Welcome Guest!
In order to take advantage of all the great features that Waterloo Region Connected has to offer, including participating in the lively discussions below, you're going to have to register. The good news is that it'll take less than a minute and you can get started enjoying Waterloo Region's best online community right away.
or Create an Account




Thread Rating:
  • 2 Vote(s) - 4.5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
ION Phase 2 - Cambridge's Light Rail Transit
When does Cambridge get its LRT refund then?
local cambridge weirdo
Reply


RM Transit has some interesting discussions of construction cost but none of his explanations seem to apply here. If we can’t build a simple at grade LRT line for less than 4 billion then we simply aren’t going to succeed as a society.
Reply
(04-04-2023, 10:20 PM)KevinL Wrote: It's the number (and length) of bridges involved, plus the overall rise in general expenses we've been seeing since the pandemic. I'm honestly not that surprised.

And the projected cost increases for the next 10 years. So, it's $4.5M in inflated costs, not $4.5M in today's dollars.
Reply
(04-05-2023, 12:29 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: RM Transit has some interesting discussions of construction cost but none of his explanations seem to apply here. If we can’t build a simple at grade LRT line for less than 4 billion then we simply aren’t going to succeed as a society.

Even with the bridges, this is just an unreasonable cost for that amount of transit. Similar to what you are saying, I would say that this is probably symptomatic of some serious problems with our ability to build things that we need.

What does this imply for future road construction? Bridges for an LRT line should be similar in expense and design to bridges for a 2-lane road. How can we possibly afford the 8-lane superhighways many people still think we should be building if we can’t even build a few LRT bridges for a reasonable price?
Reply
(04-05-2023, 12:29 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: RM Transit has some interesting discussions of construction cost but none of his explanations seem to apply here. If we can’t build a simple at grade LRT line for less than 4 billion then we simply aren’t going to succeed as a society.

I couldn't agree more. This reminds me of the story in London, where cost overruns (combined with much stronger NIMBYism) led to their LRT plans being abandoned in favour of a half-baked BRT system.

That $4.5B figure is insane, though. Based on this 2022 article, we could buy a hybrid bus for $905k or an electric bus for $1.1M. So would we rather have an LRT that isn't even completely grade separated, or would we prefer to add like 4,000 busses to our fleet to have 2 minute headways on every route? Obviously there are extra costs involved with expanding our fleet, I'm just trying to give context to that massive figure.

https://www.therecord.com/news/waterloo-...-year.html
Reply
(04-04-2023, 10:20 PM)KevinL Wrote: It's the number (and length) of bridges involved, plus the overall rise in general expenses we've been seeing since the pandemic. I'm honestly not that surprised.

The length and the bridges of Stage 2 explain why the original cost estimate was $1.5B compared to the $818M of the slightly longer Stage 1, so that is still part of the current estimate.

However, even the inflation we've seen during the past 2 years doesn't turn $1.5B int 4.5B, a 3x increase. That would require 10 years of sustained 11.5% yearly inflation.
Reply
(04-05-2023, 04:39 PM)Bytor Wrote:
(04-04-2023, 10:20 PM)KevinL Wrote: It's the number (and length) of bridges involved, plus the overall rise in general expenses we've been seeing since the pandemic. I'm honestly not that surprised.

The length and the bridges of Stage 2 explain why the original cost estimate was $1.5B compared to the $818M of the slightly longer Stage 1, so that is still part of the current estimate.

However, even the inflation we've seen during the past 2 years doesn't turn $1.5B int 4.5B, a 3x increase. That would require 10 years of sustained 11.5% yearly inflation.

Yeah, my initial mental number crunching was not the best. WE need some kind of explanation for the discrepancy.
Reply


(04-05-2023, 04:39 PM)Bytor Wrote:
(04-04-2023, 10:20 PM)KevinL Wrote: It's the number (and length) of bridges involved, plus the overall rise in general expenses we've been seeing since the pandemic. I'm honestly not that surprised.

The length and the bridges of Stage 2 explain why the original cost estimate was $1.5B compared to the $818M of the slightly longer Stage 1, so that is still part of the current estimate.

However, even the inflation we've seen during the past 2 years doesn't turn $1.5B int 4.5B, a 3x increase. That would require 10 years of sustained 11.5% yearly inflation.

Construction inflation was running around 6% annually before the pandemic, and has increased significantly since. It's hard to know where it will land over the next 10 years, but that's actually not a totally unbelievable number.

What that says about our society is another problem. Our inability to build things (housing, transit, etc) is reaching a crisis point. If we don't change course we've got a real issue.
Reply
I mean this is serious. If we're stuck to a car-infested hell forever, then what's the point of improving anything? If the LRT isn't happening, then bus lanes aren't happening, and everything is going to be shit forever - but at least some environmental consultant got paid.
local cambridge weirdo
Reply
I mean, this really does beg the question...where is all that money going?

I think there was some statistic that the second ave subway in NYC paid consultants more than the actual construction firms....and that is something I can honestly believe. But I don't know that this is the case here.
Reply
The 4.5B is the capital cost, operation, maintenance and rehabilitation for the full lifecycle of the LRT. This is the same method Provicne used to cost the Hamilton LRT when they said that their project would be 4B.
Reply
(04-06-2023, 09:59 AM)neonjoe Wrote: The 4.5B is the capital cost, operation, maintenance and rehabilitation for the full lifecycle of the LRT. This is the same method Provicne used to cost the Hamilton LRT when they said that their project would be 4B.

The $4.5b is entirely capital costs, and includes property and vehicles, but not financing. Lifecycle costs are listed separately in the report at $9.4m, $18.8m, and $22.6m per year in 2022 dollars for each route option.
Reply
(04-05-2023, 04:39 PM)Bytor Wrote:
(04-04-2023, 10:20 PM)KevinL Wrote: It's the number (and length) of bridges involved, plus the overall rise in general expenses we've been seeing since the pandemic. I'm honestly not that surprised.

The length and the bridges of Stage 2 explain why the original cost estimate was $1.5B compared to the $818M of the slightly longer Stage 1, so that is still part of the current estimate.

However, even the inflation we've seen during the past 2 years doesn't turn $1.5B int 4.5B, a 3x increase. That would require 10 years of sustained 11.5% yearly inflation.

If you look at the chart on the previous page, you will see the route A option at $1.8M (top left figure), a roughly 20% increase from the pre-pandemic estimate. The preferred route is now C, though, which is $2.7B -- about 50% higher than A.

The cost escalation (over about 12 years) is about $1B, taking it to about $3.7B. And then a 20% contingency/buffer to allow for cost overruns. And that's how we end up at about $4.5B.
Reply


(04-07-2023, 02:28 PM)tomh009 Wrote: If you look at the chart on the previous page, you will see the route A option at $1.8M (top left figure), a roughly 20% increase from the pre-pandemic estimate.

Option A in the report is Fairway to Pinebush only. The previous roughly $1.2B cost estimate was for the construction of the entire length, option C in this report. So you can't really compare them like that and say Option A is a 20% increase from previous.


(04-07-2023, 02:28 PM)tomh009 Wrote: The preferred route is now C, though, which is $2.7B -- about 50% higher than A.

Which is 10 years worth of 8.5% inflation every year.

That roughly $1.2B we got previous was from, what, 2018? To get from $1.2B to $2.7B in 5 years is 17.7% inflation every year. That makes nosense is utterly ridiculous.

Even at the 6% that TaylorTBB mentioned above, it should only have grown to ~$1.6B.


(04-07-2023, 02:28 PM)tomh009 Wrote: The cost escalation (over about 12 years) is about $1B, taking it to about $3.7B. And then a 20% contingency/buffer to allow for cost overruns. And that's how we end up at about $4.5B.

That $998M "escalation" would be the equivalent of roughly 2.6% inflation for 12 years

It should be ~$1.6B plus ~$553M escalation for ~$2.16B, then 20% contingency of ~$432M for a total of ~$2.59B.
Reply
(04-07-2023, 05:39 PM)Bytor Wrote:
(04-07-2023, 02:28 PM)tomh009 Wrote: If you look at the chart on the previous page, you will see the route A option at $1.8M (top left figure), a roughly 20% increase from the pre-pandemic estimate.

Option A in the report is Fairway to Pinebush only. The previous roughly $1.2B cost estimate was for the construction of the entire length, option C in this report. So you can't really compare them like that and say Option A is a 20% increase from previous.

Was that the same route, though?
Reply
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

About Waterloo Region Connected

Launched in August 2014, Waterloo Region Connected is an online community that brings together all the things that make Waterloo Region great. Waterloo Region Connected provides user-driven content fueled by a lively discussion forum covering topics like urban development, transportation projects, heritage issues, businesses and other issues of interest to those in Kitchener, Waterloo, Cambridge and the four Townships - North Dumfries, Wellesley, Wilmot, and Woolwich.

              User Links