Rapid Transit

[TheRitsman]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

Hamilton has a more complex underground infrastructure and it's getting put through the P3 process.. It's not clear exactly what the scope of the $3.4 billion cost is. Is it capital construction costs + financing + land + 30 years of operating and maitenence? Is it just capital? What?

The Quebec cost very well could be just the capital cost, while the Hamilton is construction, design, land acquisition, maintenance for 30 years, financing costs for 30 years, etc.

The Feds and Province have made it clear that the city is responsible for operations and maintenance just like any other transit project or transit line.

I am curious at the immense cost as well. I suspect there are a few things going on. A massive number of properties needed to be acquired for this project. I'm not sure that Quebec City or Montreal's or Ottawa's required this many. Secondly the bridges are likely factored in, in the case they need to be replaced. The bridge over the 403 is especially expensive as it is a massive bridge, crossing a huge gap.

The underground portion under existing rail lines complicates things as well, and it's very likely Hamilton has complex underground infrastructure. Many sewers in Hamilton are old brick lined sewers and much of the underground infrastructure isn't actually known or documented that well. We may well run into a Kitchener situation where there is something of archeological significance found.

I still wonder at the costs, since they haven't been priced out but that's the point of the RFP. The government has estimated, and the finally cost will come down to the company that wins the bidding process.

[ScreamingViking]

Originally Posted by Beedok

I really wonder how they’re getting 5 underground station and those extra kilometres with less money... are the two bridges really more expensive than tunnelling is?

Bridges aren't cheap, but tunnelling is the most expensive thing when it comes to building transit infrastructure. Underground stations are especially more costly than surface stops.

I'm going to bet a HUGE contingency has been built into the deal for Hamilton, until they can see what the bids are. The procurement model may factor into that as well (e.g., financing is mentioned above... did they include that for the capital portion of costs?). And perhaps the Quebec total has also been *very* underestimated.

Hamilton LRT should be comparable in cost to the Hurontario LRT, though probably somewhat higher per km because there is much older infrastructure underneath that requires replacement (I also don't know if the need to buy up and demo properties is as great in Mississauga). The CP rail grade separation will be costly because it involves a fairly deep excavation for about 350 metres or so -- from the earlier drawings it looks like it would begin just east of Gage and end just east of Glendale Ave -- but not as much as tunnelling the same distance.

I'd love to see the breakdown. So much number play has been done, and there are very different forms of dollars that can easily be conflated with each other or include/exclude specific costs of the project.

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by TheRitsman

The Feds and Province have made it clear that the city is responsible for operations and maintenance just like any other transit project or transit line.

I am curious at the immense cost as well. I suspect there are a few things going on. A massive number of properties needed to be acquired for this project. I'm not sure that Quebec City or Montreal's or Ottawa's required this many. Secondly the bridges are likely factored in, in the case they need to be replaced. The bridge over the 403 is especially expensive as it is a massive bridge, crossing a huge gap.

The underground portion under existing rail lines complicates things as well, and it's very likely Hamilton has complex underground infrastructure. Many sewers in Hamilton are old brick lined sewers and much of the underground infrastructure isn't actually known or documented that well. We may well run into a Kitchener situation where there is something of archeological significance found.

I still wonder at the costs, since they haven't been priced out but that's the point of the RFP. The government has estimated, and the finally cost will come down to the company that wins the bidding process.

All I've seen is that Hamilton is expected to cover operating costs - as far as I know maintenance is planned to be bundled in the P3.

Honestly just including 30 years of financing costs can send a project's "cost" up significantly. The Hurontario LRT had an estimated construction cost of $1.4 billion but it's final P3 contract was for $4.6 billion for example, as lots of other costs that are typically excluded were thrown in. Same with Finch West - original capital budget was $1.2 billion but P3 contract value was $2.5 billion.

The P3 finance model inflates project costs as it includes far more costs than typically indicated in a traditional procurement method.

Also the Hamilton LRT has a wide range of "add ons" to it that were to be bundled into the contract, like the Frid Street extension, for example.

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by TheRitsman

The Feds and Province have made it clear that the city is responsible for operations and maintenance just like any other transit project or transit line.

I am curious at the immense cost as well. I suspect there are a few things going on. A massive number of properties needed to be acquired for this project. I'm not sure that Quebec City or Montreal's or Ottawa's required this many. Secondly the bridges are likely factored in, in the case they need to be replaced. The bridge over the 403 is especially expensive as it is a massive bridge, crossing a huge gap.

The underground portion under existing rail lines complicates things as well, and it's very likely Hamilton has complex underground infrastructure. Many sewers in Hamilton are old brick lined sewers and much of the underground infrastructure isn't actually known or documented that well. We may well run into a Kitchener situation where there is something of archeological significance found.

I still wonder at the costs, since they haven't been priced out but that's the point of the RFP. The government has estimated, and the finally cost will come down to the company that wins the bidding process.

All I've seen is that Hamilton is expected to cover operating costs - as far as I know maintenance is planned to be bundled in the P3.

Honestly just including 30 years of financing costs can send a project's "cost" up significantly. The Hurontario LRT had an estimated construction cost of $1.4 billion but it's final P3 contract was for $4.6 billion for example, as lots of other costs that are typically excluded were thrown in. Same with Finch west - original capital budget was $1.2 billion but P3 contract value was $2.5 billion.

The problem is that IO rarely breaks the costs in these contracts down, so we don't know the actual construction value. The original Eglinton Crosstown contract had a contract value $9.1 billion, but of that only $5.3 billion was actually construction, for example. We just don't know that number for every project as it hasn't been released.

[TheHonestMaple]

What will it cost local taxpayers to run a Hamilton LRT? - Hamilton Spectator

Where Hamilton city councillors stand on the $3.4B offer for LRT - CBC

[bigguy1231]

Since the only people that will benefit from this are the people that live in Wards 1 -5 lets area rate the costs so that they pay for any expenses related to it.

[TheRitsman]

Originally Posted by bigguy1231

Since the only people that will benefit from this are the people that live in Wards 1 -5 lets area rate the costs so that they pay for any expenses related to it.

That is a terrible idea, and what has led to Hamilton's horrifically terrible lack of expansion. When areas of the city don't pay for something, it's hard to expand there because people won't want to pay for something new. It's why Waterdown has shitty bus service. It's the same problem as Burlington where wealthy people with cars have no interest in paying for public transit.

The other problem, is that area rating in general is a terrible practice. It's selfish, and isn't well explained by anything other than "it not by me, or I'm not going to use it, so I should pay for it!"

I have to pay for your snow clearing, I'm going to pay for your road to be resurfaced, I have to pay for schools, despite having no children. That's not the contract we signed when we joined society, voluntarily or not, we agreed to pay into a pot for the greater good.

Further more, the increased property tax revenue from development along the route will be spread city wide, further subsidizing the suburbs.

If you want to area rate it I'm fine with that, so long as you cannot ride it without paying the full price per ride, so instead of a ~$3 fee, you will pay the full $7-$8 it costs per ride to run the HSR. Every single cents from today onward of increased property taxes along the corridor will also be required to stay within the wards paying for the improve connectivity and investment. Strange, that doesn't sound as great now that the wards paying get all the benefits, rather than the situation you and others dreamt up where other people pay for something that benefits you indirectly, even if you never step foot on the LRT.

[Beedok]

Originally Posted by bigguy1231

Since the only people that will benefit from this are the people that live in Wards 1 -5 lets area rate the costs so that they pay for any expenses related to it.

The freed up buses mean it’s cheaper to spread service to the rest of the city. So everywhere with HSR service is benefitting.

[TheHonestMaple]

Originally Posted by bigguy1231

Since the only people that will benefit from this are the people that live in Wards 1 -5 lets area rate the costs so that they pay for any expenses related to it.

So only the wards that the Linc run through should pay for that highway? Come on.

[bigguy1231]

Originally Posted by Beedok

The freed up buses mean it’s cheaper to spread service to the rest of the city. So everywhere with HSR service is benefitting.

If the cost of running the LRT is as much as they say it will be they will be using the HSR budget to cover it. HSR service will go downhill.

[bigguy1231]

Originally Posted by TheRitsman

That is a terrible idea, and what has led to Hamilton's horrifically terrible lack of expansion. When areas of the city don't pay for something, it's hard to expand there because people won't want to pay for something new. It's why Waterdown has shitty bus service. It's the same problem as Burlington where wealthy people with cars have no interest in paying for public transit.

The other problem, is that area rating in general is a terrible practice. It's selfish, and isn't well explained by anything other than "it not by me, or I'm not going to use it, so I should pay for it!"

I have to pay for your snow clearing, I'm going to pay for your road to be resurfaced, I have to pay for schools, despite having no children. That's not the contract we signed when we joined society, voluntarily or not, we agreed to pay into a pot for the greater good.

Further more, the increased property tax revenue from development along the route will be spread city wide, further subsidizing the suburbs.

If you want to area rate it I'm fine with that, so long as you cannot ride it without paying the full price per ride, so instead of a ~$3 fee, you will pay the full $7-$8 it costs per ride to run the HSR. Every single cents from today onward of increased property taxes along the corridor will also be required to stay within the wards paying for the improve connectivity and investment. Strange, that doesn't sound as great now that the wards paying get all the benefits, rather than the situation you and others dreamt up where other people pay for something that benefits you indirectly, even if you never step foot on the LRT.

I haven't used the HSR in 30 years and never will so paying the full cost to use it wouldn't be a problem. As for paying for other services I have no problem with my taxes going to pay for the services of others. I do have a problem when my property taxes may go up $50 or $100 per year just to pay for a streetcar that less that 10% of the population will use when we already provide a fairly good bus service that covers a much bigger area. Oh and don't say taxes won't go up that much. In Kitchener, according to the story in the Spec the cost of transit as a result of ION went up over $40 in just the first year. That was to cover ION's operating costs.

[TheRitsman]

Originally Posted by bigguy1231

I haven't used the HSR in 30 years and never will so paying the full cost to use it wouldn't be a problem. As for paying for other services I have no problem with my taxes going to pay for the services of others. I do have a problem when my property taxes may go up $50 or $100 per year just to pay for a streetcar that less that 10% of the population will use when we already provide a fairly good bus service that covers a much bigger area. Oh and don't say taxes won't go up that much. In Kitchener, according to the story in the Spec the cost of transit as a result of ION went up over $40 in just the first year. That was to cover ION's operating costs.

Two things:

1) Property taxes may increase in the short term, but will decrease in the longer term. As someone who will be alive in 2070 that's a benefit to myself and the community I live in.

2) The average property tax in Hamilton is $4271 per year, so a $40 increase in property taxes is 0.9% increase, in addition to point #1 that in future the effect on property taxes will be less significant and eventually go into the negative as time goes on.

Again, your argument that you don't want something because "less than 10% of the population use it, remains a flawed argument. Do you also not want your taxes to go toward individual roads that less than 10% of the population uses? What about hockey arenas? Sidewalks? Parks? Again, this is selfish view of investment into the community. I'd save thousands per year if I could avoid paying for things you feel are important and I do not, and yet, I am willing to pay for those things.

If we want to discuss how our council wastes money, great, but the reality is that LRT will be a net benefit for all of Hamilton, more jobs, more residences, more retail, and more transit options. Even if you drive, the economic benefits of having a strong core will likely benefit you and your neighbours, whether it's sports, clubs, bars, restaurants, job opportunities etc. The other reality we have to contend with is that Hamilton has a $3.3billion infrastructure deficit. The money going toward that alone would fix everything, but then Hamilton would fall behind again. LRT will be paying for 20% of the infrastructure deficit in the form of infrastructure upgrades from McMaster to Eastgate, and will increase property tax revenue so the city can catch up in the longer term. I expect property tax revenue to outstrip additional costs within 5-10 years from completion.

It's like how if you had the money to purchase a house outright, you wouldn't, assuming you had good investment sense. You'd mortgage at a low interest rate and invest in low MER ETFs at a higher return. Governments must think in the longer term like this because otherwise we are doomed to make the same short sighted decisions over and over.

Regardless, I suspect council will vote in favour, and in the longer term you will get to see the benefits, unless you remain ignorant to the economic and tax revenue benefits of large public investment with permanence that drives private investment.

[TheHonestMaple]

Originally Posted by bigguy1231

I haven't used the HSR in 30 years and never will so paying the full cost to use it wouldn't be a problem. As for paying for other services I have no problem with my taxes going to pay for the services of others. I do have a problem when my property taxes may go up $50 or $100 per year just to pay for a streetcar that less that 10% of the population will use when we already provide a fairly good bus service that covers a much bigger area. Oh and don't say taxes won't go up that much. In Kitchener, according to the story in the Spec the cost of transit as a result of ION went up over $40 in just the first year. That was to cover ION's operating costs.

I think you're missing the whole point of the LRT though. It isn't just for public transit, it will encourage development and overall growth to the city's economy. People will want to build condo towers, offices and other businesses along the line....that will, as a result, benefit the whole community.

This is not just about public transit - it is so much more.

[ShavedParmesanCheese]

Yes because the city centre, one of the country's top universities, 3 shopping malls, the football stadium, largest urban park, and the entire city centre isn't warranting of bolstered services.

Curious how people who haven't ridden the HSR since the county was amalgamated have an awful lot of opinions regarding it's efficiency...

[bigguy1231]

Originally Posted by TheHonestMaple

I think you're missing the whole point of the LRT though. It isn't just for public transit, it will encourage development and overall growth to the city's economy. People will want to build condo towers, offices and other businesses along the line....that will, as a result, benefit the whole community.

This is not just about public transit - it is so much more.

We are going to get massive development LRT or not. The city is set to grow for reasons other than an LRT. How many of the developments in the downtown were cancelled when the LRT was cancelled by the province. The answer is none.

[bigguy1231]

Originally Posted by ShavedParmesanCheese

Yes because the city centre, one of the country's top universities, 3 shopping malls, the football stadium, largest urban park, and the entire city centre isn't warranting of bolstered services.

Curious how people who haven't ridden the HSR since the county was amalgamated have an awful lot of opinions regarding it's efficiency...

Nope , none of that warrants a 3.5 billion dollar expenditure. It is all being well served by the current buses.

[bigguy1231]

Originally Posted by TheRitsman

Two things:

1) Property taxes may increase in the short term, but will decrease in the longer term. As someone who will be alive in 2070 that's a benefit to myself and the community I live in.

2) The average property tax in Hamilton is $4271 per year, so a $40 increase in property taxes is 0.9% increase, in addition to point #1 that in future the effect on property taxes will be less significant and eventually go into the negative as time goes on.

Again, your argument that you don't want something because "less than 10% of the population use it, remains a flawed argument. Do you also not want your taxes to go toward individual roads that less than 10% of the population uses? What about hockey arenas? Sidewalks? Parks? Again, this is selfish view of investment into the community. I'd save thousands per year if I could avoid paying for things you feel are important and I do not, and yet, I am willing to pay for those things.

If we want to discuss how our council wastes money, great, but the reality is that LRT will be a net benefit for all of Hamilton, more jobs, more residences, more retail, and more transit options. Even if you drive, the economic benefits of having a strong core will likely benefit you and your neighbours, whether it's sports, clubs, bars, restaurants, job opportunities etc. The other reality we have to contend with is that Hamilton has a $3.3billion infrastructure deficit. The money going toward that alone would fix everything, but then Hamilton would fall behind again. LRT will be paying for 20% of the infrastructure deficit in the form of infrastructure upgrades from McMaster to Eastgate, and will increase property tax revenue so the city can catch up in the longer term. I expect property tax revenue to outstrip additional costs within 5-10 years from completion.

It's like how if you had the money to purchase a house outright, you wouldn't, assuming you had good investment sense. You'd mortgage at a low interest rate and invest in low MER ETFs at a higher return. Governments must think in the longer term like this because otherwise we are doomed to make the same short sighted decisions over and over.

Regardless, I suspect council will vote in favour, and in the longer term you will get to see the benefits, unless you remain ignorant to the economic and tax revenue benefits of large public investment with permanence that drives private investment.

You can argue all you want and it's not going to change my mind. I have heard these kinds of arguments for numerous things over the years and it always ends up costing the city way more that what we were told in the original estimates.

[TheHonestMaple]

Originally Posted by bigguy1231

We are going to get massive development LRT or not. The city is set to grow for reasons other than an LRT. How many of the developments in the downtown were cancelled when the LRT was cancelled by the province. The answer is none.

Looking at what happened to KW after the LRT was approved, I respectfully disagree. The system in that region has been nothing but a net benefit for the progress of that city.

And the reason no developments were cancelled is because they knew the LRT would happen sooner or later, the previous cancellation was nothing more than the provincial conservatives playing their cards right and forcing federal funding.

[ShavedParmesanCheese]

Originally Posted by bigguy1231

Nope , none of that warrants a 3.5 billion dollar expenditure. It is all being well served by the current buses.

You said it yourself, you have not ridden the HSR since I could take a VIA train to Calgary. You are not in a position to comment on or declare sufficiency of a network you do not use nor have a vested interest in. The HSR is certainly NOT well served and anybody relying on the 10 on a weekday can testify.

[TheHonestMaple]

Hamilton needs to look to other cities to understand the long-term benefits of LRT