ION Phase 2 - Cambridge's Light Rail Transit

[ac3r]

Small Cities, Big Transit by Taras Grescoe
Turns Out You Don't Have to Be Chicago-Sized to Have Rail Rapid Transit

But you do need to be anywhere other than North America - and when the bill comes out as too much money, you have to just give up!

It sucks, but I think you need to keep in mind just how much 4'500'000'000 is...and it would no doubt go well over that. You have to put it into context with other projects with this price tag. Now I think a lot of these are in USD but the difference isn't all that great considering inevitable cost overruns. There are a couple dozen countries on this planet that don't have a GDP that high. Line 4 of the TTC and the recent expansion of Line 1 of the TTC cost less - combined. The Thessaloniki Metro in Greece with 35 stations cost half that. Line 6 of the Dhaka Metro in Bangladesh - with 16 elevated heavy rail stations running through one of the densest cities on the planet - cost only 2.8 billion. Indonesia is building an entire high speed rail line across the extremely mountainous island of Java for only 0.5 billion more. The Manila Bay Bridge which crosses over 32 kilometers of the Indian Ocean is cheaper. NASA/SpaceX would be able to launch a few missions to space with the Falcon Heavy reusable spacecraft and not even make a dent in a 4.5 billion dollar budget (it costs less than 100 million per mission when using a reusable rocket).

4.5+ billion is an insane price tag and it just does not make any sense. It makes no sense as to why it costs that much and it makes no sense to spend that much for what we would get. It would become one of the single most expensive megaprojects ever undertaken in Canada. And...it isn't even really a megaproject. It's just a 2 track, partially elevated LRT that would end up being extremely mediocre, just like the first line between Kitchener and Waterloo is.

So how can we even justify spending that much of our money on this? In a city that doesn't really need it? Or who doesn't even want it? I don't think it's really fair to Cambridge yet it's hard to justify spending that amount of money - especially since we'd be getting likely no federal or provincial funding. If planning for the future is what we are trying to do, then we should be spending that money more wisely. Cambridge could be connected with improved BRT or something for less money and it would be sufficient for now. Since they do not have the same level of higher education facilities, the same amount of new development, the same population growth etc it doesn't seem worth the money at the moment. Planning for our future requires fiscal responsibility and I cannot see how we can justify the cost of this for what we'd be getting and what it would be used for.

[westwardloo]

But you do need to be anywhere other than North America - and when the bill comes out as too much money, you have to just give up!

It sucks, but I think you need to keep in mind just how much 4'500'000'000 is...and it would no doubt go well over that. You have to put it into context with other projects with this price tag. Now I think a lot of these are in USD but the difference isn't all that great considering inevitable cost overruns. There are a couple dozen countries on this planet that don't have a GDP that high. Line 4 of the TTC and the recent expansion of Line 1 of the TTC cost less - combined. The Thessaloniki Metro in Greece with 35 stations cost half that. Line 6 of the Dhaka Metro in Bangladesh - with 16 elevated heavy rail stations running through one of the densest cities on the planet - cost only 2.8 billion. Indonesia is building an entire high speed rail line across the extremely mountainous island of Java for only 0.5 billion more. The Manila Bay Bridge which crosses over 32 kilometers of the Indian Ocean is cheaper. NASA/SpaceX would be able to launch a few missions to space with the Falcon Heavy reusable spacecraft and not even make a dent in a 4.5 billion dollar budget (it costs less than 100 million per mission when using a reusable rocket).

4.5+ billion is an insane price tag and it just does not make any sense. It makes no sense as to why it costs that much and it makes no sense to spend that much for what we would get. It would become one of the single most expensive megaprojects ever undertaken in Canada. And...it isn't even really a megaproject. It's just a 2 track, partially elevated LRT that would end up being extremely mediocre, just like the first line between Kitchener and Waterloo is.

So how can we even justify spending that much of our money on this? In a city that doesn't really need it? Or who doesn't even want it? I don't think it's really fair to Cambridge yet it's hard to justify spending that amount of money - especially since we'd be getting likely no federal or provincial funding. If planning for the future is what we are trying to do, then we should be spending that money more wisely. Cambridge could be connected with improved BRT or something for less money and it would be sufficient for now. Since they do not have the same level of higher education facilities, the same amount of new development, the same population growth etc it doesn't seem worth the money at the moment. Planning for our future requires fiscal responsibility and I cannot see how we can justify the cost of this for what we'd be getting and what it would be used for.

Maybe this has already been answered, but do we have a source for where this 4.5B number is coming from. Is this a class "B" project estimate from a reputable consultant hired by the region? or is this a number that the "Fraser Institute" or some consultant paid by Anti-LRT crowd came up with to scare tax-payers away from building rapid transit? I am just having a hard time figuring out how this project could cost 4.5B. I know it will consist of a few more bridges/ overhead rails than Phase 1 and there has been a significant increase in construction cost in the last 2 years, but 4.5x the cost of phase 1 seems like a made up number that was leaked to the press and used to scare the Region from pursuing Phase 2. The entire 47 KM 26 station grade separated REM Line in Montreal is costing 6.5B. There is just something extremely fishy about this 4.5B number.

[danbrotherston]

It sucks, but I think you need to keep in mind just how much 4'500'000'000 is...and it would no doubt go well over that. You have to put it into context with other projects with this price tag. Now I think a lot of these are in USD but the difference isn't all that great considering inevitable cost overruns. There are a couple dozen countries on this planet that don't have a GDP that high. Line 4 of the TTC and the recent expansion of Line 1 of the TTC cost less - combined. The Thessaloniki Metro in Greece with 35 stations cost half that. Line 6 of the Dhaka Metro in Bangladesh - with 16 elevated heavy rail stations running through one of the densest cities on the planet - cost only 2.8 billion. Indonesia is building an entire high speed rail line across the extremely mountainous island of Java for only 0.5 billion more. The Manila Bay Bridge which crosses over 32 kilometers of the Indian Ocean is cheaper. NASA/SpaceX would be able to launch a few missions to space with the Falcon Heavy reusable spacecraft and not even make a dent in a 4.5 billion dollar budget (it costs less than 100 million per mission when using a reusable rocket).

4.5+ billion is an insane price tag and it just does not make any sense. It makes no sense as to why it costs that much and it makes no sense to spend that much for what we would get. It would become one of the single most expensive megaprojects ever undertaken in Canada. And...it isn't even really a megaproject. It's just a 2 track, partially elevated LRT that would end up being extremely mediocre, just like the first line between Kitchener and Waterloo is.

So how can we even justify spending that much of our money on this? In a city that doesn't really need it? Or who doesn't even want it? I don't think it's really fair to Cambridge yet it's hard to justify spending that amount of money - especially since we'd be getting likely no federal or provincial funding. If planning for the future is what we are trying to do, then we should be spending that money more wisely. Cambridge could be connected with improved BRT or something for less money and it would be sufficient for now. Since they do not have the same level of higher education facilities, the same amount of new development, the same population growth etc it doesn't seem worth the money at the moment. Planning for our future requires fiscal responsibility and I cannot see how we can justify the cost of this for what we'd be getting and what it would be used for.

Maybe this has already been answered, but do we have a source for where this 4.5B number is coming from. Is this a class "B" project estimate from a reputable consultant hired by the region? or is this a number that the "Fraser Institute" or some consultant paid by Anti-LRT crowd came up with to scare tax-payers away from building rapid transit? I am just having a hard time figuring out how this project could cost 4.5B. I know it will consist of a few more bridges/ overhead rails than Phase 1 and there has been a significant increase in construction cost in the last 2 years, but 4.5x the cost of phase 1 seems like a made up number that was leaked to the press and used to scare the Region from pursuing Phase 2. The entire 47 KM 26 station grade separated REM Line in Montreal is costing 6.5B. There is just something extremely fishy about this 4.5B number.

I don't know what the process by which the number was arrived at, but the source itself is a regional staff report...it's definitely not an anti-LRT or otherwise biased third party, but it is presumably an estimate either in house or by a contracted engineering firm.

[Bob_McBob]

Maybe this has already been answered, but do we have a source for where this 4.5B number is coming from. Is this a class "B" project estimate from a reputable consultant hired by the region? or is this a number that the "Fraser Institute" or some consultant paid by Anti-LRT crowd came up with to scare tax-payers away from building rapid transit? I am just having a hard time figuring out how this project could cost 4.5B. I know it will consist of a few more bridges/ overhead rails than Phase 1 and there has been a significant increase in construction cost in the last 2 years, but 4.5x the cost of phase 1 seems like a made up number that was leaked to the press and used to scare the Region from pursuing Phase 2. The entire 47 KM 26 station grade separated REM Line in Montreal is costing 6.5B. There is just something extremely fishy about this 4.5B number.

The council report says the estimates were prepared by a "specialized cost consultant" retained by the region, and are consistent with other contemporary LRT project costs based on their internal database. The report doesn't name the consulting firm or any comparable construction projects.

[westwardloo]

Maybe this has already been answered, but do we have a source for where this 4.5B number is coming from. Is this a class "B" project estimate from a reputable consultant hired by the region? or is this a number that the "Fraser Institute" or some consultant paid by Anti-LRT crowd came up with to scare tax-payers away from building rapid transit? I am just having a hard time figuring out how this project could cost 4.5B. I know it will consist of a few more bridges/ overhead rails than Phase 1 and there has been a significant increase in construction cost in the last 2 years, but 4.5x the cost of phase 1 seems like a made up number that was leaked to the press and used to scare the Region from pursuing Phase 2. The entire 47 KM 26 station grade separated REM Line in Montreal is costing 6.5B. There is just something extremely fishy about this 4.5B number.

I don't know what the process by which the number was arrived at, but the source itself is a regional staff report...it's definitely not an anti-LRT or otherwise biased third party, but it is presumably an estimate either in house or by a contracted engineering firm.

Thanks! I would very much like to see that staff report to see how the number was produced. I think they must assume similar construction cost escalation for the next decade. Ottawa is building 44 Km of Grade separated LRT for 4.6B.  Either way sounds like the Region is getting fleeced the by someone. Imagine what we could have built for 5.5B in 2014. Probably could have done the whole network with elevated rail, elevators and covered platforms.  At this point there is no way Cambridge is getting LRT unfortunately.   I wonder if in 20 years we will be talking about how we could have built it for as little as 4.5B. 

I do wish we could somehow fund/ coordinate/ schedule the construction of these large scale infrastructure projects continuously over period of time like 50-100 years. Like have a goal laying 2-5KM of track per year with 1-2 stations coming online per year.  Just a constant expansion of Rapid Transit, instead of coming up with a grand plan every 10-20 years to spend billions of dollars only to have politician cancel or change the plans.

[bravado]

But you do need to be anywhere other than North America - and when the bill comes out as too much money, you have to just give up!

It sucks, but I think you need to keep in mind just how much 4'500'000'000 is...

Everything you've said is right, but it means that we have lost a significant amount of state capacity over the generations. If we can't build 19km of light rail in less time and less money than it took to launch Apollo 11*, then that's not a society I want to live in because it is on the decline.

*fun hyperbole, but also...

[ac3r]

We're definitely on the decline. And therein is the challenging paradox. Do we invest in this now? Or do we wait but potentially spend more later? We shot ourselves in the foot last century after falling for big oil propaganda and now we're living in an era where things are incredibly expensive.

But yeah...like westwardloo said: the end cost of this would be 5.5 billion if not more due to cost increases. We could have began construction on a pre-metro(subway) or fully fledged heavy rail subway system for that cost, with tunnels and elevated sections and have a world class transit system we could be proud of if we knew it would have cost us so much money.

Everything here is broken and no level of government seems to have any idea what to do. Everything from transit to groceries to rent has gone up and up and up. When does it stop? It seems like the next few decades are going to be miserable for everyone, with only those with deep pockets able to live comfortably. Those who aren't as wealthy will be migrating around the country to cheaper communities - or leaving the country all together. There are deep flaws with our economic systems yet there don't seem to be any answers as to how to fix this.

[nms]

There are deep flaws with our economic systems yet there don't seem to be any answers as to how to fix this.

Too bad the old ways of doing things aren't palatable anymore to turn things around (with tongue firmly in cheek):
1. Imperial expansion (see, Roman Empire etc)
2. Colonialism & "Free" land (related to number 1, but with fewer Christians being eaten by lions)
3. Global War (yes, it was murder on the economy for a decade afterwards...but those 4-6...wow, 100% employment)
4. Cold War (someone had to outspend the Communists...by proving that a Capitalist society could do a better job of looking after everyone and hopefully avoiding a communist revolution)
5. Moonshot ($280Billion when adjusted for inflation)

Everything here is not broken; we've just been listening to voices that tell us that everything is broken and some of us are losing hope.  Can you imagine what would happen if those voices took the approach that said, "Everything currently works, but we can make it much better"?

Our cities and societies are made up of thousands of people who are making the world around them just a little bit better for everyone else.

[ijmorlan]

There are deep flaws with our economic systems yet there don't seem to be any answers as to how to fix this.

Too bad the old ways of doing things aren't palatable anymore to turn things around (with tongue firmly in cheek):
1. Imperial expansion (see, Roman Empire etc)

That reminds me of a bit from Yes, Minister:

Foreign Secretary: “In the old days we would just send in a gunboat”

[guffaws all around]

Minister of Administrative Affairs: “I suppose that is, absolutely, out of the question?”

[ac3r]

What do you think Ukraine and Taiwan are meant to be? Justification for another global war!

Joking of course, but usually when the saber begins to rattle it's because the neoliberal military-industrial-capitalist needs some money. Better start doing some pushups before you end up drafted to fight in Transnistria or South Ossetia.

[danbrotherston]

I don't know what the process by which the number was arrived at, but the source itself is a regional staff report...it's definitely not an anti-LRT or otherwise biased third party, but it is presumably an estimate either in house or by a contracted engineering firm.

Thanks! I would very much like to see that staff report to see how the number was produced. I think they must assume similar construction cost escalation for the next decade. Ottawa is building 44 Km of Grade separated LRT for 4.6B.  Either way sounds like the Region is getting fleeced the by someone. Imagine what we could have built for 5.5B in 2014. Probably could have done the whole network with elevated rail, elevators and covered platforms.  At this point there is no way Cambridge is getting LRT unfortunately.   I wonder if in 20 years we will be talking about how we could have built it for as little as 4.5B. 

I do wish we could somehow fund/ coordinate/ schedule the construction of these large scale infrastructure projects continuously over period of time like 50-100 years. Like have a goal laying 2-5KM of track per year with 1-2 stations coming online per year.  Just a constant expansion of Rapid Transit, instead of coming up with a grand plan every 10-20 years to spend billions of dollars only to have politician cancel or change the plans.

We aren't getting "fleeced" by anyone right now, because we are not paying this cost. It is more believable that this is a false or bad cost estimate designed to achieve some political end regarding the LRT project.

[westwardloo]

Thanks! I would very much like to see that staff report to see how the number was produced. I think they must assume similar construction cost escalation for the next decade. Ottawa is building 44 Km of Grade separated LRT for 4.6B.  Either way sounds like the Region is getting fleeced the by someone. Imagine what we could have built for 5.5B in 2014. Probably could have done the whole network with elevated rail, elevators and covered platforms.  At this point there is no way Cambridge is getting LRT unfortunately.   I wonder if in 20 years we will be talking about how we could have built it for as little as 4.5B. 

I do wish we could somehow fund/ coordinate/ schedule the construction of these large scale infrastructure projects continuously over period of time like 50-100 years. Like have a goal laying 2-5KM of track per year with 1-2 stations coming online per year.  Just a constant expansion of Rapid Transit, instead of coming up with a grand plan every 10-20 years to spend billions of dollars only to have politician cancel or change the plans.

We aren't getting "fleeced" by anyone right now, because we are not paying this cost. It is more believable that this is a false or bad cost estimate designed to achieve some political end regarding the LRT project.

That is what I was trying to say. This number is spreading like wildfire and even people i speak to that were 100% in favor of phase one are against phase two now. There is a political motive behind releasing this ridiculously high number.

[Bob_McBob]

I find it hard to believe regional staff and an independent private consulting firm are part of a conspiracy to inflate the cost of Stage 2. I would like to see significantly more details about how they arrived at the estimate as well as what comparable projects it's based on though. It's worth pointing out the actual estimate is $2.7 billion, or $3.25 billion with contingency, and would have been considerably less if the project was already under construction. There's an extra $1.2 billion added on entirely due to cost escalation while the region spends a decade planning and attempting to secure funding.

[bravado]

It doesn’t have to be a conspiracy, it just has to be a system that doesn’t care about costs in any step other than when the cheque finally gets signed - which is exactly what we have.

Is it anyone’s job - other than Doug Ford *shudder* - to look at the overall system and cut out waste and useless steps?

[KevinL]

One would hope enough people in the Region's administration would see that getting a reasonable price and value for money would help the project secure the funding it needs. But bureaucracy can be very opaque about those things.