Elevated Trains Are Good, Actually

[@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

[@hnitsua]

Yknow a Blvd is already ruined if it has 8 lanes

[@braindump1446]

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

[@DiscoverMontréal]

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.

[@Sp4mMe]

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".

[@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.

[@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.

[@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.

[@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.

[@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.

[@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?

[@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

[@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.

[@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.

[@marctreal]

@@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]

@@marctrealwhat 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

[@marctreal]

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

[@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.

[@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.

[@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 😞

[@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

[@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.

[@hnitsua]

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

[@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.

[@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.

[@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.

[@scenicdepictionsofchicagolife]

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

[@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.

[@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!

[@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.

[@SCFR_Guest5]

The REm is basically the Canadian equivalent of the French RER

[@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.

[@adavirus69]

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

[@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.

[@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.

[@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.

[@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.

[@hnitsua]

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

[@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.

[@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.

[@carlinthomas9482]

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

[@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

[@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.

[@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 !)

[@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.

[@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.

[@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.

[@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!

[@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

[@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.

[@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.

[@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.

[@moshdee456]

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

[@MrLiguinii]

Rest in pieces, tunelpalooza.

[@brianmombourquette2673]

The hardest thing about life is the discovery that being right has almost no use...

[@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.

[@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.

[@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]

👍

[@TheNewTravel]

Great video :)

[@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.

[@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.

[@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.

[@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

[@22k_LOL]

Sounds of train passing by is music to my ears

[@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

[@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.

[@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

[@WebSoak]

Many major American cities originally had elevated railways through their cores

[@sachamm]

As a Vancouverite, the one thing I don't like about Skytrain is that it is freakin' LOUD. Obviously a solvable problem. Otherwise, it is a huge boon to the region. I was biking along the Expo line yesterday and there were tons of people walking and running and biking the trail under the tracks. It connects people in more ways than one and I agree with your analysis that they have many other advantages.

[@polishtheday]

I never found it loud. Arriving in Montreal I found the trains on the metro so loud that you can’t hear the announcements let alone have a conversation. I also covered many kilometres walking the trails under the Skytrain tracks. If they made any mistakes it was putting the stations too far from residences and not having many shops at the stations.

[@happydictator2523]

In Melbourne Australia we are currently elevating our train lines and it's fantastic, they are going above ground for most parts and then tunneling when needed. The land under these train lines has become community space with a bike track and walking track that goes into town, reducing the number of cyclists on roads because they have a safer alternative route. There are picnic tables, public BBQs, concrete table tennis tables and enclosed off lead dog parks. The noise from the trains has decreased, especially with the removal of the bells at road crossings, they were loud, high pitched and could go for ages during peak hour. Traffic is 1000% better because all of the boom gates and road crossing have been removed, it used to take up to 20 mins to get through a road crossing during peak hour due to the number of trains on the lines, now you only have to stop if someone is at the lights and wants to cross the road. I think that it's been fantastic for our community and increased the value of properties in the area.

[@metropod]

Everyone gets it into their heads that all elevated rail lines are like the over a century old structures built in Chicago and here in New York, when those were products of their times and were built with the materials people at the time could build with.

[@ianhomerpura8937]

To be fair, those old elevated rail lines STILL serve the general public, like the ones in Berlin and Tokyo, plus they have shops right under the rail lines, so it's always fun to walk around the stations and enjoy the local food.

[@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.

[@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.

[@itoen9080]

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

[@DinoCon]

Highways: Emit lots of heat due to asphault Elevated rail: More shade

[@davidbarts6144]

Tellingly, Seattle built two sections of its initial Link segment as a surface-running tram, and never again has chosen that option. For good reason: the long surface-running section in the median of MLK Avenue is the slowest and most delay-prone part of the system. A lot of what is being built in the new extensions is, you guessed it, elevated.

[@MrBirdnose]

Part of the problem was Seattlites never really learned they couldn't turn left in front of the trains. Seemed like there was a collision every week when I was there.

[@christofferraby4712]

REM would be great. No potential flooding of subways in the future. No intersecting with car traffic.

[@RoboJules]

I noticed that in BC, objectively beneficial public works projects often steamroll opponents. The response from the province and the COV is always somewhere along the lines of "I'm sorry you feel that way." This has happened with the Canada Line, The Evergreen Line, and the Broadway Subway. We have a government who does not give a single flying f*** when it comes to myopic boomers waving signs complaining about a transit project. I don't know why that is, but it could be that we're a much younger city with an ever shifting, dynamic population of mostly millennials and Gen-Xers, while many boomers are basically retiring from the civil service en masse. Our premier was born in the 70's, as was our mayor, so both of them are a lot more in tune with what a modern society requires to get ahead.

[@polishtheday]

Blaming the government is pointless because they’re just giving those who vote what they want. If you want change you need to advocate for it and that includes having polite debates with those you disagree with that are rooted in logic, not emotion. I followed the debate about transit for years when I lived in Vancouver. It was mostly about money. Those who complained the loudest drove to work and didn’t want their tax dollars spent on transit nor did they want it running through their neighbourhoods. You couldn’t blame the politicians because any government that supported transit would have lost the next election. There were all kinds of complaints and protests leading up to the opening of the Expo Line that were dampened by the excitement over Expo 86. Once it opened there were still detractors. Every time there was an outage someone would point out its faults. Talk of running the extension to Richmond using the existing rail corridor along Arbutus was met with neighbourhood concerns that stations situated near Shaughnessy mansions would attract crime. Some would use single weather-related shutdown as an example of the unreliability of a system that worked well the other 364 days a year. The second line after the original Expo line should have been to UBC. It had the most riders. Instead we got the 99B pulling up at Broadway Station every four minutes to cram another articulated busload of passengers into a standing room only bus. Taking the bus was considered socially unacceptable. When I started working on the UBC campus I was one of three people in a department of sixty that didn’t drive to work. I wasn’t in poverty. I had a good job and could afford a car. Why other people insisted on going everywhere in one when they didn’t have to has always puzzled me. Things began changing about a year after the Skytrain went into service. It was a gradual process that also saw the introduction of reduced fare transit passes for students and those working for large employers. New office buildings started including showers for those who wanted to cycle to work. In other words transit was finally socially acceptable. It took twenty years but my colleagues were finally taking the bus. I think the final key to social acceptance was the arrival of the iPhone - that may explain what you think is a generational difference when it’s really what we get used to and/or what we find convenient. I’ve had to drive to work a few times to drop off the dog. Because I’d never done this before (at least not in a city) I hadn’t realised how stressful driving to work could be. It also meant not checking text or email messages, or people-watching, or just enjoying the view of the mountains. I’d assumed my commute on public transit was stressful. It sometimes could be when I was in a hurry during rush hour but every day wasn’t like that. Some people haven’t had that experience so they don’t know what they’re missing.

[@farorest3621]

I'm still so upset about the REM de l'est being effectively cancelled. The East side of Montreal is so underserved by public transit, just like the West Island currently is. But, at least the West will get its REM line. It's a huge mistake I feel the residents of the eastern part of the island will regret when the full REM project is finally completed and opened.

[@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 :/

[@Anotherfunnyword]

Never let "perfection" become the enemy of "better."

[@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.

[@goab1287]

Cool to mention the Netherlands! I have used quite a few elevated railroads here, like the metro to Rotterdam Ahoy (a big eye and ear sore) and the rail line around Arnhem Zuid (Arnhem South, a thoroughly unpleaseant station especially with wind) A number of these elevated lines have also been moved underground, like at Rotterdam Blaak and Delft. In both cases the city improved a lot. (well except financially) It used to split the city, was an eye sore and was very noisy. A lot more can be said about how moving underground was better, but it is beside the point. It was never a case of having a railroad on a bridge or having no railroad at all in the Netherlands. That is what Montreal is facing. Nice video and channel name! Keep it up!

[@test40323]

Nice episode. How are they gonna address snow clearing with elevated rails?

[@OhTheUrbanity]

rem.info/en/news/rem-and-winter

[@MrAronymous]

Trains will move the snow and remove the ice. Switches will be heated. That's basically it.

[@test40323]

@@OhTheUrbanity , thanks for the link, it was informative. I'm less worried about passenger comfort than safety. e.g. derailment caused by snow or ice or stranding passengers on elevated sections on power outage and without human oversight how safe will it be teething problems aside.

[@samuelledoux8579]

Merci, merci, merci!

[@somewhereupthere785]

The under design that's curved makes sense. It helps extend sunlight, makes it seem less imposing.

[@marvintpandroid2213]

" Ruin an 8 lane 'boulevard' " 8 lanes, its already ruined.

[@skye.etandah]

I loves the REM 💖 I hope the REM est will b picked back up ✨

[@coolbreez773]

Democracy stops progress...

[@barryrobbins7694]

Parts of the BART system in the San Francisco Bay Area have elevated trains on single pillars, below are bicycle and walking paths. BART uses a third rail instead of overhead power, so it is more esthetically pleasing anyway.

[@leopoldleoleo]

The REM de l’est debacle is one of the most frustrating and disheartening things to happen in recent Montreal politics. To the point that I wish I could attend some kind of counter-demonstration

[@aarons3008]

Thanks!

[@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.

[@clawscrab3497]

It's exactly the same where I live. People are so against "skyrail" as we call it here, but very few people see the benefits. It's because they won't be able to drive their precious car wherever they want while works to build it are going on. And they are the same people who complain that nothing is being done, but when something is done they still complain about it. All of the skyrail projects I have seen here have really improved the areas they serve, particularly one in a suburb I used to live in. I would say the skyrail has made a big improvement to what was there before. Being able to walk from one side to the other without having to go to a designated crossing point is the best part of it. That and how it unites communities rather than keep them divided.

[@emporioalnino4670]

I'm here to see anything Melbourne related. Our 'SkyRail' was a great success!

[@Matt_JJz]

Ima say this once, if you advocate for cars over a metro system. You are far from an environmentalist.

[@jamesorlando8178]

Great video! I love elevated trains - I live in the shadow of NYC’s J train, which is your classic “ugly” / loud el (built in the 1800s!), but I actually love it 😂 can’t wait to ride the REM next time I’m in MTL!

[@MetaView7]

Meanwhile, CNA has built 40,000 km of high-speed trains and never looked back.

[@CEostiguy]

I’d be curious to see you guys post a video with Raymond Moquin or Daniel Chartier of the Collectif-Environnement-Mercier-Est. I feel like a lot of people are dismissing their position as « NIMBYism » when there are many arguments that are overlooked (ie: Governance issues, no-concurrency clause on a 5km radius of the REM…) I feel like their arguments resonated a lot while the REM was being built (and we figured out how ugly those cables were), but will probably lose their impact as time goes on. So yeah, having the other side of the coin could be interesting, even for posterity. Not a lor of transit KZbinrs actually interact witg NIMBYs, it’d be quite the experience!

[@TD-gc5tq]

There’s far more better critics than theses two. The CEM-E board members are way too disingenuous and actively partake in disinformation.

[@toastsandwich2862]

They may have some valid complaints, but none of them warrented what happened to the project. The benefits outweighed the negatives.

[@SilentEire]

9:35 Nice zoom 🏎️ 💨

[@Ethan_Fox_CM]

I live in Metro Vancouver, the Skytrain is very good. Years ago, I was heading to Surrey from Downtown Vancouver (Expo Line) On the section of track after Commercial Broadway station, there are a lot of apartments windows that are very close and on level with the Skytrain windows. I saw a gentlemen enjoying a morning cup of tea/coffee, completely naked, staring right at us as we went by. He did seemed amused with himself and in fairness, it did make me laugh.

[@jameskennedy7093]

Speaking as someone in Philly where we have a number of elevated trains (the most obvious is “the El” but also several of pur interurban trolleys or Regional Rail trains have elevated portions) I can say that even the more historic trains that you used as a rhetorical flex point are actually good. I lived in West Philly and in Kensington, and both neighborhoods have their issues, but the El isn’t one of them. And many of Philadelphia’s wealthiest neighborhoods have elevated trains. The elevated section of the R6 above Manayunk’s streets has cobblestones below it and truly makes me feel like I’m in Europe. Mt. Airy, Chestnut Hill, even the suburban “Main Line” has elevated trains. And the elevated sections of the Reading Viaduct today not only form part of the Regional Rail network up 9th Street but also have defunct sections that have been turned into beautiful parks. One of the coolest things about many neighborhoods are the limited vistas the elevated lines produce. They also protect you from the heat in summer and from rain or snow. El trains are great!

[@jameskennedy7093]

our* not pur. I’m sure this is full of cell phone typos.

[@richard-mtl]

In my opinion, there were many problems with the REM de l'Est, including: * competition with the Green line * the tunnel going to Montréal-Nord, which would have cost a fortune (why a tunnel on that branch, and not the other?) I'm disappointed that Montréal-Nord still isn't getting a rapid transit link.

[@TD-gc5tq]

Competition is not a real problem for users, it’s a problem for the STM who’s funding structure is outdated and turns against users. There’s a bunch of bus line that could be merged between different operators, providing more streamlined and frequent services across the region, but operators will staunchly defend “their” territory even if sharing would benefit users. The ARTM is trying to change that really toxic mentality. Look at other cities the size of Montreal or even smaller in Europe, there’s a lot of redundancy of transit lines, because that’s how you provide options and capacity. Speaking as someone who’s been frequently squished in the green line, competing the green line is absolutely not a bad thing. The soil composition along the North branch is just way more easier to work with. On the other hand, tunnelling in area like Mercier and downtown is really tricky; it likely means longer construction timeline, more expensive and deeper station, and other unpleasantness. The east branch also benefited from wide right-of-way like the Souligny rail corridor, which is perfect for an elevated metro.

[@TD-gc5tq]

Gotta pick a lane. So we decry a project because tunnelled hence to expensive, but also decry a project because not tunneled enough, and also decry a transit project because it offers more transit… than be disappointed that no transit project moves forward 😂

[@richard-mtl]

@@TD-gc5tq I didn't express myself clearly. I just found it problematic that there was a tunnel on one branch and not on the other, with no real effort to educate the public about the reasons for those choices. It made it seem like "We don't care about the folks in PAT so we'll go elevated, but gotta protect the views of the people in St. Leonard so let's give them a tunnel". It seemed disjointed and surely led to a lot of the grumbling about the elevated portion. If I had my way, both branches would have been a mix of elevated or street-level (yes I know that makes it difficult if not impossible to do automated trains if street-level), instead of the increased cost of a tunnel.