What $536 Million Will Buy You – A UBC to BCIT LRT!
Mr. Haveacow made the following important observation; “I am also surprised that few have picked up on that the LRT portion of the contract is only $536,000,000 for 19 km of surface route.”
Zwei, referring to his ‘Google’ maps found that 19km of LRT would stretch from UBC, down 10th Ave. onto Broadway, then along Broadway and the Lougheed highway to past Willington in Burnaby. BCIT is only 1.5 km from the Lougheed Hwy., on Willington.
Why a BCIT to UBC LRT makes sense? Light rail would replace TransLink’s busiest transit corridor with a transit line connecting the University of Vancouver to the BC Institute of Technology, providing a far better service (which in turn will attract more transit customers) with much cheaper operating costs. Much smaller construction costs, means less tax burdens on the local taxpayers.
By using Broadway and other streets for LRT, would greatly improve capacity along this transit corridor at a far cheaper cost than a subway. As most of the Broadway route previously operated with streetcars, much of the infrastructure is in place for the OHE, thus further reducing the cost of construction. The most expensive piece of engineering would be a span over Hwy. 1 to connect to UBC.
It all makes sense, why then doesn’t TransLink and the City of Vancouver ‘get it‘?
So when TransLink and the C0V and their hangers on go on and on for the need of billions more in new taxes & user fees, why not a LRT P-3 connecting UBC to BCIT for around $536 million. What is said that can’t be done in Vancouver,Ai?? is being done in Kitchener Ontario.
Keep in mind that the $536,000,000 is also a function of cheaper land and operating costs associated with being in a smaller regional center of just over half a million people. To make it comparable to a larger city like Vancouver or Toronto I would double those costs. It also assumes 1 car trains (30 metres each) with 60 metre station platforms.
Zweisystem replies: Actually the $536 million cost is right in line for a basic on-street LRT for Broadway. The cost range was estimated by another transit specialist a few years back and I believe are still valid today. Building on-street minimizes land inquisition and longer cars (based on a modular design) would increase the cost by a small percentage. If TransLink ever offered a P-3 LRT for Broadway, costs would be around the $500 million to $600 million mark. Broadway already has a foundation for LRT, from the former streetcar line. We must not make LRT a poorman’s light metro and costs for LRT must be retained at a reasonable level or LRT will become obsolete itself.
One of other things I looked at was how much certain costs would increase with the operational reality of being in a much larger and busier city. If I was building a line like that, I would double the train size and increase station platform lengths to 90 metres. This in my estimation would increase the cost for a Toronto/Vancouver sized LRT building program/operation to approximately $1.3-1.5 Billion for a 19 km long line with a 36 car fleet. This compares to the Ion Line’s 60 metre stations and 14 vehicle fleet at $536,000,000.
Zweisystem replies: From what I have seen, Toronto’s LRT planning is nearer to the light-metro range and not modern LRT at all. If we build on street, land acquisition is minimized; and longer cars and station platforms would only add a small incremental cost. What I see for Broadway is a European style LRT with sections of reserved rights-of-ways and streetcar operation in mixed traffic. With stops about every 500m to 600m (with a few exceptions), we would replace all trolleybus and B-Line services, thus greatly reducing the operating costs of the route. Modern track laying with prefab track (most of the route is in straight lines) and retaining the supports & and span wires for the OHE would also save many millions of dollars.
I am very unpopular with the following but we on this side of the pond, have failed to recognize the true light rail Renaissance in Europe and today most planners still plan for LRT as if it were a poorman’s light-metro. The failure, I believe is based on the fact there is no school of urban transportation in Canada and the USA, focused strictly on urban transportation and most transit planning done in North America is based on 1960’s and 70’s doctrines.
Well, it might buy the track but not the vehicles or the property needed for the line and the storage of the cars. If you had bothered to carefully read the link http://www.railjournal.com/index.php/north-america/three-bidders-vie-for-waterloo-lrt-contract.html?channel=542&goback=%2Egde_88283_member_5819124411105570817#%21 in your previous post, you would have known that the total cost of the project is $818 million.
“Ontario has committed up to $C 300m in funding, bolstered by Canadian federal government funding of $C 265m and regional contributions of $C 253m.” 300m + 265m + 253m = $818 m.
“Earlier this year the regional government reached an agreement with Toronto and Hamilton transit authority Metrolinx to acquire 14 Flexity Freedom LRVs from Bombardier for the new line.”
Furthermore, if you had bothered to read the UBC Line Study, you would also know that it includes $186 million for the vehicles and $96 million for property. That and with a $148 million contingency and $99 million for inflation bring the cost to the $1.1 billion.
Also note that the UBC Line LRT costs include the 36 vehicles to serve over 160,000 trips per day while the Waterloo system total costs only includes 14 vehicles to serve 56,000 trips. You often forget to include the cost of the vehicles and a place to store them in your analysis.
I’d recommend doing more research before posting.
Zweisystem replies: Richard, I would recommend you do some research. The $536 million quoted is for a design build and operate of the 19 km line, it is an all in cost. There has not been an independent LRT study for Vancouver since 1977, studies since then have been skewed in favour of SkyTrain. Also remember one modern tram is as efficient as 6 to 8 buses, thus 36 LRV’s is just over kill. The modern modular LRV can be up to 40 metres in length and have passenger capacities between 250 to 300 persons. I would love to see Siemens of Alstolm do a LRT study for Broadway, than the self serving consultants that are currently hired.
Track laying for on-street LRT is about $6 million/km and with the OHE already in place, the actual cost for on street construction would be in the neighbourhood of $120 million. Of course with over engineering the cost of construction will rise and this is the trick TransLink uses to artificially inflate the cost of light rail.
It gives me great pleasure to again weigh in and say….at least learn to read the sources you cite, especially if you are disagreeing with someone. Richard is correct and it is not even difficult to verify. There are several links that break down the actual costs better than the article you linked to but the official website for the LRT is clearest.
That said I am still pleasantly surprised with the cost of this LRT even though it is 818million.
Zweisystem replies: the LRT portion of the contract is only $536,000,000 for 19 km of surface route and about $282,000,000 for up to 16 km of very light BRT service to Cambridge.
Richard is seldom correct, like most light rail nay-sayers, he mistakes LRT fact for SkyTrain fiction.
Just to clarify the 818 million includes the BRT section.
Zweisystem replies: I see you do agree that the 19 km for LRT is for $536 million.
A historical note – the newly formed TransLink so over-engineered the Broadway Lougheed LRT plans to such an extent that a elevated SkyTrain mini-metro was only 7% more expensive than a surface operating LRT line. The same sort of BS continues with TransLink’s LRT planning today.
During the Canada line planning charade, Alstolm walked away from the bidding because they could not bring themselves to plan for a metro style transit system on such a low capacity line. Siemens were excluded because they could be a far larger LRT network for a cheaper cost than the Canada line light-metro. The anti LRT stance by TransLink has made the organization an international joke. Ever notice no one has copied Vancouver’s transit planning?
BRT costs to Cambridge is 20 million. Park and ride facilities are 16 million….so I guess that means I don’t agree…
Zweisystem replies: You never do, in fact the entire SkyTrain lobby never does, but then they would never admit that no one buys SkyTrain anymore.
Interested in a breakdown in what is not included in the 536 million? Starting with rolling stock (seperate contract with Metrolink), property costs, project management costs ect….or is 818 million minus 20million for the Cambridge BRT section easy enough?
Zweisystem replies: I would think that the LRV order is included in the DBO P-3. Remember this is a real P-3 and not a sham P-3 that saw the Canada Line P-3 built (judge Pittfield called the Canada Line P-3 a charade). And $20 million doesn’t a BRT make. I will leave it up to Mr. Haveacow to comment. But them Rico, you never answer this question; “If SkyTrain is so good, why doesn’t anyone buy it?”
When you admit automated light metro is a popular and successful transit method. Very few people except for you care whether it is made by Bombardier.
Zweisystem replies: Is it? Why then automated light metro systems are never allowed to compete directly against light rail? Could it be that ALM is not as popular as you think.
All the best in 2014 to my friends & enemies; LRT, Zwei, Haveacow, Skytrain, Richard, Rico, Daryl and not necessarily in that order. I’d recommend Rico & Richard that you need to get your minders in Translink to brief you more thoroughly in future before you make fools of yourself.
Mind you Translink is pretty good at making a fool of its self;
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/10/22/skytrain-delays_n_4143854.html
Adieu
Richard read carefully and listen to your superiors;
the IRJ article as previously posted states very clearly:
THREE consortia have submitted bids to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo, Ontario, for the $C 536m ($US 505m) PPP contract to design, build, operate, and maintain the city’s first light rail line.
can’t be clearer than that, can it?
Cardinal says, ‘Richard read carefully and listen to your superiors;
the IRJ article as previously posted states very clearly:
THREE consortia have submitted bids to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo, Ontario, for the $C 536m ($US 505m) PPP contract to design, build, operate, and maintain the city’s first light rail line.
can’t be clearer than that, can it?’
Apparently it can.
‘Bombardier Transportation has secured a C$66m ($63m) contract to supply 14 Flexity Freedom light rail vehicles (LRVs) to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo in Canada.’ From Aug 2013. If I have to I can link everything like the 18 million for property or the project management costs etc…….
Zweisystem replies: Then the $66 million is included in the P-3 contract, unless the order has been changed.
And here is what the actually documents from Waterloo say:
http://rapidtransit.regionofwaterloo.ca/en/multimedialibrary/resources/E-13-074_F-13-049Stage_1_Light_Rail_Project_-_Request_For_Proposal_Financial_Matters_.pdf
On page 12, Figure 1
Other Components, Contracted by Directly the Region:
- The LRT vehicles, aBRT vehicles, acquisitions of land, construction of the aBRT works and overall management of the project (collectively the “Other Components”);
It can’t be clearer than that.
Plus, a 5 second google search “waterloo lrt vehicles” brings up:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/kitchener-waterloo/a-first-look-at-the-region-s-new-light-rail-vehicles-1.1397334
On Wednesday, regional councillors approved a $92.4 million contract with Bombardier, through a partnership with Metrolinx, to purchase 14 of the light rail vehicles by a vote of 11-1.
Also, while I can’t find documentation, be aware that this project is very similar to the Canada Line in that some of the capital costs are paid to the private partner through performance payments during the operation of the line. Thus, as in the Canada Line, the actual capital costs of this project could be higher than $536 million. The RFP documentation about states that “staff have included in the RFP the provision that the DBFOM team provide an amount of long-term private financing equal to 22.5% of total capital costs. The final amount will be determined through the RFP process.” page 3. So, who knows if the $536 million includes that 22.5% or not?
Zweisystem replies: Yesterday’s news. The Canada Line was never a true P-3 because Translink would not allow a LRT option. In fact, the operating consortium never assumed risk, which is the hallmark of a P-3.
You just can never say whoops I goofed can you? How about you approach it differently. Everyone agrees the total cost is 818 million. That means you are claiming 282 million is for 16 km of very very light BRT (basically paint). Interestingly enough the Environmental Assessment estimated a cost of 157 million for the complete system as a higher grade LRT.
Or another approach, why would they include already issued contracts in a request for proposals?
Zweisystem replies: Rico why bother, you haven’t a clue what you are talking about.
Zwei, sometimes I am wrong. When I am wrong I generally admit it. To date I have yet to see you admit your mistakes even when it is obvious you were wrong. Richards links and comments say it well, better than my attempts….and crystal clear that 536 million is not total cost. I breathlessly await your mea culpa.
Zwei replies: Why so? It seems you disregard facts, what are you afraid of?
A significant majority of Ion rapid transit’s LRT phase I is being built on an existing railway right-of-way, not an on-street right of way – which completely invalidates your proposition.
Zweisystem replies: Read the title. The base cost for on-street laying track with OHE is about $6 million to $8 million (as always, engineering increases this cost), since the supports and span wires already exists along Broadway, on-street LRT would quite cheap as the route follows the ghost rails of the old Broadway streetcar line foundation. In fact, a Broadway LRT could be said to be reinstating streetcar service on Broadway.
Better if the light rail tracks have metal fences protecting the line rather than being exposed to the mixed traffic roads to improve travel time.
Zweisystem replies: So, would you put metal fences on bus routes in mixed traffic?
Of course not. Only light rail routes would have metal fences. Buses do not need metal fences.
Zweisystem replies: Why does LRT need metal fences? What is the difference between a LRT line and an express bus route?
Sean – Why do you believe the LRT lines should need metal fences to protect the line?
Daryl – Where do you read that `A significant majority of Ion rapid transit’s LRT phase I is being built on an existing railway ROW’?
Rico – The IRJ article stated $536, why do you try to argue black is white?
Tom,
Is critical thinking dead? Does no one actually read the complete linked to articles or actually bother to look at what Richard or I post?
From the background to the request for proposals (to the aforementioned estimated 536 million dollar contract),
‘Other Components, Contracted by Directly the Region:
– The LRT vehicles, aBRT vehicles, acquisitions of land, construction of the aBRT works and overall management of the project (collectively the “Other Components”);’
If that is not clear enough you have serious reading capabilities issues (or like Zwei are unable to admit you are wrong). Speaking of which Zwei are you not posting Haveacows latest comments because it pricks your pride?
Not stated directly but implied is ~45million for ‘change of scope’ provisions and ~45 million for contingencies, I would assume these are part of the 812 million but not the 536 million (after all it seems silly to put those into the build contract even though they are in the budget).
Zweisystem replies: Rico, we know you are a TransLink troll, no one would spend so much time on so little. Haveacow has not sent a post and I would suggest he is enjoying the holidays. Sorry honesty is not in your lexicon.
The last word.
Time to move on, the RftV blog has touched a raw nerve; COV & Translink have reacted and the retained trolls have been busy attempting to recover lost ground.
Wow, who would have thought so much debate over a little series of comments! Yes, I was busy my furnace died and yesterday high was -45 degrees C. with the windchill factor here in Ottawa. Furnace guy just left the poor guy hasn’t slept in 3 days. Thankfully the house never went below 5 degrees, still checking all the pipes for leaks (cross your fingers). On a bright note it took 2.5 days for the house to drop down to that temp, considering the outdoor temperature. The kids survived and now have a story for their little friends for years to come. However it was getting close to the grab your stuff guys were going to Grandpa’s point, thankfully the furnace is chuggin away and at last check up to 14 degrees. My water bill is going to be a killer though, I had to run all my taps at a trickle and hourly flush all the toilets for 2 days to prevent my pipes from freezing up. I just found out my neighbour across the street was in the same dire straights as we were.
Zweisystem replies: Wow!, on the wet coast , the sun is shining and its 10 C.
LRT needs better right-of-way than buses.
Zweisystem replies: Ah, er no. LRT can operate basically on a reserved R-o-W, which can be as simple as a HOV lane with rails.
I have here in my warming hands a quote of construction costs for LRT in Ontario from a friend named “Philip” an engineer formally at Metrolinx now with Bombardier. These are class B estimates but can go higher for specific rights of way with specific costs. To everyone this is what really gets quoted to governments and their agencies. Hence the reason Philip needs to be protected from being sued by his past employer. Most of these costs are pretty close to what I expected but, zwei your power costs are way off as well as the price of street rail. Most of the prefab track cannot be used in Ontario because of frost expansion, Transport Canada safety standards and rail hardness issues (Canadian Street Railways require rails that are 20-30% more dense). Electric power delivery components (catenary, connectors, guy wires and such) have to be much sturdier than European or American because of climate issues and associated safety standards.
LRV ‘s Bombardier 5 module Flexity specifily for North America: $3,500,000-4,000,000 per LRV, $5-6,000,000 per unit if you don’t “piggy back” your order on Toronto’s order of 182 LRT related LRV ‘s and the 204 vehicle order to replace the CLRV’S streetcars for the TTC, something the guys in Kitchener Waterloo insisted on in their tendering contract to keep costs down.
Just for cost comparison, a Mark 2 or Mark 3 Skytrain costs or in the case of the Mk. 3 vehicles, will cost between $ 8-11,000,000 per 4 car train set. The stated public costs were much lower because the order was subsidized through BDC Canada (Business Development Bank of Canada). The subsidy is a common practice for large Canadian corporations like Bombardier, to offset the expensive small production runs for a city like Vancouver as a way for the government and Bombardier to showcase Canadian technology internationally. Now before everyone goes nuts here yes it is a form of subsidy but, without it the product would not be affordable, due to the small production runs. Companies like Bombardier need production runs of 500-800 units over a 15 year period minimum now, for most of their rail transit vehicle lines just recoup their design and production set up costs. The days of sub 500 unit decades long production runs are sadly long gone. That is why the Skytrain vehicles are not shown as a separate product on their website but, as part of an entire transport system, with technology options including their City Flow 650 automated operating system or linear induction drive motors. The same way we order a better sound system, seat warmers or 4 wheel disc brakes on our cars. Check it out under Rail transport systems on their website, the Innovia Automated Light Metro System. Its not a Skytrain conspiracy guys its a common practice for Canadian companies to get this kind of help to sell products and market to overseas customers, many countries do this including the Europeans through a similar EU Agency.
More to come later, I have to go and clean the chocolate off the face of my smiling 3 year old Christopher. I sure hope its chocolate, well I guess I am about to find out, anyways cheers everybody.
Zweisystem replies: About 4 years ago, Zwei was in communication with several track companies and they were quite forthcoming with information. In Eastern Europe (including Moscow), pre fab track was the norm. Easy to lay and install, pre-fab track was in general use. What Zwei did hear and in spades, was how dated our transport rules were and it was time to adopt a more modern approach. In most countries in Europe, the rules and laws for new tram construction have been completely revamped and maybe it is time we do it here as well. In Vancouver, our climate is definitely not the same sort as Ontario’s and maybe a push should be made for provincial rules for tram construction. In Helsinki, the cost for new track, including overhead (supports and span wires, and contact wire) was just over CAD $6 million/km and I would suspect the cost has only risen slightly in the past 4 years.
Note: during the Susan Heyes failed lawsuit against the TransLink with the Canada Line, her lawyer submitted documents showing that the real cost of the Canada Line was in excess of $2.7 billion and the presiding judge called the P-3 bidding process a “charade”.