STM Kinda Sucks, Actually

 This is the first in a multi-part series where I reflect on my time that I spent in Montreal recently.

I'm going to start by saying this, which I had said before: transit in Montreal is not better than transit in Toronto. Yes, the Montreal Metro is better than the TTC subway, but the EXO regional rail network and the STM's bus services are, overall, not good.

While I held that view prior to my most recent visit in Montreal, making the point of taking a wide variety of routes opened my eyes to just how many issues there really with the bus network in particular in the city. In this blog post, I will outline some of my reasons as to why Montreal's bus network is significantly lacking, and why it fails to live up to Toronto's. The reasons are as follows:

1. Issues with frequency, span, and poor management;
2. Incomplete network: dead-end routes and weird terminal points;
3. Incomplete network: too peak-oriented; and
4. Wasting of buses.

This piece is a bit technical in nature, but I think it's good to reflect on practical issues that I experienced in the city. Noting that bus ridership in Montreal is much lower than it was a decade or two ago, there is benefit in taking these observations, creating objectives, and acting on those objectives.

Number One: Issues with frequency, span, and poor management

Often, this tends to be the biggest thing people notice about insufficient transit. While they are three distinct issues, I grouped them together because they have a similar impact: transit that struggles to serve trips. I will give examples of each.

While there are some routes that run at decent frequencies, they are often peak-oriented. For example, the 51 Édouard-Montpetit, a route I used extensively in my time in the city, operates every two minutes eastbound during morning rush hour. However, westbound in the same time period, service ranges from every four to every ten minutes, which, in any case, is a less frequent than the other direction. This is compounded later in the night: after 10pm, service westbound is every fifteen to twenty minutes, but eastbound is every twenty-five to twenty-seven minutes. These waits are a bit extreme for a frequent route, and having taking eastbound 51s during the evening, I can assure you that ridership is still very high. I have previously written about issues with half-frequencies on STM before, and they are still just as frustrating as they were then! Toronto has issues with frequency, absolutely, but there are no routes that run more frequently in one direction than the other, and many routes run every ten to fifteen minutes at all hours.

Some routes in Montreal, like the 14 Atateken, barely run at all. Despite being a convenient north-south connection, serving many dense areas with numerous points of interest, service is every thirty minutes at best, and is every fifty minutes on weekends. At this point, it isn't a very functional service at all, and you are far better off walking or biking your trip. This route's functionality is compounded by the second problem: a poor span of service. While it runs every day, service ends at 7pm. As such, while this route may work for a regular 9-5 job, such an early end of service means that many may plan their trips around it. What if they get to the stop at 7:05? Now they've inconvenienced themselves significantly, so it is worthwhile just avoiding the route.

The last issue is management. Montreal routes have significant slack built into schedules, which allows for buses to depart on time always. A bus may have twenty minutes at the end of the line before it is supposed to depart again, so falling of schedule is hard. I think this is (mostly...) a good thing. However, managing service staying on time throughout the route, and not just at the ends, is non-existent. On a Sunday, for example, the 51 had multiple buses that were a half-hour late, or more, including one bus that was one hour and seventeen minutes late! This operated all throughout the day, and no effort was made to rejig the schedule. I'm not the only one noticing this! TTC does this exact same thing a lot, so I don't think either agency is particularly better at management.

One last thing related to this topic: the 140 Fleury is the most woefully infrequent route I have ever seen. Like, thirty minute service in the midday is one-third of what it should be.

Number Two: Incomplete network: dead-end routes and weird terminal points

The STM network feels incomplete. In many ways, some routes are so focussed on providing service in a particular way, that trips not in that way are completely ignored. Many routes have termini that don't make connections to other routes, so backtracking becomes a significant problem. 

The route I have chosen to focus on here is the 26 Mercier-Est. Service ends at Claude-Masson and Anne-Courtemanche. However, the neighbourhood doesn't end here, and there are nearby routes that connections are not made with. While the route is physically close to a Costco and an industrial park north of Highway 40, people on the bus are forced to travel south, then come all the way back north, or walk a decent distance and completely avoid the 26. This route, I argue, doesn't fit within the network; it does its own thing, but doesn't increase mobility for the city as a whole. 

The 26 is so close to those other bus stops, yet does not make a connection with them here.

Staying on the east of the island, you really feel the downtown-focus. In the east-end, there are two termini: Terminus Sherbrooke, and Terminus 100e. While there are a million connections from each towards the Metro, there is not a single route that connects the two together, despite being less than a kilometer apart as the crow flies. As such, trying to get around Pointe-aux-Trembles may mean having to transfer once, or even twice, to other routes with very limited frequencies.

So close, yet so far...

Terminal points for routes can be odd too. The 39 des Grandes-Prairies ends at d'Amiens and Hôtel-de-Ville, an otherwise irrelevant intersection in a residential area. While it does make connections with other nearby routes, the end point doesn't really make sense. Why doesn't it connect to the metro, or meet with more routes? Surely a number of passengers on this route wish to go further west than Pie-IX, right? Someone coming off the Metro must transfer to one route, then to this one, before being able to get to their destination. It makes it hard to use, and coordinating trips is extremely difficult.

Number Three: Incomplete network: too peak-oriented

There are so many routes in Montreal than run one-way, during peaks only. The expansive industrial areas of the city are the biggest offender of this. The industrial areas of Rivière-des-Prairies is served by the 39, the 428, the 448, and more. However, late at night, service here is spotty at best. Let's take the 428 Express Parcs industriels de l'est. In the morning, this route picks up at Station Radisson, and drops off in the industrial parks. In the afternoon, it picks up in the parks, and brings passengers to Radisson. It doesn't run in the opposite peak direction, and there is no service outside of rush. This is a problem though, as industrial areas often to not correspond to a traditional 9-5 work schedule. Someone may work a late night shift, and the 428 runs right past their work, but they can't take it since it goes the wrong way. The 428 has no local corresponding service, so this person may need to transfer quite a few times to get home. I'm not saying that service needs to be 24/7 everywhere, but the 428 is already running not-in-service back to Station Radisson, would it really kill to have it run in service? Would having a bus heading back to the garage late at night doing one extra trip really break the bank?

What a functional schedule!

Aside industrial routes, there are a number of routes that could provide good cross-city connections at all hours, yet have such a limited, schedule. The three that I think of immediately are the 409 Express des Sources, 430 Express Pointe-aux-Trembles, and 460 Express Métropolitaine. If they ran all the time, in both directions, they could seriously cut down commute times for some of the more far-flung parts of the island.

While TTC can improve service to industrial areas, especially in the late evening, service is bidirectional on all but two routes, and both these routes have corresponding local routes that can be used for opposite peak trips. As such, transit is a bit more functional in Toronto for trips that don't fit traditional commutes.

Number Four: Wasting of buses

My god, for an agency that is constantly struggling with their budget, STM has no issue wasting buses. This is a huge problem when there is a finite amount of buses. STM does this in three key ways.

The first way is related to the slack in schedules. While I think this is good as it keeps departures on time, it wastes vehicles significantly. Let's say we have a route that runs every fifteen minutes, and takes approximately one hour to do a round trip. This would require four buses to operate. However, STM has put fifteen minutes slack in the schedule at each end of the route, meaning that two additional buses are required. As such, while the route only needs four buses, six are used, with little visible benefit for the customers. TTC does this too, but to a much lower degree, and the slack at the ends is far less than what STM provides.

The second way is with useless routes. I'll give an example here. The 485 Express Antoine-Faucon operates from Station Lionel-Groulx, stopping at Terminus Dorval, then Terminus Fairview, before providing local service along Antoine-Faucon to Château-Pierrefonds. This route runs weekdays until 7pm, and peak service is every fifteen minutes, which is great! During rush hours, STM also runs the 218 Antoine-Faucon, between Terminus Fairview and Château-Pierrefonds, running the exact same route at the 485. This route is every thirty minutes. Wait, why? Who uses this route? The 485 serves the same stops as the 218, goes much further, and runs more frequently. STM wastes two buses on the 218 when they could be better used providing more frequent service on the 485, or even elsewhere on the island. There is not a single trip that can be made on the 218 but not on the 485. I wish this was a one-off case, but sadly I can think of a number of examples off the top of my head that are similar, if not the exact same: 68 Pierrefonds and 468 Express Pierrefonds/Gouin; 165 Côte-des-Neiges and 465 Express Côte-des-Neiges; 80 du Parc and 480 Express du Parc; the list goes on. Each of these examples has either a local route that doesn't have to exist since the express covers all the stops, or is an express route that runs through downtown (empty), serving many of the office buildings throughout (also empty).

The 485 (above) is such a good route, why on earth does the 218 exist?

The last way that STM wastes buses is with trying to provide service connections everywhere, resulting in connections being insufficient in all directions. The worst example of this is Chemin Bord-du-Lac, in West-Island. From Terminus MacDonald, and running east, you have the 200 Ste-Anne-de-Bellevue, the 211 Bord-du-Lac, and the 405 Express Bord-du-Lac. The first of these runs to Terminus Fairview, whereas the latter two both run to Station Lionel-Groulx, the only difference being that the 405 gets on the autoroute a smidge sooner, at St-Charles. However, the schedules are not coordinated. While the three routes average to a bus every ten minutes on the common portion, the reality is that all three area scheduled at the same time, then another pack comes a half-hour later. The result are three routes that remain relatively empty, instead of one frequent, very busy route, running from one terminus, with one service pattern. Later this year, STM aims to add more trips to the 211, which is good, but doesn't solve the big issue at hand.

Conclusion

STM's bus network has a lot wrong. I know Toronto and the TTC are far from perfect, but at least some effort is made to make a network that is functional, instead of one that picks a small segment of trips to accomodate.