Welcome Guest! In order to take advantage of all the great features that Waterloo Region Connected has to offer, including participating in the lively discussions below, you're going to have to register. The good news is that it'll take less than a minute and you can get started enjoying Waterloo Region's best online community right away. Click here to get started.


Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Montreal Light Automated Metro
#16
(05-26-2016, 05:59 PM)plam Wrote: They pointed out that it is somewhat difficult (expensive) to connect above-ground rail to underground systems.

Pure, unadulterated Hodge Podge.  That's what Scarberians would like you to believe, too, as an excuse to replace the Scarborough rt with a useless subway extension that serves exactly no-one, rather than repair what they have and expand upon it.  But that's another bedtime story, for another city.

And, try telling that to anyone who has ever ridden the "L" in Chicago!  Switching between the underground lines and those which are above ground in the Loop couldn't be easier.  A couple of escalators or staircases, and you're done.

Perhaps the Montrealers are simply too accustomed to their brilliantly-designed cross-platform metro interchanges, like Lionel-Groulx, which have intersecting lines corkscrew 90 degrees before entering the platforms, so you simply walk across the platform to change trains without changing level.

Nothing but poppycock.
For daily ion construction updates, photos and general urban rail news, follow me on twitter! @Canardiain
Reply
#17
Let's consider where they want to build Metro interchanges.

Gare Centrale already connects to multiple Metro stations in the dense downtown Underground City, so no work required here at all, really.

Édouard-Montpetit was actually designed to one day connect to the tunnel when it was built; new shafts would have to be dug, but I understand there are no utilities in the way.

McGill would need the most work, as a connection was not pre-designed. But we only need new pedestrian links, which can be built in a more flexible manner than rail tunnels (which, once again, already exist).

Other connections would be with the commuter rail system, not the Metro, and are even easier to build.
My Twitter: @KevinLMaps
Reply
#18
(05-26-2016, 05:59 PM)plam Wrote: They pointed out that it is somewhat difficult (expensive) to connect above-ground rail to underground systems.

Seriously?  There are countless stations in Japan connecting underground, above-ground and elevated systems.  It's simply a non-event.
Reply
#19
The complainers would be better off drawing attention to the fact that only 9 out of 68 existing Metro stations have full access to the surface - the rest don't have elevators. If they have to rip stations apart to put elevators in, they might as well retrofit for this while they're at it.
Reply
#20
Yes; the Montreal Metro, for as beautiful as its stations are (absolute heaven for a Brutalist architecture fan such as myself), have very, very poor accessibility. It was built in a time when that wasn't really on people's minds.
For daily ion construction updates, photos and general urban rail news, follow me on twitter! @Canardiain
Reply
#21
Here's the link to the piece itself (French).

http://www.ledevoir.com/societe/actualit...ropolitain


It points out that it would actually be a long walk at Gare Centrale to connect. This is already true when connecting from Via to the metro. Also I think the issue isn't that elevators are difficult to build. It's that the stations are not colocated. They don't plan to build many stations because stations are expensive to build.
Reply
#22
It's a long walk between Line 1 and 2 at Spadina, too. Tears.
For daily ion construction updates, photos and general urban rail news, follow me on twitter! @Canardiain
Reply
#23
Which is why everyone switches at St George.
Reply
#24
..Yup.
For daily ion construction updates, photos and general urban rail news, follow me on twitter! @Canardiain
Reply
#25
(05-27-2016, 07:21 PM)DHLawrence Wrote: Which is why everyone switches at St George.

For some reason Google told me to switch at Spadina the other day. The walk is actually ridiculous compared to Montreal transfers.

(The more recent transfer stations, ie not Berri-UQAM, were planned so that the most common transfers wouldn't require stairs. Except for Jean-Talon, but that wasn't planned as a transfer. And Snowdon was planned to be stairless except that the blue line never expanded to the west as intended, so everyone has to take stairs. So, Lionel-Groulx is the main transfer that is super easy).
Reply
#26
Yes; the first time I transferred at Lionel-Groulx, I actually changed levels. And then I couldn't figure out why I couldn't find my train. And then I GASPED when I figured out how amazingly clever the design was. Like I had to go sit on a bench. It was overwhelming. Then I just watched people flood from one side of the platform to the other for like 30 minutes, gleefully grinning. Love that system so much.

I'd literally move in to Radisson if I could.
For daily ion construction updates, photos and general urban rail news, follow me on twitter! @Canardiain
Reply
#27
That astounded me when I was there last month. Took a fair bit of getting used to, especially since I hadn't been on a Metro since I was 7.
Reply
#28
I remember my college days, transferring at that station every day. Very efficient but harrowing when your train pulls in and you can see your destination train already there. About half of your train was ready to dash to the other side. It was even worse when the opposing train was on the opposite level.
Reply
#29
Mixed feelings about Montreal light rail from a Montreal transit blogger:

http://www.cat-bus.com/

(permalink: http://www.cat-bus.com/2016/06/townhall-...r-the-rem/)
Reply
#30
It's not Light Rail!
For daily ion construction updates, photos and general urban rail news, follow me on twitter! @Canardiain
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)