kalis0490
New Member
New docs:
There is a new orientation of the bus bays:
There is a new orientation of the bus bays:
|
|
|
SaugeenJunction
Senior Member
Yay the parking has been significantly reduced with a kiss and ride remaining (I’m fine with that).
Here’s a look at the pedestrian bridge over the ION corridor:
Allandale25
Superstar
allengeorge
Senior Member
Price tag for bringing ION to downtown Cambridge set at $4.5 billion
'No government is going to give $4.46 billion to Cambridge around an LRT,' said Coun. Doug Craig
www.cambridgetoday.ca
I have to agree with @Reecemartin on this: the new costing is absolutely egregious, and if we don’t get cost inflation under control transit projects will become untenable in Canada.
Tweet via Michael Druker on the staff rationale for the costs:
allengeorge
Senior Member
From the tweet above. The cost escalation of 30% seems egregious.
Northern Light
Superstar
I agree that the above cost escalation is problematic ( * @allengeorge you'e missing a zero in that last line)
That said. I can see where some of it is coming from........
1) For a class 4 estimate, they've added 50% to their actual estimate (contingency risk). So where you see 4.4B, you need to know their real number is 2.9B
2) Second, they're envisioning construction starting in 2030, so 7 years from now, and they are factoring in on-going construction cost inflation between now and then.
From the Report to Waterloo Region Planning Ctte:
***
"For the purpose of
calculating cost escalation it was assumed that construction will occur from 2030 to
2035."
Link to actual report: https://pub-regionofwaterloo.escribemeetings.com/filestream.ashx?DocumentId=3179
If you look at the Construction Inflation Index numbers (for all types of projects) they're brutal.
Its worth noting that general inflation was ~7% last year; but construction inflation ran closer to ~11%
I don't know what numbers they used for their go-forward here, but I think you can safely assume they're adding more than 3% per year.
If you work backwards, the cost is still high, but nowhere near as brutal as the headline number makes it seem.
That said. I can see where some of it is coming from........
1) For a class 4 estimate, they've added 50% to their actual estimate (contingency risk). So where you see 4.4B, you need to know their real number is 2.9B
2) Second, they're envisioning construction starting in 2030, so 7 years from now, and they are factoring in on-going construction cost inflation between now and then.
From the Report to Waterloo Region Planning Ctte:
***
"For the purpose of
calculating cost escalation it was assumed that construction will occur from 2030 to
2035."
Link to actual report: https://pub-regionofwaterloo.escribemeetings.com/filestream.ashx?DocumentId=3179
If you look at the Construction Inflation Index numbers (for all types of projects) they're brutal.
Its worth noting that general inflation was ~7% last year; but construction inflation ran closer to ~11%
I don't know what numbers they used for their go-forward here, but I think you can safely assume they're adding more than 3% per year.
If you work backwards, the cost is still high, but nowhere near as brutal as the headline number makes it seem.
robmausser
Senior Member
Our economy will crash before we start construction on this and eventually, after we have picked up the pieces from a decade long depression we can start building again.
This way of existence is completely unsustainable. We are ironically in the roaring 20's all over again right now.
This way of existence is completely unsustainable. We are ironically in the roaring 20's all over again right now.
Cobra
Senior Member
No wonder China and the Global South will be the leaders. That's insane...Price tag for bringing ION to downtown Cambridge set at $4.5 billion
'No government is going to give $4.46 billion to Cambridge around an LRT,' said Coun. Doug Craig
I have to agree with @Reecemartin on this: the new costing is absolutely egregious, and if we don’t get cost inflation under control transit projects will become untenable in Canada.
Tweet via Michael Druker on the staff rationale for the costs:
ARG1
Senior Member
Its still insanity that countries like Spain can build Metros for half of the cost of this streetcar. I think we're beyond the point of "This is high but not that bad". As for as I'm concerned our costs are hitting a crisis point, and we absolutely need to do something to address it. Simply put, costs like these aren't sustainable.
Also, they're really planning to build this thing this late? That's a bit... unambitious...
Northern Light
Superstar
I agree the numbers are high; though really Spain is not a fair comparison......
Their median income is something like 1/4 less than ours, their construction sector pays a lot less, in relative terms.
There are, of course, other issues at play. But we do need to be mindful when making comparisons in costs things like relative income and land cost.
I don't remember it being proposed for any earlier than 2028.
Disappointed to see it pushed back; but not surprised.
Bordercollie
Senior Member
Rate of inflation, cost of materials, labor all of these things are going up. Fuel is a huge factor also.
sche
Active Member
We really need to stop making these lame excuses. That does not explain a 10x difference in cost.
Besides, If you don’t like Spain, compare to Sweden which builds at costs on par with Spain or even France/Germany which are still like 5x cheaper than Canada
Northern Light
Superstar
Excuse me? I don't do anything 'lame'. If you go back and read the preceding posts, I explain that the cost quoted is not what it appears and explain why; I also acknowledge the cost remains too high though it is certainly not 10x or anything close to that and it is 'lame' to make something like that up; you're better than that. Then I simply note that comparing Toronto blindly to a place with a much lower cost base across the board isn't reasonable either.
Though crude, and error-prone at times, Numbeo can provide a good sense in the difference in cost base between major urban centres:
Toronto
Toronto Projects in Our Database Overview If you have insights into transit-infrastructure projects in Toronto, please get in touch with us at info@transitcosts.com. We are always looking for people to help us understand why projects cost what they do.
transitcosts.com
Stockholm
Stockholm Projects in Our Database Overview If you have insights into transit-infrastructure projects in Stockholm, please get in touch with us at info@transitcosts.com. We are always looking for people to help us understand why projects cost what they do.
transitcosts.com
Sunnyside
Senior Member
Regardless of the cause, an industry shakeup in NA transit Is necessary… this isn’t sustainable, and it suggests we are building transit out of principle of spending money on it rather than to build it because transit itself is good.
crs1026
Superstar
I wonder if part of the problem is simply risk aversiveness by the bureaucracy..... these days nobody wants to put forward numbers that prove too low, so the cushions are added.
The unintended result I see is that if the numbers are proposed more conservatively, the political sticker shock may incent politicians to shelve projects we actually really need.
The other problem is, the padded numbers become the target, and while there may be incentive to the contractor to come in under budget (and pocket the contingency), the offsetting potential is to do the project less efficiently and still make a decent return. The politicians declare victory, but actually a lot of money gets wasted - they buy their victory at a premium, where the target and end prices could have been a bit lower if people overlooked the odd bit of overrun.
I worked with one very senior project executive who had built some pretty large infrastructure - their strategy was to hold all the contingency at the top and be ruthless in not handing it out without breaking somebody's spirit. It wasn't pretty, but it sure worked. Maybe we should not bake so much contingency into the contract.
I have a lot of trouble with iOn Phase II because it seems to have played to every business lobby and community along the way - leading to a winding, slow routing that won't actually work that efffectively. I can really get behind a higher order transit link between downtown Cambridge and Kitchener - but this doesn't feel like that higher an order. I can even get behind a Cambridge LRT - if you look at the incremental cost of the Ainslie-Delta and Delta-Pinebush segments, these are not out of line for an LRT. With the right develeopment strategy and LRT, Hespeler Road could become the next Hurontario. It's the link to Fairway (and the winding route north of there) that seems like throwing away money.
- Paul
The unintended result I see is that if the numbers are proposed more conservatively, the political sticker shock may incent politicians to shelve projects we actually really need.
The other problem is, the padded numbers become the target, and while there may be incentive to the contractor to come in under budget (and pocket the contingency), the offsetting potential is to do the project less efficiently and still make a decent return. The politicians declare victory, but actually a lot of money gets wasted - they buy their victory at a premium, where the target and end prices could have been a bit lower if people overlooked the odd bit of overrun.
I worked with one very senior project executive who had built some pretty large infrastructure - their strategy was to hold all the contingency at the top and be ruthless in not handing it out without breaking somebody's spirit. It wasn't pretty, but it sure worked. Maybe we should not bake so much contingency into the contract.
I have a lot of trouble with iOn Phase II because it seems to have played to every business lobby and community along the way - leading to a winding, slow routing that won't actually work that efffectively. I can really get behind a higher order transit link between downtown Cambridge and Kitchener - but this doesn't feel like that higher an order. I can even get behind a Cambridge LRT - if you look at the incremental cost of the Ainslie-Delta and Delta-Pinebush segments, these are not out of line for an LRT. With the right develeopment strategy and LRT, Hespeler Road could become the next Hurontario. It's the link to Fairway (and the winding route north of there) that seems like throwing away money.
- Paul