The Great Canadian Transit Thread

[rbt]

Originally Posted by SteelTown

In addition to the letter Mayor Fred leaked or released the confidential report on the LRT provincial cost estimates, $5 billion price tag.

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/6586383/PRIVATE-and-CONFIDENTIAL-ATTACHMENT-2.pdf

$350M for utility moves? Both Finch and Hurontario had that as a separate (much smaller) contract, cost shared with the city and companies involved.

[SteelTown]

Yeah and a whooping $510 million in "contingency" and "escalation" too.

[accord1999]

Originally Posted by rbt

$350M for utility moves? Both Finch and Hurontario had that as a separate (much smaller) contract, cost shared with the city and companies involved.

That's not unreasonable for a project of that size; without a single meter of track laid, Calgary Green Line has already spent nearly $500M on enabling works, much of which is utility and water main relocation and upgrades.

The disastrous 32 km long Honolulu Rail Transit originally projected $350M, it's now ballooned to over $880M.

Originally Posted by SteelTown

Yeah and a whooping $510 million in "contingency" and "escalation" too.

Given how recent light-rail projects have gone in North America, I'd expect it would have been needed if Hamilton was built. Calgary's already burned through its contingencies and forced into cutting back on the original plans for a 4 km tunnel through DT.

[Innsertnamehere]

A counterpoint of a project much more relevant to Hamilton is Kitchener which was built more or less on budget, and a very small budget too.

[Nouvellecosse]

Small budget perhaps, but almost 6km of the line is along a rail ROW rather integrated into a street which generally requires a lot less work and disruption. Plus we're talking about a less dense area in a smaller metro.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by SteelTown

Yeah and a whooping $510 million in "contingency" and "escalation" too.

That's sensible, because the cost always go up. I'm surprised this isn't built into every cost estimate.

[Reecemartin]

[Deleted]

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by accord1999

That's not unreasonable for a project of that size; without a single meter of track laid, Calgary Green Line has already spent nearly $500M on enabling works, much of which is utility and water main relocation and upgrades.

The disastrous 32 km long Honolulu Rail Transit originally projected $350M, it's now ballooned to over $880M.

That seems shockingly cheap for an elevated rail network in a such a remote location as Hawaïï.

[begratto]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

That seems shockingly cheap for an elevated rail network in a such a remote location as Hawaïï.

The cost is between 8 and 10 billions. That’s in $US, of course, so CAN$13B. Twice the cost of the quite similar Montreal REM project, for half the length, so 4X the cost per kilometer.

[Metro-One]

The 14 km elevated Expo Line extension to Langley is 2.9 billion I think. So less than half per km as well, but not as cheap as REM.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by begratto

The cost is between 8 and 10 billions. That’s in $US, of course, so CAN$13B. Twice the cost of the quite similar Montreal REM project, for half the length, so 4X the cost per kilometer.

That makes a whole lot more sense than $880 million.

[accord1999]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

That makes a whole lot more sense than $880 million.

For my comment regarding Honolulu Rail Transit, I was talking specifically about the utility costs for that project.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by accord1999

For my comment regarding Honolulu Rail Transit, I was talking specifically about the utility costs for that project.

I see now. I guess I didn't link the Calgary and Honolulu comments. Thanks for the clarification.

[canucklehead2]

Somehow I think outside of a few existing projects getting short extensions, large scale infrastructure investment is drying up faster than an unwatered lawn in Vegas right about now. Thanks knuckle-draggers!

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by canucklehead2

Somehow I think outside of a few existing projects getting short extensions, large scale infrastructure investment is drying up faster than an unwatered lawn in Vegas right about now. Thanks knuckle-draggers!

The financing model is the issue. Get more investors like the CDPQi and things will move. Politics are killing transit.

[Martin Mtl]

Originally Posted by p_xavier

The financing model is the issue. Get more investors like the CDPQi and things will move. Politics are killing transit.

Sad but true.

[ssiguy]

A very interesting transit initiative has taken place in the US in the last 2 weeks that could have widespread implications including in Canada.................Kansas City is bringing in free transit. Other very small {mostly resort} towns have tried it before and Austin for one year but it was a complete disaster being tried 30 years ago when ridership was collapsing nationwide and the city was in the middle of a crack cocaine war.

KC can afford to do this because they are charging a municiple sales tax to offset the drop in fare revenue. The system has such low ridership {only 31,000 unlinked trips a day} that the difference isn't great because fares only accounted for 8% of revenue anyway. Still you can't help but take your hat off to them for trying such a bold move. The city has spent a lot on it's new and expanding streetcar line and has brought in new BRT street routes and opened a new one just 2 weeks ago so it's goal for improved transit has been a long-term one and this is not just some quick vote-getting scheme a la Wynne's Tor/Lon HSR.

KC's decision has made headlines across the US and sparked a real debate about transit not just being a transportation service but also a real mechanism to reduce socio-economic stratification. I will state what I think of the idea in a few posts but would be interested in what you guys think of KC's initiative and whether it is one that Canadian cities {big or small} should be emulating.

[WhipperSnapper]

Free fares is a publicity stunt and not viable in any major Canadian city. It's completely imbalanced . There is no such thing as "free". Where is Toronto supposed to find the 120 plus million dollars? It reminds me of some of Wynne's contribution, for example, increasing the number of university scholarships while having to slash the Ontario Student Assistant Program to pay for some of it. The result is university is for free to some at the cost of others that can no longer afford it without the assistance.

[ssiguy]

Yes, there is no such thing as free anything but the same could be said of public schools, healthcare, old age security and a whole litany of government services that are also "free".

The people that were initially pushing for KC free transit were NOT transportation planners but rather civic leaders and anti-poverty activists. It is being viewed as more of an opportunity of helping reduce poverty and greater egalitarianism. How can we expect people to fully participate in our economic, social, and cultural life when not everyone has the same ability to access them? If the concern is the environment, would it not be far fairer to offer free transit as opposed to subsidizing people who can afford a $60k electric car?

Also, even if you think it is not workable in Toronto {whiuch of course it is because it has much more to do with political will than anything else}, what about other cities? Less than half our population lives our our metros of over 1 million. What about mid-size cities like Halifax or London or smaller ones like Kamloops of Granby or smaller urban areas like Swift Current or Corner Brook?

[J.OT13]

Free transit is not viable in Toronto, Montréal, Vancouver, Calgary or Ottawa because our transit infrastructure is already overcapacity. We would need to invest tens of billions in each city over 5-10 years before we can even start considering it, or at least major fare cuts (Toronto and Ottawa particularly).

It might be plausible in mid-sized cities where they would only need to purchase extra buses, hire more drivers and add a few bus lanes.