[UrbanAffair]

An extremely funny response given that we are in one of the most cost-effective construction environments in a decade (or more). Unless you just love getting rinsed by your friends in favourable, sometimes no-alternate-bid contracts, that is.

Anyone actually tendering work right now is sometimes holding off on signing contracts because the price they might get next week is lower than the one they'd sign today. CMs, constructors, unions, specialists, etc. are all bleeding and are desperately trying to sign anything just to keep the lights on. But I'm sure Marija knows that...

Interesting about construction labour costs. Are you seeing lower cost to build overall? (Or at least with hard costs generally being lower?) I see Altus Cost Guide is saying as much, suggesting decreasing cost to build overall from 2024 to 2025.

 

[ProjectEnd]

Interesting about construction labour costs. Are you seeing lower cost to build overall? (Or at least with hard costs generally being lower?) I see Altus Cost Guide is saying as much, suggesting decreasing cost to build overall from 2024 to 2025.

Significantly. But we're still not at the floor, hence some folks still holding off. *Except* Metrolinx, obviously...

 

[crs1026]

Unlike commercial projects where one needs to be sure there will be buyers when the project is complete, with transit the demand is already there and deferring contracts imposes an opportunity cost on those who are waiting for the line to open.
So personally I am content with ML accepting today's price and getting on with things.

Lansdowne and Caledonia are going to make a big difference on mobility.

- Paul

 

[ProjectEnd]

I disagree.

I think it's embarrassing that the government (at all levels) can't, at times, act like private industry and work to a competitive price and schedule. Not to be a 'taxpayer' guy, but it really is our money and what I want most of all is to see the government internalize work (not contract out) and build expertise to lower costs and accelerate schedules on their own. Whether it's Metrolinx, ALTO, Build Canada Homes, etc. etc. etc., there is absolutely no culture of accomplishment and the folks these agencies have hired have little to no interest (or even understanding) of their mandate or what a reasonable cost and time of delivery might be. The way trust in government and implicit support of things like taxation is earned is through completed work. You wouldn't buy a car or a house from a brand you knew was unreliable or consistently late, so why can the government get away with cucking the rest of us? Regan and Thatcherist privatization drives were novel (and ideologically bankrupt) 40 years ago but I currently see no desire to escape the trap of paying double so that a private sector glutton can profit.

It sucks, really, because it didn't used to be this way and it doesn't have to be going forward.

 

[UtakataNoAnnex]

...there's always a degree of accountability that is lost when government allows for private interests to take over the things they should be working out for themselves and/or running themselves, IMO.

 

[Towered]

I disagree.

I think it's embarrassing that the government (at all levels) can't, at times, act like private industry and work to a competitive price and schedule. Not to be a 'taxpayer' guy, but it really is our money and what I want most of all is to see the government internalize work (not contract out) and build expertise to lower costs and accelerate schedules on their own. Whether it's Metrolinx, ALTO, Build Canada Homes, etc. etc. etc., there is absolutely no culture of accomplishment and the folks these agencies have hired have little to no interest (or even understanding) of their mandate or what a reasonable cost and time of delivery might be. The way trust in government and implicit support of things like taxation is earned is through completed work. You wouldn't buy a car or a house from a brand you knew was unreliable or consistently late, so why can the government get away with cucking the rest of us? Regan and Thatcherist privatization drives were novel (and ideologically bankrupt) 40 years ago but I currently see no desire to escape the trap of paying double so that a private sector glutton can profit.

It sucks, really, because it didn't used to be this way and it doesn't have to be going forward.

It all comes down to accountability. If any of the players with actual input could be threatened to lose their cushy position as a consequence of poor performance and timely project delivery, the culture would change real fast.