Elevated Trains Are Good, Actually

The opening of the REM is bittersweet. Montreal is getting a lot more transit and that’s exciting! But it also highlights just how frustrating it is that activists and politicians said “no” to the east end getting its own REM.
Keep Urbanity rolling:
Join our Patreon for early releases: / ohtheurbanity
Subscribe: / @ohtheurbanity
Join us on Twitter: / ohurbanity
The lines we quote from from the "DÉCLARATION COMMUNE : ARRÊTONS LE PROJET DU REM DE L’EST ! - 21 février 2022" from the Collectif en environnement Mercier-Est, notably:
·Le REM aérien sera un mastodonte de béton et d’acier qui infligera aux populations des quartiers densément peuplés des nuisances significatives (bruit, vibrations, tourbillons de vent, pollution visuelle, etc.) qui entraîneront un impact certain sur la santé physique, psychologique et mentale des citoyen.nes incluant un sentiment d’insécurité publique accru.
·Le REM aérien écrasera, défigurera et fracturera nos quartiers, en plus d’augmenter considérablement ou de rendre impossible la protection ou la requalification future de bâtiments et de milieux de vie dont plusieurs sites patrimoniaux, historiques ou emblématiques.
·Des horreurs comme l’autoroute Métropolitaine construite dans les années 60 au nom de la mobilité automobile sont des erreurs du passé. CDPQ Infra impose déjà un modèle semblable avec le REM de l’Ouest et elle persiste à répéter les mêmes erreurs dans l’Est, au nom du transport collectif.
Source: collectifeme.ca/declaration-c...
Translation:
· The aerial REM will be a behemoth of concrete and steel, inflicting significant nuisances (noise, vibrations, wind vortices, visual pollution, etc.) on the populations of densely populated neighbourhoods, with a definite impact on the physical, psychological and mental health of citizens, including an increased sense of public insecurity.
· REM will crush, disfigure and fracture our neighbourhoods, as well as considerably increase or render impossible the future protection or requalification of buildings and living environments, including many heritage, historic or emblematic sites.
· Horrors like the Metropolitan Expressway, built in the 1960s in the name of automobile mobility, are mistakes of the past. CDPQ Infra is already imposing a similar model with the REM in the West, and persists in repeating the same mistakes in the East, in the name of public transit.

[@omnipotent_arcanis]

I do love the irony that an ‘environmental group’ is advocating for more cars and traffic.

[@WildWildWeasel]

That's because people like JSO or any of these treehugging groups don't care about the environment, they only care about causing disrupt, looting, damaging property and being a sheer living annoyance. Fortunately people are waking up and throwing hands/cars at them 😂

[@subjekt5577]

They're the kind of people that think "environment" means "aesthetics"

[@WildWildWeasel]

@@subjekt5577 Spot on! A friend and I were talking just about that literally 20 minutes ago haha.

[@matthewboyd8689]

🤦

[@ivelinkamenov]

It is very interesting who funds the "environmentalists" in this case....

[@gmkgoat]

"It would ruin this 8-lane boulevard" lmao

[@austinh.]

Yknow a Blvd is already ruined if it has 8 lanes

[@braindump1446]

If it has 8 lanes ... it is NOT a boulevard.

[@thastayapongsak4422]

Any environmentalist group that outright reject mass transit project should not be taken seriously. There can be opposition in detail, but being a NIMBY isn't it.

[@Cyrus992]

They are phony

[@Not_Sal]

That’s because they were never an environmentalist group. Just a NIMBY group disguised as one.

[@DanielBrotherston]

Unfortunately you are describing the majority of the most well funded environmental groups in the US at least. Environmentalism has a long history of strongly conservative values.

[@partiellementecreme]

This attitude is shockingly dull. Has it not occurred to you that a flawed public transit project can get proposed, and pro-transit people could be against it because it’s so seriously flawed? Do you know the history of bad public transit proposals?

[@jens_le_benz]

@@partiellementecreme I'd say digging a massive tunnel that doesn't even connect to the city center is way more flawed than whatever REM extension people are so enamored by.

[@nickrreese]

Anyone who's anti transit should be stripped of their "environmentalist" title. Of course, there are bad examples of transit like the proposed monorail in LA, but any reasonable analysis of the REM should be self evident of its environmentalist bona fides.

[@BoredCapturer]

Preach

[@colinguo5855]

Just name them industrialists.

[@mremumerm]

same as for anti-Active-transportation

[@Geotpf]

People who are against the monorail in LA are for the better, and, factoring in everything, not more expensive, underground subway version of the same project.

[@ianhomerpura8937]

@@Geotpf wait, really? How did an underground line became more cheaper than an elevated monorail?

[@knarf_on_a_bike]

Ironic that the protesters saying the REM would ruin the neighbourhood loaded their protest signs into their cars. . . 😂😂😂

[@HowlingWolf518]

That's common in Vancouver too - we've got NIMBYs from neighbourhoods halfway across the city deciding to fight a proxy war in ours.

[@willythemailboy2]

Or maybe there were people from the length of the proposed line that all came to protest in the same place rather than being spread over 50 km?

[@dominiccasts]

@@HowlingWolf518 Not just in the city, IIRC the reason the Evergreen expansion took so long is because of issues getting Coquitlam and Port Moody residents on board, to say nothing of what expansions out to Maple Ridge will be like. There's a real stereotype that the SkyTrain brings crime, though maybe with all the fare gates and everything that might change, they've been around for at least a decade now.

[@nvelsen1975]

Uhm... why? You one of those weirdo anti-car anti-mobility types?

[@zochbuppet448]

@knarf_on_a_bike the idea is from the 1980s when they were first built in Canada they look pretty awful, and can still look awful if not done right or the proper height. Technology has progress and they they build them higher than in the past when they were dividing communities as they were not that high off the ground with heavy slab foundation feet. that was one of the many issues

[@ukaszb9223]

I admire your calm. I try to be zen about life and people but I can't imagine making this kind of video without calling the protesters brain-dead morons at least once.

[@byronday8696]

Give it time, Not Just Bikes has started to get a bit defensive after all the negative comments.

[@yveltalsea]

@@byronday8696Not Just Bikes has become a lot more sarcastic, I like it a lot. His irony is v fun to listen to

[@byronday8696]

@@yveltalsea oh I definitely agree! He's also pointed out specific arguments that people make and how to counter them, which is both helpful and and humerus with how he makes his statements. I hope he gets some rest from it, I can hear how upset he gets sometimes, but I really do enjoy the sarcastic tone he's added to recent videos.

[@JohnJohnson-kg4ek]

@@yveltalsea Not Just Bikes makes good videos, but they are not going to convince anybody who isn't already an urbanist nerd. I always feel like he is talking down to his audience. If someone from a different viewpoint watches a NJB video, they will leave feeling like they are being made fun of and likely just dig deeper into their original opinions. I think the calm and rational style of this channel is much more likely to get NIMBYs to change their minds.

[@JohnJohnson-kg4ek]

Imagine you're an opponent of the elevated train project. Which video is more likely to change your mind? This one, or one where you're called a brain dead moron?

[@Maxime_K-G]

I actually love elevated metros. They look so cool and futuristic and riding them is a ton of fun, you feel like you're in a theme park.

[@emh.1178]

The view is so beautiful and fun:D

[@laurinnintendo]

Well it‘s still a lot of ugly concrete. Maybe we could decorate them in a way that makes them look more like old european bridges / viaducts instead of concrete structures.

[@creaturexxii]

@@laurinnintendoI know that for the Evergreen extension for the SkyTrain, they added colourful lights on the pillars in Coquitlam. But I think vines or other vegetation would look good.

[@Maxime_K-G]

@@laurinnintendo Sure, but I would still take that over more car infrastructure and cars on surface streets any day of the week. Your proposal reminds me of the elevated section of the Hamburg metro near Baumwall station. It's very light and elegant and fits in perfectly with the port warehouse surroundings.

[@ulrichspencer]

Exactly! Buried metros are nice and all, but they're boring to ride. Elevated metros give you a view of the city, and the city a view of trains going by. Win-win.

[@JustClaude13]

In Japan, elevated rails are a development opportunity. The area under the tracks is filled in with shops and apartments. The tracks are only visible at street crossings.

[@NothingXemnas]

I don't know how living under train tracks would work, but giving the housing shortage, some people probably wouldn't mind. Interesting how no space is lost.

[@5688gamble]

@@NothingXemnas Depends on how heavy the traffic is, though I imagine many wouldn't mind, beats a house near a highway! Glasgow has a large elevated corridor switching trains from multiple different lines into a 15 platform elevated terminus that is extremely wide, the station has lots of commercial space, there is commercial space under it, including in what have effectively became tunnels in at least one or two cases and every major street passes under it until the lines break off into various tunnels, bridges and surface lines, it also has two platforms underground for trains that run under the entire city centre from east to west. Even where it is obvious in that case, Glasgows urban otorways are far more offensive, and at least in and around the city centre, the space is well used for bars, restaurants, cafes and just about anything else! The area the M8 Motorway ploughed through suffered a lot more, and going from the city centre to the kively west end on foot is quite unpleasant eaven with the motorway either elevated or sunken into a trench, it is wide, smoky, noisy (way worse than a busy station or rail corridor above you actually) and the surface is congested from traffic leaving it, crossing the area on foot sucks!

[@ThomasNing]

@@NothingXemnasI suppose it's just a fact of life, in the same way that you wouldn't spend time in your own backyard because the air is so poor from the nearby highway. That being said, I'm sure modern constructions have some way of mitigating the noise and vibration.

[@DaigoroToyama]

@@NothingXemnas I mentioned this in anoher reply, but it's surpirsingly quiet below the elevated rail tracks in Japan. You do hear people talking in the aisle and cars travelling on the adjacent streets, but the sounds of the trains somehow just blend in and don't bother you much. That said, I believe it's far more common to have retail spaces under the train tracks than apartments.

[@Ron-gh4dr]

​@@DaigoroToyamaactually even living adjacent to an elevated track isn't too bad from my experience. You kinda get used to it in a while that you might even forget about it.

[@Sturmwaffles]

As a Chicagoan, it blows my mind to think that anybody would think elevated rails are an eye-sore, or hurt the quality or visuals of a neighborhood. Elevated trains become an iconic part of the modern city environment, and aid people every day in getting to where they go. Huge win for Montreal, so happy about it.

[@Desmaad]

Some people just abhor change, no matter what form it takes.

[@MrBirdnose]

Part of it may be portrayals in movies, where it goes right past people's apartments and shakes the whole building. "There's an elevated train next to the building" sort of became shorthand for indicating someone was living in a poor/undesirable neighborhood.

[@MelGibsonFan]

As a New Yorker, same. While I agree older L’s can be an eyesore of improperly maintained, I think l lines are better than subways.

[@SAmaryllis]

I live in Chicago too and although I love not having to own a car / drive thanks to the public transit, I can concede that the roads the elevated tracks run over feel claustrophobic and cramped, and the trains indeed are quite loud if you're in a building next to the tracks. I do vastly prefer having them compared to thousands more cars on the streets, but it's certainly not all roses

[@techtutorial9050]

Imo underground trains are better than elevated ones, but if properly implemented, neither is a bad addition to the city, because in the end, if people get from place to place faster, then the goal of rapid transit is achieved.

I'm convinced the more people ride the REM, they will start asking why they don't have a station in their neighbourhood. Thanks for this video, it's so nice to hear common sense versus the bizarre arguments of NIMBYs.

[@_SpamMe]

But by the time that gathers enough momentum even the cheaper variant of the project will probably cost double or triple. The cheapest time to build a project of this size is unfortunately always "now".

[@chickennoodle6620]

This was a point of contention for elevated rail or 'skyrail' in Melbourne built to grade separate level crossings. The opposition to it had really weird arguments like saying that creeps would watch children playing in the backyards. After it was built, however, the opposition disappeared when the benefits of open space under the tracks as well as improved traffic were immediately apparent.

[@ianhomerpura8937]

Looks like those ****ers are also the reason behind the paranoia by helicopter parents nowadays. In reality they are only protecting their puny property values and nothing else.

[@SaveMoneySavethePlanet]

The “but think of the children!!” arguments have become so overused these days that I just roll my eyes and ignore the person when they pull it out. It’s become the easiest way to identify someone who’s not actually arguing in good faith IMO.

[@ianhomerpura8937]

@@SaveMoneySavethePlanet one great defense against that argument is Japan, where the kids themselves ride the trains to and from school. All of them safe from cars.

[@rajagupta6772]

I love the space usage underneath skyrail sections. The Upfield line one between Coburg and Moreland has table tennis tables, a fenced dog park and calisthenics areas. Its great. The funny thing is that some of the anti-skyrail NIMBYs want a trench. But trenches are way worse as you can only cross them at certain areas.

[@ianhomerpura8937]

@@rajagupta6772 in many countries as well, the space below elevated railway lines are occupied by shops and other businesses, like in Tokyo and Berlin. In Manila they are used as intercity bus stations.

[@xoxxobob61]

MIAMI has an Elevated Metro too and we heard the same arguments about it being Ugly and a Eyesore when it was proposed yet nobody expressed the same outrage over that Highway system in the city when it destroyed so many neighborhoods!

[@Legion849]

These people are the same ones complaining about pollution and when a solution is presented they give "not in my backyard" mentality. They'll come around eventually

[@isaacrawlings1651]

Probably because the neighbourhoods destroyed were predominantly inhabited by minorities

[@valban]

@@Legion849 doubtful. More than likely to die off of old age then to come around.

[@edwardmiessner6502]

And the State Department of Transportation is expanding and rebuilding one of them with delays and huge cost overruns and nobody cares!

[@TheLIRRFrenchie...]

Miami was scammed out of it's expansions.

[@Stefi747]

The Skytrain is a blessing. I couldn't imagine Vancouver without it. The benefits massively outweigh the drawbacks

[@James-vj5hz]

Vancouver could use trams too.

[@__Rune__]

​@@nom_chompskyCars are a nuisance

[@James-vj5hz]

@@nom_chompsky Trams with their own ROW are sweet.

[@myleghurts3546]

@@James-vj5hz Vancouver has electric buses almost all over the city as well as natural gas buses too. The electric buses are old and still great!

[@sodapone]

I can't picture False Creek without that iconic stretch of SkyTrain from Stadium to Main Street stations. I think it looks beautiful, honestly - and bonus points for it passing through a building along the way. I love stations integrated into buildings like Marine Drive and New Westminster.

[@stevesurf22]

The biggest benefit to elevated in my opinion is it is much more enjoyable ride then being in a tunnel. Better for tourism and even commuters mental and physical health.

[@mremumerm]

agreed. Living in Toronto i would take the Streetcar over the Subway even if it meant a 20 minutes longer commute just for the mental impact of daylight (and also avoiding Yonge&Bloor transfer)

[@myleghurts3546]

Amen! I live in BC and feel like a tourist in my own city every time I take transit

[@rohitghoshal]

Also cheaper and quicker to build.

[@Maxime_K-G]

Very much so. Seeing the trains glide by also works as an advertisement for the metro. Underground metros with confusing passageways and diagrams just do not have the same allure, especially for people with options.

[@natehill8069]

@@rohitghoshal VASTLY cheaper to build. But I do love London's tube.

[@isimerias]

I feel like I’m living in the wildest timeline where, being from the West Island, there has been effectively zero opposition to the REM. And I also WANT the east end to be better connected. From the opposite end of the island it just is never feasible to reach the east without a car. Out of all places for NYMBYism for it to come from the east is insane

[@anne12876]

The biggest difference is that the west part was following existing highways or railroads where as in the East, the project was going right in the middle of residential neighbourhoods. It was following Sherbrooke street for most of its run and then on René-Lévesque for the rest until it reached downtown.

[@ianhomerpura8937]

@@anne12876 that is exactly the point. Having railways through already dense residential areas would be a boon to the community. Rail stations are great for nearby businesses due to increased foot traffic.

[@anne12876]

@@ianhomerpura8937 yes, but no. See, there’s already a metro running parallel or even above the projected East REM line in these dense residential neighbourhoods. The REM wouldn’t increase significantly the mobility for these communities, already well served by the green line. The REM would be mostly used by suburbanites commuting to downtown from Monday to Friday. The REM won’t bring new developments or businesses there.

[@isimerias]

@@anne12876 yes i'm aware that the situations are very difficult. its too bad still. with a large scale redevelopment of wasted industrial land we could have also calmed the housing crisis and ensured sufficient ridership for the green line and REM. what could be better to avoid NIMBY development than somewhere where nobody lives... it's also so sad that metro starved dense areas like east rosemont, Montreal Nord etc will not be receiving any new transit anytime soon because of this. Also, as a suburbanite with plans to go spend time near the green line today on a saturday but having to take 1h30 min on transit to get there, that "point" of yours is especially frustrating. faster transit all over the city is unequivocally good.

[@polishtheday]

⁠The most highly disputed part ran across industrial lands (now occupied by the Ray-Mont container storage facility that’s a real eyesore) along an also disputed but that will be inevitably built viaduct, then down Notre-Dame to René-Lévesque. While it would have impacted some residential buildings most of the land it would have run along was expropriated decades ago for an expansion of Notre-Dame that didn’t happen. The buildings that were torn down in that era were replaced by green space and a busy commuter cycle path. I welcomed the idea of having a REM station nearby. I would gladly move right next to one because I’ve lived near such a station in Vancouver where I also walked down the pedestrian/cycle path beneath portions of that network. The Caisse responded to some of the objections by revising the initial plan. I’m sure they would have been willing to make further changes including running part of the network underground where it made sense to do so. The final nail in the coffin was a flawed ARTM report opposing it because they had much to lose if it got built. It all comes down to some opposition by a bunch of NIMBYs who would rather see the east side stuck in the past along with officials who had something to gain by joining in. I hope Legault steps in and does the sensible thing like he did with the project in Lévis. There’s no reason why we can’t have an elevated line in the east that’s attractive and includes green space for a reasonable cost.

[@montrealgoalie]

The Premier of Quebec, Francois Legault, really wants this project in the east end. He even made a snarky comment towards the mayor (Who destroyed the CDPQ's version of the project) yesterday at the REM inauguration. The eastern part of Montreal is electorally favorable to the current government, there is no way Legault will give up on this project.

[@Bresto88]

woah woah, link?? Edit: found it lol it's FUCKING GOLD

[@montrealgoalie]

@@Bresto88 lmaoooo only Legault can get away with that kind of stuff

[@DR-wr7zp]

do you mind sharing the link to the video?

[@polishtheday]

I would like that to be true. I’m not a big fan of Legault but I think he made the right decision about the link to Lévis. But eastern Montreal isn’t where he gets much support. My eastern neighbourhood elects Québec Solidaire by a good margin while the CAQ gets most of its support from suburban and rural ridings.

[@shauncameron8390]

@@polishtheday Like Pointe-Aux-Trembles although it's part of Montreal city limits at the far Eastern end of the island.

[@SaveMoneySavethePlanet]

6:14 I’m actually writing a video about the sound of trains right now! We have a similar issue where an astroturf group is trying to undermine construction of our train which will go through the sepulveda pass in LA and part of their issue is the elevated section over a road. One of their flyers claiming that the noise would be too loud got me so worked up that I grabbed a decibel meter and checked the sound levels next to a current train track vs next to the road where we want to build the elevated train…and the car traffic on the road is ALREADY louder than the train!

[@Urbanhandyman]

Adding more noise to an already loud environment is a legitimate complaint although the flyer you mentioned is probably exaggerating things. Don't forget that an elevated line is in a better position to broadcast across a wider area versus a ground level train. If the elevated line is constructed I hope effective sound barriers are installed. I'm a strong believer in under-grounding as much of a train line as possible. I'll take silence over "it's not too loud" every single time.

[@OhTheUrbanity]

@@Urbanhandyman The problem is that silence, in the case of the REM de l'Est for example, is the silence of a train that just doesn't get built.

[@SaveMoneySavethePlanet]

@@Urbanhandyman there are sections of the line which are planned to be underground. I’d have to double check the location, but I believe that this elevated portion is connected to a very old (and very dumb) law which prohibits underground tracks in a portion of LA. NIMBY’s put it in place right after we built our first underground line. You’re right about sound dampening which is why I find it hilarious that the flyer also complained about an “ugly lid” which would be placed over the track in another section…a lid which is obviously a noise reduction technique. At the end of the day, this group isn’t arguing in good faith. They’re just using any straw man argument that they can get their hands on in order to make the train not get built.

[@thomaspreudhomme9443]

​@@UrbanhandymanHigher price means (if it still get built) less/no money for other infrastructure projects.

[@Urbanhandyman]

@@OhTheUrbanity I'm completely sympathetic to your point. I think the REM de l'Est project will require certain modifications before the project can continue. It's up to the management team to present those modifications as quickly as possible and not foster an "us versus them" mentality which the opposition groups seem to have. Arriving at a compromise will result in the line being built as quickly as possible. We'll see how much noise each side generates during that process.

[@krisrizakis9989]

I grew up on a stretch of the Deux-Montagne line that was taken over for the REM. I remember as a kid that the old train line effectively cut our neighbourhood in half because the train was street level. It split a park in half. Kids would walk along the tracks or slide under the barriers as they came down when the train was passing through which was extremely dangerous. The cops were frequently patrolling the area and having to constantly warn people to stay away from the tracks. I recently went back to my old neighbourhood. The train barriers are gone. You can walk under the REM. No need to worry about kids walking the tracks and possibly getting hit by an uncomming train.

[@Gary_C]

You make a really good case for elevated rail. Larger system, cheaper price tag, and faster construction. Plus, it can be buried over time to spread out the cost if it's what people really want.

[@chengyanboon]

I'm all for elevated for the reasons stated, but burying over time is a really bad idea as trains aren't really good at sudden elevation changes, meaning you have to rebuilt pretty large sections at a time, and that means either cut-and-cover, which levels the entire area and is very disruptive, or tunnel boring, which makes no sense for the distances you're talking about (tunnel boring machines are way more efficient the longer they can continuously work). It's also really expensive to build portals from elevated to underground sections, and you have to find a site every time you do it since they are usually pretty big. It's viable when it's wrapped into the cost of billions of dollars to build the line, but you'll never find the money to do it after the line is already built.

[@glavatazelva]

I don't know why would you build one system and then tear it down and build another! i don't think you can just throw dirt on top of an elevated railway and bury it!

[@andymod]

No need to bury them at all if it is possible not to. People who riding deserve to have a view from a window, not a black dark tunnel.

[@mohammedsarker5756]

as someone who lives in a neighborhood in NYC with an elevated train (in fact 2 different lines right on top of each other it's complicated), it's been the lifeblood of our neighborhood and we've adopted them as a sort of icon for our neighborhood. Shops will incorporate images of our bridge into imagery and its broadly associated with our neighborhood and is a source of pride, along with high-quality transit.

[@gnhansen29]

I think it was a mistake to replace the heavy rail in Newcastle, Australia with light rail. What would have been a better solution?

[@ianhomerpura8937]

Here in Manila, most of the metro rail lines are elevated, but mainly due to another reason: floods. Even before the original streetcar network was destroyed in 1945 during WW2, streetcar services always ground to a halt because of floods. Hence why when the first line was opened in 1984, it was fully elevated. Lines 2 and 3 are also mostly elevated, but mainly because of NIMBYs around the gated communities of the elite. Currently we are building Line 9, which will be our first subway once it opens in 2029. The North South Commuter Railway, also elevated, is being built and will probably be opened in its entirety in 2028.

[@Ron-gh4dr]

PNR be like 😭😭😭

[@ianhomerpura8937]

@@Ron-gh4dr good thing the NSCR is being constructed now, plus they opened a new commuter route between Naga and Ligao. Bilisan na nila haha.

[@JoshuaRail3070]

Even PNR Finally Having a Electric Multiple Unit trains in NSCR line which is way more environmentally friendly than Diesel Multiple Unit trains of PNR in Non elevated track in Manila

[@Eggmancan]

The difference in treatment between mass transit and car infrastructure in NA is what really gets me. The cost, noise, pollution, and ugly factor of highways and stroads is never an issue, but the moment a mass transit project is proposed all those factors go under a fine-toothed comb and become a matter of intense local controversy. It's shocking how deep the car brainwashing is.

[@polishtheday]

What’s even more surprising is that it only took a half a century for people to be brainwashed into thinking that the car is the best way to get around.

[@shauncameron8390]

@@polishtheday But by and large, it is.

[@polishtheday]

@@shauncameron8390 That depends on where you live. I sold mine when I got tired of driving it mostly to clear the road on street cleaning days. I had only put 1000 km on it in the last year and figured I could always join Communauto if I needed a car. It’s been eight years now and I haven’t needed one. It was much easier to get to IKEA and Costco, either on public transit or by car, in Vancouver. There are stores I no longer shop at, friends I don’t visit and trails I don’t hike but I refuse to give in and get another car.

[@officialgreendalehumanbeing]

elevated trains tend to be easier to make accessible, provide sick views and also look really cool.

[@ianhomerpura8937]

Especially when the trains speed by alongside congested highways. It's always fun to do that here in Manila.

[@jasonmascarenhas5177]

Elevated metros are not socially acceptable but 6 lane highways are?

[@anne12876]

Nor are them. We wouldn’t want more highways either. I live in the eastern part of Montreal and I was against the project in the form it was presented. Contrary to the west branch of the project where the lines mostly followed existing highways, the eastern branch of the REM would have passed in the middle of residential neighbourhoods for most of its run, creating more fractures in neighbourhoods that are trying to revitalize. These neighborhoods already have to deal with too wide streets, heavy traffic and industrial zones (the port, railways, factories, etc). When I saw the proposed project plan by CDPQ, it felt like the existing population were after thoughts in order to get as many suburbanites in the city as quickly as possible. There was only one connection with the existing metro. It felt like we had to endure all the down sides without any benefits.

[@gc.96]

@@anne12876 thats city life, if you cant handle it maybe move to a farm in the countryside instead of ruining public infrastructure for 99% of other people

[@anne12876]

@@gc.96 I’m a city enthusiast wanting more mobility, I just think the East of Montreal deserves better than the half-baked project that was initially proposed.

[@SonsOfSevenless]

@@anne12876 nobody is discussing the fact that the REM is a cynical money grabbing scam by the CDPQ to speculate on property values adjacent to the new stations. if and when the actual train line is unprofitable it will be sold back to the public, despite having been built using the public's funds as well

[@mohammedsarker5756]

@@anne12876 I live in a residential neighborhood in NYC with the "old school" subway lines the video mentioned, the noise is literally not a big deal at all, two blocks away and you can barely hear the subway, all the houses on real estate websites near the stations have a big premium on their price because most people are thrilled to have the convenience of a station right outside their door front. And the whole point of a subway system is to shepherd people in and out of the city rapidly. I don't wanna be mean cus I'm not from Montreal, but I'm sorry you sound misinformed about urban policy.

[@knightornstein5902]

It still baffles me that some of the least well off burroughs with some of the oldest residents in the city said no to a project like this.

[@bellybutthole69]

a LOT of people in the Hochelaga Maisonneuve borough wants nothing to change. they don't want any gentrification or anything like that. They have their "relatively cheap" apartments and do no want anything that can affect that.

[@James-vj5hz]

I find it most interesting that most of these protesters won't exist 10-15 years after these projects exist. They're sabotaging young people, and have zero remorse.

[@thevoid5503]

That's because these people don't come from there. They come from the suburbs.

[@RigoStar]

it totally makes sense, people with less means, less education,, maybe they never seen such system in their lives or ever travelled to a place to see how it works. People are just afraid of what they ignore.

[@MrBirdnose]

People who live in places like that often have a sense of grievance that all the undesirable stuff gets dumped in their neighborhood.

[@jamesphillips2285]

Reminds me of "environmentalists" opposing nuclear power so that coal gets built instead.

[@cooltwittertag]

im sure they're all very good faith actors

[@jamesphillips2285]

@@cooltwittertag That includes Greenpeace.

[@LouisSubearth]

It's funny because anti-nuclear activists will cite Chernobyl and Fukushima, where those are abnormal events, while nuclear power emits less radiation than coal power due to updates in reactor technology and new plant construction methods.

[@AmurTiger]

@@LouisSubearth That's less of a technology thing and more coal being awful always and turning thousands of tons of coal ( and impurities ) into ash in the atmosphere means you're distributing those impurities widely, some of which are radioactive. Same reason why mercury is a pollution problem for coal, the quantities of stuff they're burning are so large that minor impurities become substantial pollution problems.

[@jamesphillips2285]

@@LouisSubearth No it is just because nuclear reactions are 1,000,000x more energetic than chemical ones, resulting in less material handling (and trace minerals add up). Only 10,000x less material handling because most current plants only "burn" 1% of their fuel before the fuel pellets are damaged.

[@abdullahrizwan592]

You guys are sooo right. People scrutinize transit much more than they do car infrastructure

[@MultigrainKevinOs]

It's incredibly frustrating to be at the edge of a golden era of transport in Canada and keep seeing the carpet pulled out from us. The public and goverment support is there for big bold transport projects, let's get them done for future generations.

[@mremumerm]

frustrating to be on the edge of "edge of a golden era of transport in Canada". greetings from Halifax 😞

[@SupremeLeaderKimJong-un]

I love how these people don't even realize the irony of opposing elevating trains because they believe it'll ruin the neighborhood when the eight-lane boulevard already ruined the neighborhood! Many cities have elevated trains that have become an iconic part of the culture of cities, like the L in Chicago as you mentioned or the 7 train in Queens, NYC! The Bronx is another NYC borough that famously has elevated subway tracks, and nobody has said the trains ruin the neighborhood! If they think trains ruin neighborhoods, they should go ask all the people of The Bronx who live along the Cross-Bronx Expressway about their health and all the noise and air pollution. And of course, building elevated trains will promote dense transit-oriented development. As more people become environmentally aware, on top of those who either can't afford a car or can't physically or mentally drive one, building dense transit-oriented development is an absolute must as we move forward and solve society's biggest problems

[@calaphos]

Ah, the feel good "Enviromentalists" who are actually just conservative NIMBYs. Useful environmentalist policies only if they absolute don't affect them please. But its ok to take a car everywhere, its to buy organic produce. They want to 'make a difference' after all. Elevated railways are great in the way that they dont create barriers between neighbourhoods like traditional on ground rail infrastructure.

[@adamlytle2615]

I know this is not how things usually work, but I'd like to imagine the people opposed to REM l'est riding the REM and doing an about face on the issue.

[@honziq]

Such would be the hope.

[@vishnureddy3977]

A broad swath of the population who are mostly disinterested and got pushed to be slightly opposed to the REM by the loud activists can be convinced, I think. Once more people get used to the south and western portions of the REM, the doom and gloom narrative will be a harder sell.

[@gabrieldsouza6541]

Once 2027 comes and the whole island is connected, the opposition will melt away :)

[@mremumerm]

@@gabrieldsouza6541 and they will have lost 10 years, and complain about all the increased prosperity of Brossard and Pierrefonds....

[@christophehorguelin7044]

It may well happen. This video changed my views already.

[@Maxime_K-G]

People there should've counterprotested, what a shame.

[@kai663]

I hope they didn’t cancel the project because of the less 100 protesters we saw in the video.

[@marcscattolin1554]

@@kai663 it effectively was, it's been taken over by the gvt who want to tunnel the whole thing, without a downtown connection, for $36 billion

[@adammess]

@@marcscattolin1554what do you mean without a downtown connection, it won’t connect to central station?

[@brunob45]

​​@@adammessit will connect to the green line, maybe L'Assomption station

[@marcscattolin1554]

@@adammess that's the proposal from the ARTM, google it

[@TechieSewing]

Kyiv subway emerges from the ground in several places, one is above the river, and it's always refreshing and pleasant to see around, and it's quieter for the passengers. I also love seeing trains moving on their bridges from the outside.

[@AverytheCubanAmerican]

Absolutely REM is the best thing to happen to Montreal! I mean sure Montreal has the Montreal Metro as well, but REM is faster! And if you look at their EXO commuter rail system, it's...not great. REM will make the lives of Montrealers and those in its suburbs way better! On top of having a convenient way to the airport as part of the system's ambitions, there's also changing the Deux-Montagnes commuter rail line into actually convenient light metro service. Which makes a huge difference. And the REM will promote more development on Île des Sœurs. The island was used as farmland by nuns from the 1700s until 1956 when they finally sold it, and the original Champlain Bridge opening in 1962 kicked off development. Three thousand moved into 800 units by the end of the 1960s, and high-rises have since been built. Not to mention they finally replaced the original Champlain Bridge. The old steel truss cantilever bridge opened in 1962 and was degraded by de-icing salt that was added every winter for decades, which attacked the concrete and steel rebar used in girders, pylons, and other parts. Along with the contrasting summer conditions and the volumes of traffic, it just couldn't handle it anymore. But this one can! The current bridge that opened in 2019 was designed by Poul Ove Jensen, who was Dissing+Weitling's project manager for the Great Belt Bridge in Denmark! He also participated in the design for the Øresund Bridge between Denmark and Sweden. It is built to last 125 years with the usage of stainless steel and high-performance concrete.

[@jordensjunger]

the canada line in vancouver was originally proposed to be elevated along much of cambie street, which has a wide boulevard, but nimbys pushed it underground all the way to marine drive. now, a decade later, translink is likely having to cancel a planned infill station at 57th avenue because it's just too expensive to build it underground.. it's frustrating..

[@polishtheday]

As land values climbed along the Canada Line corridor, some of these NIMBYs sold their homes for a nice profit. They no longer live there so their opinion no longer matters. Land values climbed even higher after they left, so high that the only way developers can make money is to fill these lots with high rise towers. This hasn’t stopped people from wanting to live there especially those who appreciate being close to restaurants and shopping so they don’t have get into a car to do it. Oakridge Centre became such a profitable mall they’ve been able to shut it down to entirely redevelop it a second time.

[@austinh.]

BRUH. ☠️ I always thought it was a missed opportunity that was a mistake by trans link to put the train above ground bc Cambie st has such a wide corridor, but now I thank u for correcting me. I take this train all the time and I hate it’s underground

[@elizabethdavis1696]

I think a lot of the desire for a monorail is really a desire for elevated trains because a lot of people’s first experience with an elevated train was the monorail at Disney world

[@Landis_Grant]

Montreal’s first monorail trains debuted at Expo 67 where the elevated trains went through the Geodesic Dome of the US Pavilion.

[@jonathantan2469]

But monorails usually require an elevated track. Theoretically one could have a ground level monorail track, but it will have two trenches on both sides of the central rail. Which will need to be kept clean from accumulated vegetation, trash, and rainwater. Elevated trains can run at ground level, and in subway tunnels.

[@mma0911]

There's a good case to elevate the rest of the Broadway extension to UBC, but you'll have to build through West Point Grey, one of the most NIMBY places in Vancouver.

[@ericmilligan6603]

Ugh. I hate rich people.

[@ChrisGnam]

When you said Vancouver was slightly closer to home than Paris, it prompted me to google it. And apparently Vancouver is only 17% closer to Montreal than Paris is. (4569km vs 5502km)

[@Alley00Cat]

I live next to the downtown portion of what was supposed to be the REM de l’Est. I was heartbroken when it was cancelled!! I just cannot comprehend how a tiny group of people can destroy such a beautiful project. The reasoning was totally ludicrous as you pointed out. Shame on our mayor and premier for not standing up for the poor masses in the east that desperately need this service. I bike to Griffintown just under the new line. It’s gorgeous and makes barely any noise. It looks futuristic and totally blends in with the city.

[@jonathanlanglois2742]

Never mind the 500 million per kilometer Broadway extension. You don't have to go anywhere near that far to find an exemple of a subway extensions that's going to cost way more than that. In fact, you can find in in Montreal. Work has slowly started on the 5.5km blue line extension in Montreal and it is set to cost more than a billion per kilometer. That's absolutely insane.

[@horizonlex]

As someone living in the east end, I find it really unfortunate that yet another project got NIMBY’d into oblivion. Its a nightmare to get downtown from here, whether you use transit OR cars. The REM de l’est would have been really beneficial for so many people and a project of the sort is long overdue :(

[@borealphoto]

The problem is having to go downtown in the first place.

[@Luiszelaya06]

Its ok dont worries blue ligne gonna add more station . Sooo can pple ride as sardine

[@thebigb1286]

It looked nice, wonder why they called it an eye sore and crushing? It looks like the train to Disneyland. I loved ot as a kid. A quiet ride in a nice place to see all kinds of things.

[@creaturexxii]

One of the reasons I love the SkyTrain in Vancouver is that it's elevated. From a passenger POV you can enjoy the sights as they pass by and while on the ground you can watch the trains pass by. Of course, NIMBYs will complain about it but wouldn't bat an eye to a highway that cuts their neighbour hood in half. On a slightly different note, at 22nd Street station for the SkyTrain, it quite literally passes through someone's backyard as that station is located in a suburb. But the residence don't seem to mind.

[@placeholdername0000]

When your city has built a light rail that slows down to 15km/h in the city centre because idiot politicians wanted to create an idyllic scenery instead of a useful transit option. Like, yeah, it would have cost a lot more to elevate it for the central 3 km, but it would have been fast. Right? Like, instead of it taking longer than going by bike.

[@palmsa4363]

I live in Bangkok and these elevated trains seem very normal to me.

[@ianhomerpura8937]

Plus, it is way more advantageous, since Bangkok experiences floods once in a while. Commuter trains can still travel even during citywide floods.

[@AmirHamedZakeri]

I think after the inauguration of the REM a few days ago, even people from eastern montreal will start to realize how beneficial it will be for them as well. The expansion of the network will connect most of the municipalities together and become and integral part of our lives in future.

[@j.s.7335]

Maybe one can hope that people now will see how great the original REM 2 proposal was, given the cheaper price and how great the built REM is, and want it back. I do find it rather perplexing that people are so opposed to elevated rail. I don't even find the L tracks in Chicago, which are quite old, to be very much of a nuisance, albeit the trains do go pretty slowly where I have walked on the streets under the tracks.

[@Jakob_DK]

I just came to think about the compensation paid to people near the Copenhagen metro to the airport. There houses there has seen higher price increases than the rest of the municipality.

[@pbilk]

This is great progress! However, the stupid loud minority of people ruined a great East end connection on a not-super-attractive downtown road. I hope the tunnel project idea is cancelled from the price tag so the REM can can build their in the future when the people opposed move out or even better see the light and how much better the elevated track would be with and active transportation corridor. 😊

[@MrLuchenkov]

The East link will happen, it's almost certain. Legault has all to gain from it: the CAQ could gain a few seats in a predominantly French-speaking but neglected area of the city. The link has a large support base among the voters, it's just a loud minority of NIMBY people bitching about it and claiming some ugly buildings with no architectural value built in 1947 would be like losing the Louvre.

[@dznrboy]

People said the same thing about the new elevated GO Transit line in Toronto, and what we've seen is better service, new green spaces for the local neighbourhoods, and a new bike path that will eventually connect to downtown. I would bet the so-called "environmental group" protesting was formed to oppose the new transit line and has little to no data to support what they are saying.

[@snaffu1]

You'll never need to convince me about the value of L's or other similar forms of mass transit. I've grown up through more than enough to open my eyes to the idiosyncrasies, side effects and failures of our current car-centric systems.

[@Raysworld0712]

Before REM, I took directly bus 47 from home to downtown Montreal. But now I need to take a bus to Terminal Panama, then take REM, then take another bus. Not only me, all my colleagues live in Brossard will have much longer commuting time.

[@toastsandwich2862]

The 47 stopped at terminal panama too.. and where did the extra bus come from in downtown Montréal? Terminus of the REM is downtown too.

[@SAmaryllis]

Thanks for specifically calling out the older elevated trains in Chicago - I've lived in several apartments near those tracks and it is actually disruptively loud through the walls. It's loud, too, every time I'm at a station. The direct sound comparisons was helpful for me to hear how much quieter the REM is! Having service every 2.5 - 5 minutes sounds like an absolute dream though, I can't count how many times I've juuuuust missed a train in Chicago and now have to wait 10 - 20 min for the next one to come. What a pain! I'm interested in getting a better understanding of how the automated trains work

[@CoyoteDis]

J'adore votre test de son et la comparaison avec le train et les autos... Pas grand monde se plaint du bruit des automobiles autour de chez soi, pourtant le REM est pas plus bruyant et apporte tellement d'avantages en mobilité et pour l'environnement. (j'avais pas fini la vidéo en écrivant le commentaire, vous le dites et très bien, à la fin !)

[@kobilka2021]

Great video! as someone who benefits from the Montreal metro everyday I just cannot understand why the government would listen to a very small group shutting down infrastructure that would benefit millions and reduce traffic in the city.

[@FirstLast-et3sw]

Dealt with MHM protestors. It was shocking how misinformed many of the protestors were particularly the ring leader you interviewed. Other boroughs fought hard to get the REM and were rejected.

[@SCFR_Guest5]

The REm is basically the Canadian equivalent of the French RER

[@carlinthomas9482]

Thank you for making this video, elevated rail is probably some of the most misunderstood infrastructure currently.

[@MrLiguinii]

Rest in pieces, tunelpalooza.

[@gamecubebro]

Are you kidding me Montreal, I've been living here for over 10 years and you're telling me the one major developed feature, a REM! And yet they're denying it. Merci Montreal...

[@LostMekkaSoft]

when i visited kopenhagen for a conference, i was so impressed by their automated metro network. the stretches that i used were mostly elevated, but they did fit in so nicely that it was hard to imagine what the space would look like without it. and the level of convenience that can be provided by automated trains is just insane. no delays due to traffic, no train schedules needed because the come by so frequently and the view from inside the front part is just awesome! and, as a small bonus, when the trains start from a station, they sound like the start from "moby - extreme ways" :D

[@spookysenpai7642]

I more or less prefer on-ground trains (LRT and Commuter trains in particular) because they're affordable and flexible for commuting, but I can't undermine elevated trains' benefit. Despite their expense, which is not a lot compared to on-ground rail, are a lot better for commuting at long distances and faster than surface rail. It also attracts tourists from train stations, bus stations, and airports. To experience a comfortable ride on an elevated metro and it's a simple and cheap tour. It's lovely. Every city should build more of these.

[@WhiskyCanuck]

The actual construction cost of on-ground is cheaper than elevated, but if you don't already own the continuous strip of land it'll be on and/or already have a right of way, it becomes more expensive to buy (or expropriate) all that land & demolish anything that may be on it. Elevated has a much smaller real estate footprint, and much more of the existing structures on the path can be left in place.

[@ianhomerpura8937]

If your city is prone to floods, having elevated rail lines helps commuters to stil be able to go from place to place even if traffic is paralyzed below them. Manila and Bangkok experience this all the time.

[@szurketaltos2693]

On ground rail is mostly legacy rail from times when cities were smaller and expropriation was easier. Nowadays, it's generally a bad idea for urban contexts due to the costs and conflicts with the urban fabric.

[@mohammedsarker5756]

@@szurketaltos2693 yeah, either go underground or elevated. If the money's there, cities should cap rail yards like how NYC did with Hudson Yards (literally built a whole neighborhood over a massive cap over the West End Railyard) so that new buildings or parks or whatnot can be built on top of said cap. We should also cap over massive highways if removal truly isn't an option

[@eslachance]

I feel the need to point out that at 1:05 you fail to mention that there is currently another expansion being built to the metro system, the blue line extension. I'd know because I have to deal with the absolute hell of traffic problems (not just with cars) caused by the closure of literally all the main streets going north-south, in the area. So, yes, it'll have been 20 years between new metro stations opening, but still, it's important to mention! I'd also want to say that the metro seems to stagnate in size other than the aforementioned 2 expansions, but there's still work going on. The modernization of the metro train themselves is still ongoing, there's been accessibility elevators being installed in each station, etc. I'm super glad the REM is opening, and I'm real sad to see a bunch of people *clearly each individually in their car* whining against an eastern expansion, but don't minimize the Metro system :(

[@Legion849]

The only ones complaining are the car people. They are the loudest and the crowd with the most problems to them a metal box with wheels and sitting in traffic is good

[@onmywheel]

👍

[@moshdee456]

We need this in NYC! South Brooklyn, E NY, Queens, etc are sorely lacking! Audit the MTA!

[@scenicdepictionsofchicagolife]

Here in Chicago we cherish out L trains. I cant believe people would actively lobby against it!

[@NicoRTM]

In my country is the opposite, people gets happy if metro lines get near where they live. They get better access to everywhere, land value increases, maybe even car traffic decreases...

[@My-Opinion-Doesnt-Matter]

Is it China?

[@NicoRTM]

@@My-Opinion-Doesnt-Matter No, it is Chile, a Latam country. But I'm pretty sure this applies to most EU contries too.

I live near the Américo Vespucio Ave. and I wish a Line 4A expansion near my home.

[@adavirus69]

If there are elevated freeways why can’t we have elevated train lines

[@KatharineOsborne]

I live in London and the DLR is actually really cool and feels futuristic (and because there’s no driver you can sit right up front for a great view). We also have the Overground which is elevated in places. I love living in a city that doesn’t require me to own a car (and I infrequently take Uber). Together with the bus system and the Underground, plus rail, you can get anywhere pretty much at any time. You can even get to Paris in a couple of hours just using trains.

[@emilioivanjimenezlopez5798]

As a Mexican living in a big city with only a brt as transit, we actually do the opposite, recently a new highway renovation proyect was completed and people were protesting against this and in favor of a metro or light rail system, the fact that people in big city in a developed nation dont want this kind of transit is astonishing to me

[@abchaplin]

I have long held the opinion that elevating Ottawa's LRT would have been cheaper and less disruptive than running it through the downtown core through complex geology, but that ship has sailed.

[@ZorroPepe1]

This makes me remind the issues and discussions around Bogota Metro We have the most populated city on the continent (10 million people) without a metro, and instead we have a 113km long BRT system with a new line being built and 2 more in extension We have been planning for 80 years how to build it and the project that managed to pass the studies and become a reality now has a lot of opposition for being elevated. The Metro became a political battle and now they make the people of Bogota believe that it is better not to have a metro than to have an elevated one lol

[@TheNewTravel]

Great video :)

[@PotatoToon]

People will always complain when something is new, and then with time it will become an icon of the city and they will be proud of it. If you look at Amsterdam the population were furious when they started to replace roads and highways with bike and pedestrian infrastructures, and now Dutch people can't stop bragging about how good life is by not using cars. In Quebec when Hydroelectricity dams were getting build, lots of people were opposed and now the population is proud of being a leader in hydroelectricity. The issue with the REM is that the autorities listened to the 3 people who were mad about it. The REM is already becoming an icon and people are already proud of every aspects of it. It is possible that after seeing the overwheming positive feedback of the REM it will send a signal to the people in charge to go forward with new plans.

[@GalladofBales]

I love elevated Metros! I like that they’re cheaper, because a lot of cities need to build trains, and fast, to cut car trips. But I also like that you get to see the city from the train, and also see the train from the city! It’s like the perfect advertisement for public transportation. Also, maybe hot take, I also love the elevated subway lines in New York. I still don’t find the noise any worse than an arterial road with cars.

[@JoshLemer]

As someone enjoying the Metro Vancouver Skytrain system every day, it truly boggles the mind how anyone could be opposed to a line through their 'hood. It's truly a game changer!

[@discursion]

I left Montreal when it began construction and returned when it was nearly done. The REM is an awesome idea - we need more of those projects all across the country and America. When is the high-speed train linking Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal and Quebec City (and everything in between)?

[@ntatenarin]

The elevated train is literally outside my window across the alley in Chicago. I love the train sounds and take pride in living next to a station. I'll admit it took about a 2 weeks to get used to it while sleeping.

[@zenmastermtl]

Well congrats, you successfully made the north-east of the island even more isolated than it already is. So while the south shore and west island use this to grow and prosper, the east will languish in old busted streets, bitching about why businesses and new projects won't come to the east. Must be the fault of the Anglos! Of course, 5-10 years down the line, once they see how effective the REM is, they will be complaining that it isn't extended out east and insist they want it too.

[@jeankagian1505]

These people are crazy.

[@martinplasse174]

Honestly I think the train might give some visual appeal and variety to those aesthetically "underwhelming" neighborhoods. This is so depressing, it's so hard to be proud to be a Québécois for so many reasons that keep piling up.

[@glasscity3104]

In Perth Western Australia ,one of our legacy train lines are being rebuilt as elevated rail lines as part of the greater Metronet project.

[@chronographer]

Melbourne Australia has just spent a huge amount of money raising the electrified metro rail network to avoid level crossings with the road network. I thought it might be ugly or loud but actually the sections that are raised are quieter and nicer places to be. Even though it's not a completely raised network, only in some small sections, it is nice.

[@Neptunewakes]

I took the REM this morning from Central station to Panama and back. WOW what a wonderful project! I was already impressed prior to taking it but being on it and actually experiencing it was an honor. Everyone seemed really impressed with the system, nothing but positive comments. What a tragedy that the REM de L'est project got shelved....

[@mremumerm]

looking in Envy from Halifax.

[@shauncameron8390]

Same here, but all the way to the Brossard terminal. Man, what a suburb Brossard is!

[@akihikotojo188]

Ugh this feels like such a classic Canadian transit situation (at least in the cities I’ve lived in). Can’t have it because it’s change. I wouldn’t be too surprised if a petro chem company was funding the “environmentalists”, but they could also be… confused is a word. I’ve met plenty of people like that here. The noise thing is such bogus as well. noise pollution is a hugely important and detrimental thing but even if the train would be as loud as highway traffic when it passes, it’s intermittent, and would help to reduce the noise of nearby roads and highways by reducing the number of people using them.

[@szurketaltos2693]

Agree with you on most points, but the REM will not reduce traffic. The only thing that can reliably do so is a congestion charge.

[@mohammedsarker5756]

@@szurketaltos2693 if its reliable and convenient, sure it can. Can it reduce it enough/to your preference? I dunno, but i support congestion pricing anyways to help fund transit and cut down on congestion

[@szurketaltos2693]

@@mohammedsarker5756 if driving is reduced then you get an induced demand effect unless (1) congestion pricing or (2) there's no more demand to induce, which is unlikely unless the city is shrinking in population

[@akihikotojo188]

@@szurketaltos2693 I agree about the congestion charge. Out of curiosity, why wouldn't the REM reduce car traffic though? different target demograhic? Wrong place for stations? Too much driving culture? I don't live in Montreal so I'm far from up to date on what things are like there.

[@gnoishcnshcha3160]

Cable car is one of the best options of public transport and it is unaware by most people. It cause little affects on sky views and low cost , faster building time and so on.

[@davvvvooooo]

Sydney is building an automated metro. The first section was completed in 2019. Section 1 connected the newer northwestern suburbs to the suburb of chatswood, which is a major business hub (very walkable place to be). It is now being extended towards the Sydney cbd and onwards. In the far northwestern end it has been built as elevated rail, and it looks fine. The land has been reserved for it, it's not obtrusive, and the views are nice. Then it goes into a tunnel for the existing areas which have been lacking a rail link, and then from Epping to chatswood it used an existing repurposed tunnel. It surfaces at chatswood station, and a new tunnel is being built for the rest of the way to the city and I'm not to sure where it will surface next. I feel that this is the best way to go by it. Having elevated rail built in existing densely populated area, it wouldve been an eyesore and rather unpleasant. Especially through Sydney city. I feel that you can kind of build around it and they have done that at the stations in the elevated area, but it wouldve look pretty bad and been pretty loud had it been floating above a quiet residencial area. I guess the reason the elevated bit doesn't look bad is bc it's been built alongside a major road away from houses.

[@Maxime_K-G]

Seeing the trains glide by also works as an advertisement for the metro. Underground metros with confusing passageways and diagrams just do not have the same allure, especially for people with options.

[@sjasonwang7384]

I frequently visit Montreal and love the city. I'm so excited for the REM!! I'm seriously impressed that Montreal built this so quickly and for such a reasonable price. It's going to pay for itself many times over in economic and quality of life benefits.

[@lzh4950]

Here in Singapore we've been installing metal skirting along elevated railways (built on concrete viaducts) since 2018 & they seem quite effective in muffling the noise made by trains passing by

[@SNeaker328]

Was just in Montreal this past weekend, and there was so much buzz about the REM.

[@jlpack62]

Miami has two elevated systems that run through its core, and it's not killing the city. On the other hand, the elevated I-95 on the west side of downtown is substantial vibe killer.

[@austinh.]

As a person raised by an driverless automatic train , it is an absolute heaven to be able to view the journey from above and being able to roleplay as a captain at the front. The Vancouver SkyTrain was such a one of a kind during my childhood and I progress to see new ones being built in other cities.

[@caseyirwin404]

I love the el in cities like Chicago and New York, and the outdoor sections here in Toronto. And the first thing I'll do when I get back to Montreal is take that ride over Nun's Island to the South Shore. But I'm not on board with driverless trains. Leaving HAL 9000 aside, I'm all about jobs for people. Automation has put a lot of folks out of work and killed more than enough cities, and basically a young person's prospects these days are limited to barista, or tattoo artist. But hey, the company saves on salaries and benefits

[@o67_ant]

​@@caseyirwin404found a luddite

[@Yoruichi__Shihouin]

Here in Korea the trains go almost everywhere and then you can take a bus the rest of the way. Trains and buses are dirt cheap, maybe 2-4 dollars total depending on where you are going.

[@22k_LOL]

Sounds of train passing by is music to my ears

[@kev2034]

A small township near my city is having a similar discussion but the opposite way. They're worried not elevating a section of high speed train will fracture their town. I'm on their side on this one just because they already get a lot of freight rail going through that can cut the town in half for a good 20 minutes if you're not lucky.

[@StLouis-yu9iz]

That’s only because precision scheduled railroading has caused trains to be insanely long. (Also why Amtrak [and I’m sure Canadian intercity fail too] has to wait in the passing sidings because the freight trains are too long. So illegally we have to wait for them instead of them waiting on us. :/

[@kev2034]

@@StLouis-yu9iz Ah this is in the UK so freight trains don't tend to be so long but it's more that there's a lot of train traffic already. There's a large interchange and sidings nearby so you can have multiple trains go by too close to let traffic through. Part of it is elevated so it does alleviate traffic from passenger trains but slow freight got left with the at grade crossings.

[@ianhomerpura8937]

@@StLouis-yu9iz iirc both CN and CP also adopted "precision" "scheduled" barely railroading and failed miserably.

[@StLouis-yu9iz]

@@ianhomerpura8937 hahaha, good one. Sorry to hear that though :/

[@TheFarix2723]

As far as the complaints about noise, I think it is more because of the type, or pitch, of the noise that trains cause. Squealing steel wheels on steel rails produce a spine-tingling sensation regardless of what the decibel level is, like nails on a chalkboard. A loud car motor is nowhere near as nerve-racking and thus people are more capable of tolerating them, even if they are louder.

[@OhTheUrbanity]

In our experience walking the line over the past few weeks and riding it yesterday, the REM did not really have the squealing sound of the VIA and exo trains (which travel through the same corridor into Gare Central). It really was more of a whooshing or gliding sound. That's our experience at least.

[@TheFarix2723]

@@OhTheUrbanity The REM may have dealt with the issue with better geometry, but most people's experiences with rail are going to be the consent squealing sound from the wheels. Unfortunately, the only way to convince people otherwise is through personal experiences. But that requires building the line in the first place. It's an annoying Catch-22 situation.

[@MrBirdnose]

@@OhTheUrbanityThat's probably because they're new. Wait until the wheel profile wears down a bit and they'll start shrieking.

[@m.e.3862]

I think some of the surprise of the noise is because the Montreal metro runs on rubber tires so there’s no metal squealing. I guess that everyone thought it’d be the same since the rem is a modern system

[@caseyirwin404]

The squealing occurs when they go around a curve as the flanges on the wheels rub against the rails. They can mitigate that with oils, but when a train is going straight, there is no squealing

[@waisinglee1509]

If they're worried about noise, just put up noise barriers like they do here in Singapore for the elevated sections of the MRT.

[@richardvargas2190]

The same controversy is happening here in Bogotá, Colombia. Activist pro-Subway are boycotting a great elevated project.

[@smallmj2886]

I really look forward to the REM going to the airport. I exclusively used transit when I visited Montreal last year and the only downside of it was the 747 bus to the airport. Slow, delayed, overcrowded, and the stop was relegated to the far edge of the terminal.

[@GorgeDawes]

Even that is way better than it used to be, given that you no longer have to change buses at the Dorval station to get downtown from the airport.

[@LiliaArmoury]

we've had these kind of arguments in australia. when melbourne had to introduce skyrail (elevated rail) on part of the dandenong line because it would have been too difficult to sink the line below ground. thankfully the negative voices didn't win against the elevated sections.

[@JasonLerado]

Extremely small but noticeable bonus, as a good chunk of Vancouver SkyTrain have paths underneath the elevated guideways. So, the guideway provides nice shade from Sunlight and rain for pedestrian pathways.

[@itoen9080]

You guys really need to go to Japan. Elevated train heaven. Well public transit heaven in general.