

Longer platforms too (Montreal’s stations are for 9-car trainsets).

Another good point. Perhaps they're deeper, too?

[GreaterMontréal]

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

Another good point. Perhaps they're deeper, too?

The average depth of the subway tunnels is 20 to 25 meters, according to the STM. Sometimes a little more. "One of the reasons the metro goes down a little deeper is that once the first 30 to 40 meters pass, the rock is healthier in Montreal," says Pierre Thouin. On the surface, the rock may be more cracked because it was crushed by the hundreds of meters of ice that covered southern Quebec about 100,000 years ago.
http://mi.lapresse.ca/screens/deb545c0-81b3-4d13-9746-bcb8cc89ed7d__7C___0.html

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by GreaterMontréal

• 5 new accessible métro stations and 5.8 kilometres of tunnel
• 2 bus terminals and 1 park-and-ride lot with 1,200 spaces
• 1 underground pedestrian tunnel providing a link to the future Pie-IX BRT
• Several operational infrastructures: 6 auxiliary structures housing operational equipment, 1 power station, 1 métro garage, 1 attachment centre for housing track maintenance vehicles and 1 service centre for infrastructure maintenance
• Estimated budget: $3.9B

the stations costs are probably not the same. Much more complex in Montréal.

Here:

https://journalmetro.com/actualites/mont...-vers-anjou-la-stm-repond-aux-critiques/

Funding costs are added, not in other provinces,

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey

Here:

https://journalmetro.com/actualites/mont...-vers-anjou-la-stm-repond-aux-critiques/

Funding costs are added, not in other provinces,

Critics quoted in this article are coming up with highly flawed comparisons. Ottawa and Toronto are not and will not be building 65 km for $3.9B.

Ottawa will be spending a total of $6.86B for that 65 km, not including interests, 24 km of which will be a mostly a single track diesel choo-choo, 8 km, 5 stations of which is existing and set to be upgraded somewhat.

Toronto (or Queen's Park to be more accurate), assuming they are referring to Eglinton, is spending $5.3B for 19 km of rail, a mix of subway and classic lrt.

The price of Québec's Tramway is not much more than an estimate at this point. I predict the $2B guesstimate will end up being highly inaccurate. Gatineau has the same estimate for about the same length for a full surface tram, and I'm sure that project too will end up significantly more expensive.

The Orange Line extension is also flawed of course, for the reasons listed in the article.

A better comparison, maybe, would have been the REM, $6.3B for 67 km, by far the the best value for money in the country.

[J.OT13]

Some great shots from David Bellerive.

Pimisi













Bayview





https://twitter.com/dbellerive15/status/1147678432727359488

[Reecemartin]

Our latest video on Vancouvers need for more capacity into the downtown core: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgVLdK-TAME

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Critics quoted in this article are coming up with highly flawed comparisons. Ottawa and Toronto are not and will not be building 65 km for $3.9B.

Ottawa will be spending a total of $6.86B for that 65 km, not including interests, 24 km of which will be a mostly a single track diesel choo-choo, 8 km, 5 stations of which is existing and set to be upgraded somewhat.

Toronto (or Queen's Park to be more accurate), assuming they are referring to Eglinton, is spending $5.3B for 19 km of rail, a mix of subway and classic lrt.

The price of Québec's Tramway is not much more than an estimate at this point. I predict the $2B guesstimate will end up being highly inaccurate. Gatineau has the same estimate for about the same length for a full surface tram, and I'm sure that project too will end up significantly more expensive.

The Orange Line extension is also flawed of course, for the reasons listed in the article.

A better comparison, maybe, would have been the REM, $6.3B for 67 km, by far the the best value for money in the country.

Again, the REM doesn't get the financing costs that other projects get, it would be probably 2G$ additionnal if it's the government who would have tender the project. Plus a relatively free tunnel and a major bridge crossing helps.

[Dengler Avenue]

This is real. I’m on the ION, and just now, 2 cars cut the train off...

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey

Again, the REM doesn't get the financing costs that other projects get, it would be probably 2G$ additionnal if it's the government who would have tender the project. Plus a relatively free tunnel and a major bridge crossing helps.

Toronto's Eglinton has significant tunneling (yet also has a lot of basic surface running stretches as well), so it might not be a good comparison. Ottawa however, has a lot of parallels with the REM.

As I mentioned, the 24 km Trillium is a very simple, mostly single track diesel train. Basic stations, mostly surface so no expensive elevators or escalators required for those, 8 km / 5 stations are existing.

The vast majority of Confederation runs at surface level using an existing Bus Transitway and a highway median. Between the two phases, we have about 7 km of tunnel and 5 underground stations:

• the 2.5 km downtown section is a deep mined tunnel with 3 brand new, fairly elaborate stations;
• in the urban west end, a shallow 3 km cut-and-cover tunnel will be built, 1/3 under a re-aligned parkway and 2/3 under a former streetcar route now an urban linear park. The two stations included in this segment will be in open-air cuts;
• .5 km shallow cut-and-cover tunnel under a park;
• .5 km in an existing BRT tunnel and station;
• .5 km for a station that was roughed in 10 years ago.

In terms of elevated segments, we have maybe 1.5 kilometers and 2 stations.

When looking at the REM, the Mount Royal tunnel will be utilized saving costs, but the stations will be much more expensive than anything Ottawa built as they are much deeper and will be connected to the Metro. A new tunnel will be built under the airport with 2 stations. The elevated sections and stations are much more extensive. All REM stations will be fully enclosed and include platform screen doors, which is not the case in Ottawa.

In terms of financing, I agree government 3Ps are much more expensive than the route the Caisse took. The benefit, apparently, is financial protection from cost overruns. We'll see if that pans out. In any case, other jurisdictions should be looking closely at the REM as the cost was much lower than any similar project.

In any case, my main point was that the examples used by the Blue Line critics were deeply flawed.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

This is real. I’m on the ION, and just now, 2 cars cut the train off...

Not surprised. Surface LRT has its place but it should be in its own dedicated lane. Make it impossible for cars to interact using barriers. Give the trains timed priority at all intersections.

[rbt]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

In terms of financing, I agree government 3Ps are much more expensive than the route the Caisse took.

Using CDPQ as a no-bid contract award for consortium leader is an interesting structure for a P3; but the implementation is still a P3 from the governments perspective. They're receiving pay-per-use infrastructure (same as Highway 407) and at not too low a fee either (71 cents per km per passenger) which will turn a profit.

CDPQ operates as a private entity, which is why it's allowed to have operations outside of Quebec, with a tiny bit of public oversight.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by rbt

Using CDPQ as a no-bid contract award for consortium leader is an interesting structure for a P3; but the implementation is still a P3 from the governments perspective. They're receiving pay-per-use infrastructure (same as Highway 407) and at not too low a fee either (71 cents per km per passenger) which will turn a profit.

CDPQ operates as a private entity, which is why it's allowed to have operations outside of Quebec, with a tiny bit of public oversight.

Honestly, I'm very confused with REM and how it came to be. Who planned it, who will own and operate the system, how fares will be collected and by whom, how the Caisse was able to get such an incredible price for it. I need to take some time to read on the matter to fully understand.

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Honestly, I'm very confused with REM and how it came to be. Who planned it, who will own and operate the system, how fares will be collected and by whom, how the Caisse was able to get such an incredible price for it. I need to take some time to read on the matter to fully understand.

I can make a short story.

In 2014, AMT studies showed that the LRT would be more expensive then buses on the new Champlain Bridge. It was the opposite for the West Island part. This was a political football as the government didn't want to finance either projects.

Old Québec premier, Couillard, visited the SkyTrain in Vancouver and thought it was a great way to come back from the Airport and it would be great for Montréal. He was flabergasted to learn that the CDPQ couldn't even build such things in its own province. Thus Sabia suggested Couillard to create a new CDPQi infra which would look into the feasibility of such projects.
During 2015, the CDPQi infra studied the 2 requests from the QC government on what would eventually become the REM :
- West Island LRT
- South Shore LRT.

Through cost optimisations, in April 2016, CDPQi announced the Réseau Électrique Métropolitain.

For the average operating costs of subsidy per km of a given user in the Montréal Metropolitain Area, the CDPQi could build, finance and operate it. For those who find the subsidy for the REM to be high, it is what the average is in the region, and that for operating costs only. The REM is not only a good deal in rapidity of execution but also for costs.

Buses operating costs are about 0.99$ per km per user and trains full subsidy of about 1.21$ for the worse lines. It thus made financial sense to remove the entire Deux-Montagne line (even if it was the most profitable line).

Projects analysis for LRT usually don't include all operating and financing costs (i.e. Ontario LRT projects), plus other metrics are usually included, such as impacts on gentrification etc.

When the REM went to the BAPE, it was criticised for not having the full information (it still hasn't). Basically the BAPE is not the Pape (Pope) was the answer by the politicians. It was hard for environmentalist groups to grasp that a project was going ahead without their approval. Such groups are pro streetcars and went to court and then superior court. The judgements were lapidating towards these groups.

Other cost optimisations were necessary with the construction consortia, and at a time, Sabia had even given hope. The REM is one of the first projects to be build/design/finance/own and the CDPQi wants to export that to other countries (New-Zealand being one)

The February 2018 version of the project, Réseau Express Métropolitain was born when the financial aspects were secured. The ARTM was mandated to discuss (read, coerced by the QC government) with the CDPQi for the charges per user per km.

Thus the CDPQi owns the REM at nearly 70% and the QC government for the remainder. Operations are in the train contract and it will be Alstom and its partners. The Mont-Royal tunnel and railtracks are owned by another CDPQ entity and not CDPQi.

The ARTM is in charge of putting the payment system for the REM and all fares are being done by that entity.

The price is low because of optimisations, no financing required, and other ownership of major structures (mainly tunnel and Champlain bridge). There is also an ARTM construction charge for new buildings or new renovations on buildings near REM stations. That is common in Asia.

This is the first time that a transit project was utterly optimize to have the most cost effective solution. In the last months, the QC government asked the CDPQi, instead of the planning arm, ARTM, to study 3 projects:
- REM extension to Laval
- REM extension to Chambly
- REM/LRT project from Downtown to CÉGEP Marie-Victorin/Pointe-aux-Trembles.

It removes most of the lazy politics from transit planning, which is amazing by itself.

[J.OT13]

It's clearer now, thank you. We need more of this in Canada. So much more efficient and cost effective.

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

It's clearer now, thank you. We need more of this in Canada. So much more efficient and cost effective.

Couillard and Sabia had proposed a partnership for new transit lines in Toronto, but the Wynne governement refused, stating they they prefer to own their transit lines.

Ironically, a private group proposed to finance and build a Québec city toy-metro (like Rennes), but the pro streetcar folks won that transit project for their city, with even less information about the project than the REM.