Make way for readers | Eastern REM

Many of you reacted to Tuesday’s editorial on the REM de l’Est. Here is an overview of your answers.



You can never make a mistake investing in public transport. Clean air is priceless.

Francois Gagnon

A torpedoed project

The original version of the REM de l’Est, proposed by CDPQ Infra, corresponded to the needs of Montrealers and should not have been torpedoed by the administration of the City of Montreal and its leaders. The new proposal seems to me unfeasible and undesirable, because of the costs generated by the underground model, the deadlines for completion, the final result: 36 billion and a necessary connection with the metro to get to downtown Montreal? Frankly, the residents of the east end of Montreal deserved better…

Sylvie Boisvert

let’s go for once

Normal that this project reaches such a cost. We are catching up half a century behind in the East. The green line has 27 stations and the orange line has 31. How much would it cost to build them today? However, 34 of them are projected over a distance comparable to the orange line for a cost per kilometer comparable to that of the blue line. The cost of underground only swells by 6% compared to the air, but finally the project becomes socially acceptable. Some argue that the traffic is insufficient, but this is a chicken and egg problem. Let us build it, this line, and development will follow. If we wait, the bill will swell even more. This type of project is essential. Procrastinating never does anything. Let’s go for once, it will make a change.

Alain Caron

Foolish !

This pharaonic project is absolutely insane: 36 billion for 34 km, to accommodate 29,000 people. With such a sum, we could accommodate all the citizens of Quebec by repairing our roads and infrastructures, which are in a lamentable state.

Estelle Laberge

We could do better

Really very expensive, this project. Why are the big cities of Europe able to create structuring and aesthetic transport networks? Yes, it is important for the east end of Montreal, but it seems to me that we could do better.

Helen Bergeron

Development tool

We have to move forward now. It is an essential tool for development and sustainable mobility that we can no longer put off. Montreal and Quebec cannot afford to do without these infrastructures. It is imperative to improve the efficiency of sustainable transport and to remove vehicles from our road network which does not have the capacity to respond to the increase in travel. It is also and above all an environmental issue. We need to take concrete action to fight climate change. In a few years, we will not stop congratulating ourselves on having carried out this great project. Let’s go without further ado.

Francois Vaillancourt, Boucherville

Act now against solo self

Obviously, we are startled when we learn of the estimated cost of the Eastern REM, but an aerial REM would not cost much less, with noise and legitimate complaints as a bonus. And if we want structuring public transport, we will have to pay the price. Above all, do not compare to 3e link, a project as useless as it was electoral, which solved nothing. Yes, it’s expensive, but if we want to phase out solo driving, we have to act now.

Bertrand Barbeau, Longueuil

Promote public transport

At that price, it just won’t happen. Now is the time to make significant investments. Since 1er July, public transit is free in Montreal for people aged 65 and over. We want to encourage this clientele to prioritize this type of transportation. At the frequency of 30 minutes, you have to plan your schedule well to keep your appointments. We recognize that the elderly are less mobile, so standing in the cold, in the rain or in the heat for long minutes is not optimal for taking public transit. If we go back to the REM de l’Est, couldn’t we consider a tramway? Much cheaper, efficient and less time consuming to build.

Carole Laberge, public transport user, Montreal

Why not a tram?

I arrive from Nice (France) and I must say that I greatly appreciated the tram leaving from the airport to go to the center of the city of Nice. In Nice there was protest as in all cities that have a tramway. But today, we should not take away their tramway from the people of Nice.

It’s important to have a good transportation service in the Montreal area, but at what cost? Is it mandatory to have a REM underground or 15 meters away in the Montreal landscape?

We surely have other priorities before investing 36 billion for transport networks. Above all, we must ask ourselves who will pay: the community of Montreal or the government of Quebec. In the latter case, does the Gaspé or Abitibi taxpayer have to pay?

We should come back with a tramway like we had in the last century in Montreal, but in a more modern version like in cities like Nice or Bordeaux or Strasbourg. We would have a tram in the center of the street. But we can pay it.

Pierre Damico, B.Sc., MA


source site-58