Canadian LRT/RT projects U/C

[J.OT13]

So a mix of contractual and operational issues.

In Ottawa, we went with a fixed price P3 arrangement, and it's worked out well so far. a collapse of the tunnel portal near the University of Ottawa in February 2014 was covered by the consortium building the Confederation Line (so City's off the hook). No word on what caused the Rideau Street collapse or who's will pay for that.

So far, we've only eaten through part of our 100 million contingency fund (for a $2.2 billion project).

In Gatineau, the mess they call RapiBus (not a P3 project) nearly doubled in price and ended up shorter than originally planned. That is bad considering this is a surface busway in suburbia, running parallel to 2 boulevards and a railroad track.

[MalcolmTucker]

Of course P3s can be managed poorly, and public as lead contractor can go well. P3s do usually force cities to use a bit more due diligence, and importantly lock down scope to avoid costly changes. That can happen with traditional projects, but also requires a council to be very disciplined.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

Of course P3s can be managed poorly, and public as lead contractor can go well. P3s do usually force cities to use a bit more due diligence, and importantly lock down scope to avoid costly changes. That can happen with traditional projects, but also requires a council to be very disciplined.

Case in point Lansdowne Park. A whole bunch of sub-contractors sued each other and the ownership team (OSEG), while others (including the OSEG for repairs to the Civic Centre roof) brought the City to court. Luckily, the City and OSEG came to a settlement where OSEG paid for the roof repairs conditional to the City guaranteeing the loan, insuring a lower interest rate.

End of the day, there is no perfect solution. But Free-for-All (Gatineau, Edmonton apparently) is definitely NOT the solution.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

So a mix of contractual and operational issues.

In Ottawa, we went with a fixed price P3 arrangement, and it's worked out well so far. a collapse of the tunnel portal near the University of Ottawa in February 2014 was covered by the consortium building the Confederation Line (so City's off the hook). No word on what caused the Rideau Street collapse or who's will pay for that.

So far, we've only eaten through part of our 100 million contingency fund (for a $2.2 billion project).

In Gatineau, the mess they call RapiBus (not a P3 project) nearly doubled in price and ended up shorter than originally planned. That is bad considering this is a surface busway in suburbia, running parallel to 2 boulevards and a railroad track.

I would not commend the Ottawa project that is not complete yet. Issues have also arisen regarding bike trails being blocked as a result of poor design. Hopefully, there is still time to resolve one of them but the Booth Street bridge has already been completed and cannot be modified to properly handle bike lanes. And we cannot minimize the street collapses. It is miracle that the Rideau Street collapse did not end in tragedy. As far as I know, RTG has had cover the cost of the street repairs pending a review of the causes.

[1overcosc]

The collapse by the University of Ottawa in 2014 was actually determined to be the City of Ottawa's fault, but RTG was nice and paid for it anyway, even though they could have gone after the City for it.

[p_xavier]

What are the forumers thoughts about Toronto's transit plans? I can't fathom how 3G$ will be spent on a single subway stop while Montreal is going ahead with 67km of SkyTrain for 5.5G$, trains included.

[1overcosc]

"Single subway stop" is misleading, as it's also a pretty long corridor (6km-7km); it just happens to have one stop because there's only one prominent spot on the route.

That said, in Toronto, there does seem to be a realization that traditional subways don't get a lot of bang for your buck, so the focus is now on GO RER... a project not that dissimilar to the REM in Montreal. That said, the GO RER plan is being led by the province, so you could say it's "Ontario's" transit plan more than it is "Toronto's" transit plan.

One theme of the past few years that has definitely emerged is that the provincial government is doing a MUCH better job at transit planning than the City of Toronto government; although under Tory, the City of Toronto is starting to get its shit together a little better.

[lubicon]

The City of Toronto and the Province need to get their sh!t together and work together. Two agencies (TTC and Metrolinx?) that should really be combined into one. Or at least hand the rail division of TTC over to Metrolyix for coordination purposes.

[osmo]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

"Single subway stop" is misleading, as it's also a pretty long corridor (6km-7km); it just happens to have one stop because there's only one prominent spot on the route.

That said, in Toronto, there does seem to be a realization that traditional subways don't get a lot of bang for your buck, so the focus is now on GO RER... a project not that dissimilar to the REM in Montreal. That said, the GO RER plan is being led by the province, so you could say it's "Ontario's" transit plan more than it is "Toronto's" transit plan.

One theme of the past few years that has definitely emerged is that the provincial government is doing a MUCH better job at transit planning than the City of Toronto government; although under Tory, the City of Toronto is starting to get its shit together a little better.

Well sure. One could call the Subway project an "extension" but it truly is an addition of a single stop, which will be the longest single stop built in the modern age (and most expensive as well).

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey

What are the forumers thoughts about Toronto's transit plans? I can't fathom how 3G$ will be spent on a single subway stop while Montreal is going ahead with 67km of SkyTrain for 5.5G$, trains included.

My impression is that almost nobody loves the Scarborough subway extension.

People either hate it, and think it's the biggest waste of money in transit history, or they swallow it and feel that it's a necessary price to pay to just get on with things. Mayor John Tory is in the second camp.

[GreaterMontréal]

Le REM aura une fréquence aux 3 minutes dans le tunnel Mont-Royal, dans les 2 sens, tandis que le tunnel reliant YUL sera en voie simple, avec fréquence aux 7-9 minutes.

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

My impression is that almost nobody loves the Scarborough subway extension.

People either hate it, and think it's the biggest waste of money in transit history, or they swallow it and feel that it's a necessary price to pay to just get on with things. Mayor John Tory is in the second camp.

Nicely said. I'm pretty much in the second camp myself. It's ill conceived however, it has potential. The Montreal situation is a little more complex than saying $5.5 billion for 67 kms of light rail. There are potentially billions, even tens of billions in property and zoning rights as part of the package.

[gunnar777]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

Nicely said. I'm pretty much in the second camp myself. It's ill conceived however, it has potential. The Montreal situation is a little more complex than saying $5.5 billion for 67 kms of light rail. There are potentially billions, even tens of billions in property and zoning rights as part of the package.

The perceived low cost of the REM project has far more to do with the upgrade of an existing (Deux-Montagnes) line and piggybacking onto the the existing Mont-Royal tunnel and Champlain bridge than with property and zoning rights (La Caisse already knows what to expect from prior experience with the Canada line in Vancouver). Though a generally superior project to the GO RER upgrades, they are similar in that it would have cost far, far more to build the RER lines from scratch than the $10-15 billion required to upgrade GO corridors.

[1overcosc]

GO RER has morphed over time as the plans have matured from when Kathleen Wynne first proposed it in the leadup to the 2014 election.

Initially, the idea was to have 15 minute electric service on the entire GO network.. resulting in relatively frequent commuter service to far-flung places like Kitchener and Barrie.

As problems became apparent with some of the GO network--the heavy freight traffic on the Milton line, the poor geometry of the Richmond Hill line, the difficulty of adding more tracks through tight spots in Markham and Newmarket, etc... the geography of the plan started to shrink; now, only 5 of the 7 GO lines are planned to get RER service and the outermost portions of those lines have been cut from the RER project and will be retaining more traditional GO service instead.

On the flip side, in response to pressure to make the plan work better at relieving subway congestion in addition to easing suburban commutes, the frequencies have also gotten better, with many sections of RER now proposing 5-10 minute service frequencies instead of the original 15 minute.

In short, GO RER has, in its final plans, become more about providing a rapid transit-like service in the GTA proper, rather than providing enhanced commuter service to the entire Greater Golden Horseshoe... as a result, GO RER as currently conceived is very similar to the Montreal REM.

[GreaterMontréal]

The REM project is possible only because the Deux-Montagnes Line is the only 100% electric commuter rail line in Canada. The backbone of the project is the link to the South Shore on the new Champlain bridge. So in fact, the REM will cost $5.5B + $4.3B. without a new bridge = no REM.

[ssiguy]

For both systems the devil is in the details, namely the fares. If both systems cost the same as the regular transit fares they will be a huge success but if they start charging commuter rail fees then their impact will be very limited. One only has to look at Toronto's UPX to see how lower fares can actually result in higher revenues.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by GreaterMontréal

The REM project is possible only because the Deux-Montagnes Line is the only 100% electric commuter rail line in Canada. The backbone of the project is the link to the South Shore on the new Champlain bridge. So in fact, the REM will cost $5.5B + $4.3B. without a new bridge = no REM.

If the Deux-Montagnes Line hadn't been electrified it would have been easy enough to electrify it as part of the process. Electrification isn't particularly expensive.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

For both systems the devil is in the details, namely the fares. If both systems cost the same as the regular transit fares they will be a huge success but if they start charging commuter rail fees then their impact will be very limited. One only has to look at Toronto's UPX to see how lower fares can actually result in higher revenues.

I have no idea how things are transpiring on this front in Montreal, but in Toronto, the answer to the question depends on the ongoing 'fare integration' studies led by the province. It's a bit of a mess because the province has to find a fare system that doesn't punish people for crossing municipal boundaries by transit while preventing transit agencies from losing revenue. That said, most early indications out of Metrolinx are that the intention is for GO RER fares to be "comparable" to rapid transit fares over similar distances.

Personally, I think that offering free (or close to free) transfers between GO RER and TTC buses should be the main objective, and if that can only happen by continuing to charge a premium for GO, then so be it. (Ideally, we'd get both, but money...)

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

If the Deux-Montagnes Line hadn't been electrified it would have been easy enough to electrify it as part of the process. Electrification isn't particularly expensive.

Actually all rails and electricity cables are being removed. The current line is 25kV AC and the REM will use 1500V DC. So nothing is being kept from the Deux-Montagne line after conversion is complete.

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

I have no idea how things are transpiring on this front in Montreal, but in Toronto, the answer to the question depends on the ongoing 'fare integration' studies led by the province. It's a bit of a mess because the province has to find a fare system that doesn't punish people for crossing municipal boundaries by transit while preventing transit agencies from losing revenue. That said, most early indications out of Metrolinx are that the intention is for GO RER fares to be "comparable" to rapid transit fares over similar distances.

Personally, I think that offering free (or close to free) transfers between GO RER and TTC buses should be the main objective, and if that can only happen by continuing to charge a premium for GO, then so be it. (Ideally, we'd get both, but money...)

There is a new agency, ARTM that will be taking a leadership role for integrated fares. Fares are already availabe in zones for the Montreal region, and the smart card Opus has been in use for nearly ten years. The REM will use wathever the ARTM, a public agency, will decide.