Today, building light metro is a grift simply because for about the same amount of money one could build a heavy rail metro with four times the capacity or build a lot more light rail, with, you guessed it, having more capacity!
Toronto’s Transit commission’s Accelerated Rapid Transit Study (ARTS) found that the then new proprietary ICTS system (the first brand name of what we erroneously call SkyTrain, which was changed to ALRT for sale to Vancouver) was not a good investment:
“ICTS costs anything up to ten times as much as a conventional light-rail line to install, for about the same capacity; or put another way, ICTS costs more than a heavy-rail subway, with four times its capacity.”
When politicians buy into this sort of grift, they cannot escape it for fear of very pointed questions why they want to. Instead they continue digging a financial hole for themselves that grows larger with every questionable project.
“Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive!” (Sir Walter Scott, 1808)
Vancouver’s SkyTrain light-metro is a prime example; internationally it is seen as obsolete; a curious historical transit footnote. Not in Metro Vancouver, as it is seen as “world class” or “state of the art” and politicians keep planning and building more, hoping that this time it will do as advertised!
Doing the same thing over and over, expecting different results has not worked well in metro Vancouver’s transit planning.
REM is a clone of the Canada Line “faux” P-3 and like the Canada line, will under perform, but financially, it will be a windfall to the Caisse du Depot, the concessionaire of the light metro system. The Caisse du Depot also happens to be one of the concessionaires with the Canada line P-3, along side of SNC Lavalin!
The following memo is from RftV’s friend in Ottawa, Haveacow on today’s post.
I always tell people that even though the REM is called an LRT Network it really isn’t its an LRT, its actually a Light Metro Network similar to Vancouver’s Skytrain Network. The term LRT in this case is used as marketing name not legal description of a rail based transportation system. The Alstom trainsets being used aren’t LRV,s (Light Rail Vehicles) but are shorter versions of the trainsets being used on Sydney Australia’s brand new, Heavy Rail or full scale Metro Network.
I then tell them what an LRT actually is as defined by Transport Canada. This is a generalized definition from the three page official document that is used. LRT or Light Rail Transit is a rail transport technology that uses electric or diesel powered rail vehicles similar to but usually larger than a traditional streetcar, that generally operates on its own physical segregated ROW (rail right of way), although it can legally operate in mixed traffic as well, if needed.
This ROW can be in a median or curb lane of a road, like a streetcar (where physically segregated ROW’s are preferred), or in a private ROW beside a roadway. It can also be operated on above grade ROW (Like the Skytrain) or in a bellow grade ROW or tunnel.
Stations should be anywhere from 400 metres to 2 km apart and can be as basic as a standard bus stop and don’t have to be expensive or elaborate multi-story structures. The length of the station platform as with any rail system, can limit the length of the LRV (Light Rail Vehicle) Trainset and thus the network’s overall theoretical and practical passenger carrying capacity.
When the ROW travels on a surface roadway, intersections can be crossed with traffic signal preemption systems that favor the rail line over the vehicle traffic or with standard traffic lane blocking railway crossing gates. Both systems can also be used in tandem with each other.
Whereas, Light Metro Systems can’t legally operate in roadways and thus they generally have higher capital costs because the ROW must be on a completely private, at grade path, totally separated and physically segregated from any roadway or intersection. Above grade or below grade tunnels are often prefered ROW’s for Light Metros.
Due to technological and operational limitations, stations should be no closer than 800 metres apart, which is similar to full scale Metro Networks and can be up to 4 to 5 km away (sometimes longer). In practicality operations, it has been found that these individual lines should not exceed 40 km in length in most cases, due to travel time limitations and capital cost issues.
The $10-billion REM de l’Est light rail project for east end Montreal is in jeopardy after a new report from the regional agency responsible for transit planning, the Autorité régionale de transport métropolitain (ARTM), raised several red flags — including the fact that the massive project simply wouldn’t attract many new riders.
But the provincial minister responsible for Montreal, Chantal Rouleau, waved off the concerns Tuesday and insisted the project will go forward.
The REM de l’Est is being built by CDPQ Infra, a subsidiary of Quebec’s pension fund manager the Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec. It would add 32 kilometres of track and 23 new stations to an area of Montreal traditionally underserved by public transit.
The ARTM says the whole venture is misguided.
“The project will result in only a modest number of new public transit users,” the ARTM said in a statement released Tuesday.
The ARTM report says much of the new project’s ridership would be drawn from existing public transit services such as the Metro green line. (Ivanoh Demers)
“It poses a problematic competition issue with two major services of the existing structural network (the Metro green line and the Mascouche commuter train), which will still have residual capacity by 2031,” the statement continued.
The ARTM report identified a number of potential shortcomings with the project, including:
Only 12 per cent of trips would be destined for downtown.
During peak periods, 94 per cent of ridership would simply be drawn from existing services (Metro green line and Mascouche commuter train).
Increased annual maintenance costs as high as $98 million would be borne by the city and neighbouring municipalities, creating a “significant impact” for public transit funding.
Concerns about integrating REM infrastructure into the urban landscape.
“In light of the findings that emerge, we suggest considering options that would allow for a project better anchored in a principle of complementarity with the existing public transit ecosystem,” Benoît Gendron, head of the ARTM, said in a statement.
Report could scuttle project
The report puts the entire project in jeopardy.
“The support of the City of Montreal and the ARTM is necessary for the REM de l’Est project to proceed, CDPQ Infra will not impose it,” CDPQ Infra said in a statement emailed to CBC Tuesday.
“We were informed last Thursday of the existence of this report, and will take the time to respond point by point,” the statement said.
CDPQ Infra says The REM de l’Est will reach parts of Montreal that have long been underserved by public transit, allowing residents to reach downtown faster than by car or bus. (Submitted by CDPQ Infra)
The city said in a statement Tuesday it would also take time to study the report.
Mayor Valérie Plante met with CDPQ Infra and provincial government officials last Friday to discuss the issue.
“The project must contribute to the development of the mobility on offer in the metropolitan region, to the development of the territory, and to strengthen the public transport network in a global way,” the city statement read.
A coalition of mayors of communities north of Montreal also released a statement Tuesday.
“We are deeply concerned about the CDPQ Infra project which, in its current form, does not take into account the impacts on existing public transit networks,” Denis Martin, mayor of Deux-Montagnes and chairman of the group said in the statement.
The mayors encouraged the province to look at alternatives.
CAQ government insists project will proceed despite concerns
Premier François Legault, asked about the report at a news conference Tuesday, said he was open to changing the project, but he dismissed the ARTM’s concerns and said it was now up to Plante to to make sure the project succeeds.
“We won’t do this project if we didn’t have the support of the mayor of Montreal. The ball is in Madame Plante’s court to present us with a new project that suits her,” Legault said.
Rouleau, the provincial minister responsible for Montreal, told reporters at the National Assembly Tuesday that the project will go ahead.
The CAQ minister responsible for Montreal, Chantal Rouleau, insisted Tuesday that the REM de l’Est will proceed despite the ARTM’s concerns. (Radio-Canada)
“The REM de l’Est is the best project. We believe in this project. It’s very important for the economic development of the east end of Montreal,” Rouleau said.
Rouleau earlier told La Presse the ARTM’s report was “incomplete and not credible”.
The REM de l’Est is a separate project from the rest of the REM network currently under construction west of downtown and on Montreal’s South Shore, also being built by CDPQ Infra.
For $10 Billion, you could build a lot of surface LRT or BRT for that matter. In Montreal a 13 km median lane busway on Pie-IX (Pope Pius the Ninth) Blvd., is about to open and it is very similar to what York Region built. According to the future project map of York Region Transit you could build 138.89 km of surface median lane, BRT Busway. If $10 Billion in light metro moves very few new transit passengers, I bet 138 km of new BRT or 67.2 km of gold plated surface LRT (updated Surrey LRT price) would attract a lot of new transit riders. At some point, a determination has to be made about what cost is too high.
This is the existing and future project map for the VIVA BRT Network of York Region Transit, this is the transit agency of the regional government directly north of the City of Toronto.
York Region is roughly 3 times the size of the city of Toronto at 1758 km2, with a population of 1.17 million and has 9 individual (lower tier) municipalities. It is still mostly rural but rapidly suburbanizing. It is officially part of the provincial government’s Greater Golden Horseshoe Planning Area.
On this map it shows my point of why at a certain time in the development of a rapid transit project, the cost of the project regardless of how good it is can become too high. The Yonge Subway extension (Project #1 on the map) costs $5.6 Billionand is 8.4 km long, with 4 stations, it will start construction in 2023. On opening day it is expected to attract 94,100 passengers per day. The price includes the extra subway trains and financing costs as well. Notice that for $5.4 Billion you can build 75 km of VIVA BRT Rapidway (York Region Transit’s median lane busway network), which includes the cost of the buses and bus garages. I also included a picture of what a Rapidway looks like. York Region has 33.7 km of this type of rapid transit right of way already. It is designed to be convertable to surface LRT. When you add 75 km to your existing rapidway network, how many passengers will a Rapidway network of 108 km move, compared to the 94100 passengers per day of the North Yonge Subway Extension? I’m not anti-subway but it is something to think about. For reference sake, the Steeles Ave. BRT Rapidway (Project #9 on the map) is a joint project between the TTC (the Toronto Transit Commission) and YRT. Steeles Ave is the northern boundary of the City of Toronto and the southern boundary of York Region.
Oh by the way, the overview image of the Davis Drive Rapidway in Newmarket, which is one of the lower tier municipalities in York Region, is slightly more narrow than Vancouver’s Broadway and they fit an entire busway on it and had room for turning lanes and 4 lanes for general traffic. Again, this is something to think about when people would tell me there is no room for surface BRT or LRT on Broadway. Considering the actual number of expected passengers the Skytrain tunnel will get on opening day, both a BRT or LRT running on the surface can easily move the same number of passengers and more, while not bankrupting Translink and the province of B.C.
The REM de l’Est has also competition problems with the Pie-IX BRT as well. It’s expected that there close parallel location will rob passengers from both rapid transit lines. The very expensive underground north-south section of the REM de l’Est will definitely attract longer distance commuters away from the BRT line. While local passengers will not use the REM De l’Est because there is already talk of cutting the number of underground stations on the parallel north-south portion of the project, due to excessive cost. The smaller number of planned stations is bound to stop locals using the REM de l’Est for shorter distance trips, forcing locals west towards the Pie-IX BRT.
Worse still the REM de l’Est, does damage to the possibility of ever building the Pink Line Metro. This is the political and somewhat needed pet project of the current mayor of Montreal, Valerie Plante. The REM lines have competition prohibitions on them to block future rapid transit lines robbing them of passengers, thus limiting Montreal’s Metro Network development. If CDPQ Infra thinks the current mayor Plante is going to just willingly sign off on this and by doing so, forever kill off her own pet metro project, think again guys.
Sure, if you don’t mind taking the long way and enter the airport from the north, instead of the quick way from the south and parallel to the CN and CP main lines into downtown. The people at CDPQ Infra didn’t want to make a deal with a railway and share real estate profits and have a far more efficient and effective rapid transit line.
For $10 Billion, you could build a lot of surface LRT or BRT for that matter. In Montreal a 13 km median lane busway on Pie-IX (Pope Pius the Ninth) Blvd., is about to open and it is very similar to what York Region built. According to the future project map of York Region Transit you could build 138.89 km of surface median lane, BRT Busway. If $10 Billion in light metro moves very few new transit passengers, I bet 138 km of new BRT or 67.2 km of gold plated surface LRT (updated Surrey LRT price) would attract a lot of new transit riders. At some point, a determination has to be made about what cost is too high.
This is the existing and future project map for the VIVA BRT Network of York Region Transit, this is the transit agency of the regional government directly north of the City of Toronto.
York Region is roughly 3 times the size of the city of Toronto at 1758 km2, with a population of 1.17 million and has 9 individual (lower tier) municipalities. It is still mostly rural but rapidly suburbanizing. It is officially part of the provincial government’s Greater Golden Horseshoe Planning Area.
On this map it shows my point of why at a certain time in the development of a rapid transit project, the cost of the project regardless of how good it is can become too high. The Yonge Subway extension (Project #1 on the map) costs $5.6 Billionand is 8.4 km long, with 4 stations, it will start construction in 2023. On opening day it is expected to attract 94,100 passengers per day. The price includes the extra subway trains and financing costs as well. Notice that for $5.4 Billion you can build 75 km of VIVA BRT Rapidway (York Region Transit’s median lane busway network), which includes the cost of the buses and bus garages. I also included a picture of what a Rapidway looks like. York Region has 33.7 km of this type of rapid transit right of way already. It is designed to be convertable to surface LRT. When you add 75 km to your existing rapidway network, how many passengers will a Rapidway network of 108 km move, compared to the 94100 passengers per day of the North Yonge Subway Extension? I’m not anti-subway but it is something to think about. For reference sake, the Steeles Ave. BRT Rapidway (Project #9 on the map) is a joint project between the TTC (the Toronto Transit Commission) and YRT. Steeles Ave is the northern boundary of the City of Toronto and the southern boundary of York Region.
https://www.vivanext.com/project_futuremap
https://i0.wp.com/blog.metrolinx.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/vivanext.jpg?ssl=1
https://www.flickr.com/photos/160770204@N05/48860832301/in/album-72157711238695313/
Oh by the way, the overview image of the Davis Drive Rapidway in Newmarket, which is one of the lower tier municipalities in York Region, is slightly more narrow than Vancouver’s Broadway and they fit an entire busway on it and had room for turning lanes and 4 lanes for general traffic. Again, this is something to think about when people would tell me there is no room for surface BRT or LRT on Broadway. Considering the actual number of expected passengers the Skytrain tunnel will get on opening day, both a BRT or LRT running on the surface can easily move the same number of passengers and more, while not bankrupting Translink and the province of B.C.
The REM de l’Est has also competition problems with the Pie-IX BRT as well. It’s expected that there close parallel location will rob passengers from both rapid transit lines. The very expensive underground north-south section of the REM de l’Est will definitely attract longer distance commuters away from the BRT line. While local passengers will not use the REM De l’Est because there is already talk of cutting the number of underground stations on the parallel north-south portion of the project, due to excessive cost. The smaller number of planned stations is bound to stop locals using the REM de l’Est for shorter distance trips, forcing locals west towards the Pie-IX BRT.
Worse still the REM de l’Est, does damage to the possibility of ever building the Pink Line Metro. This is the political and somewhat needed pet project of the current mayor of Montreal, Valerie Plante. The REM lines have competition prohibitions on them to block future rapid transit lines robbing them of passengers, thus limiting Montreal’s Metro Network development. If CDPQ Infra thinks the current mayor Plante is going to just willingly sign off on this and by doing so, forever kill off her own pet metro project, think again guys.
REM is going to make going to and from the airport a lot less painful in Montreal. Sorry, don’t care otherwise.
Sure, if you don’t mind taking the long way and enter the airport from the north, instead of the quick way from the south and parallel to the CN and CP main lines into downtown. The people at CDPQ Infra didn’t want to make a deal with a railway and share real estate profits and have a far more efficient and effective rapid transit line.