<story><title>Montreal’s new rapid transit line saved millions per mile</title><url>https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-10-30/how-montreal-s-new-rapid-transit-line-saved-millions-per-mile</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>icyfox</author><text>I&amp;#x27;m really happy that Montreal made this work. We need more alternative examples of public transit build-outs in the west that actually work and come in on-budget. Copenhagen is another good exemplar here with their public&amp;#x2F;private collaboration for new lines.&lt;p&gt;I do think this article has a rather unrealistic tone for what the rest of us can learn from this though.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; One advantage is that CDPQ Infra was able to take advantage of existing rights of way to create the route, rather than needing to dig costly tunnels or demolish buildings.&lt;p&gt;This is huge. In many cities where we most desperately need public transit in the US, this just isn&amp;#x27;t realistic. We need net new lines either over or underground, and no matter how you slice that they&amp;#x27;re going to need right of way allowances and NIMBY disagreements. Plus most urban settings that will benefit the most from transit will need tunnel development as part of the cost projections.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; Quebec passed a law that requires municipalities to respond in a timely manner to CDPQ Infra’s requests for permits and other forms of cooperation.&lt;p&gt;Reading about California&amp;#x27;s highspeed rail project[^1], it seemed clear that there was deep government buy-in about the end state but the interim goals were over legislated. Counties in the central valley traded their buy-in for the project to starting the line build-out in their counties, even though population centers in LA and SF could have benefited way more from early wins. One thing this article missed was that we need to set more of a precedence for transit agencies &amp;#x2F; bureaucrats on the ground to make decisions that will further the end goal and circumvent the horse-trading at the legislative level.&lt;p&gt;[^1]: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.nytimes.com&amp;#x2F;2022&amp;#x2F;10&amp;#x2F;09&amp;#x2F;us&amp;#x2F;california-high-speed-rail-politics.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.nytimes.com&amp;#x2F;2022&amp;#x2F;10&amp;#x2F;09&amp;#x2F;us&amp;#x2F;california-high-speed-...&lt;/a&gt;</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>WalterBright</author><text>King County in Washington State has been determined to avoid using any existing rail right-of-way, and insists on blasting new right-of-way at incredible cost.&lt;p&gt;The existing right-of-way (sometimes even with tracks still on them!) is turned into bike paths, that nobody uses most of the year because of rain.&lt;p&gt;They also decided to build a new tunnel under Seattle. What to do with the dirt they dug out? Why, they stuffed it into the old tunnel! Probably the most expensive use of existing infrastructure ever. (The excuse was the old tunnel needed some work to make it more earthquake resistant. All that needed to be done was add a liner.)&lt;p&gt;It gets even better. They decided to build another tunnel. So they bought a zillion dollar boring machine, and tunneled away. When the tunnel was completed, they cut up the boring machine for scrap! After all, nobody would ever need to build another tunnel.&lt;p&gt;Since the end of the tunnel was still in the major Seattle metropolitan area, and the machine was already there in place, just keep boring north. But hey, I surely am a dunderhead.&lt;p&gt;It&amp;#x27;s so awful one is tempted to characterize it as malicious.</text></comment>
<story><title>Montreal’s new rapid transit line saved millions per mile</title><url>https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-10-30/how-montreal-s-new-rapid-transit-line-saved-millions-per-mile</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>icyfox</author><text>I&amp;#x27;m really happy that Montreal made this work. We need more alternative examples of public transit build-outs in the west that actually work and come in on-budget. Copenhagen is another good exemplar here with their public&amp;#x2F;private collaboration for new lines.&lt;p&gt;I do think this article has a rather unrealistic tone for what the rest of us can learn from this though.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; One advantage is that CDPQ Infra was able to take advantage of existing rights of way to create the route, rather than needing to dig costly tunnels or demolish buildings.&lt;p&gt;This is huge. In many cities where we most desperately need public transit in the US, this just isn&amp;#x27;t realistic. We need net new lines either over or underground, and no matter how you slice that they&amp;#x27;re going to need right of way allowances and NIMBY disagreements. Plus most urban settings that will benefit the most from transit will need tunnel development as part of the cost projections.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; Quebec passed a law that requires municipalities to respond in a timely manner to CDPQ Infra’s requests for permits and other forms of cooperation.&lt;p&gt;Reading about California&amp;#x27;s highspeed rail project[^1], it seemed clear that there was deep government buy-in about the end state but the interim goals were over legislated. Counties in the central valley traded their buy-in for the project to starting the line build-out in their counties, even though population centers in LA and SF could have benefited way more from early wins. One thing this article missed was that we need to set more of a precedence for transit agencies &amp;#x2F; bureaucrats on the ground to make decisions that will further the end goal and circumvent the horse-trading at the legislative level.&lt;p&gt;[^1]: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.nytimes.com&amp;#x2F;2022&amp;#x2F;10&amp;#x2F;09&amp;#x2F;us&amp;#x2F;california-high-speed-rail-politics.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.nytimes.com&amp;#x2F;2022&amp;#x2F;10&amp;#x2F;09&amp;#x2F;us&amp;#x2F;california-high-speed-...&lt;/a&gt;</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>alephxyz</author><text>Indeed, about 80% of the tracks for the new rail system, including the most expensive bits (across the st Lawrence river, through downtown and dense suburbs, under the Mont-Royal) were on pre-existing railways or rights of ways. The rest was built aboveground next to a highway (with a small branch dug underground towards the airport).&lt;p&gt;By comparison, the Blue line metro extension is being built from scratch, including expropriations, and the projected cost is CAD6.4B for 5-6km of new tunnels and give stations.</text></comment>