Quebec City's Tram Just Got a Lot Worse 

Yeah but that line is incredibly slow and should have at least been a high floor separated LRT like their other lines. Trams aren’t good for what is essentially a regional transit line.

@@fordclapperton4600 Still mad about the 2010 municipal election... Sad. You still lost.

Only problem is that the concrete was not built to withstand temperature changes in the winter. (South part of the line is officially open now; so maybe they fixed it.)

No idea what you’re talking about. I don’t live in Edmonton, I only recent had travelled there and used the system. Beyond that I’ve just been following it in the news for the past two years.

@@jamesphillips2285 It's fixed. No extra cost.

$8B?! They could build a high speed rail line with that money 😭

​@expojam1473 the could've built a world class airport.

Almost? nah at 8b it's 100% not worth it. trying to recover that cost before you need to replace or rebuild it will be almost impossible.

Helsinki built a longer light rail line for 1/15 of the cost and it was under budget and opened early.

Me who got mad when region of Stockholm spend around $760 million for a tram... I'd be soo mad if $8billion

Yeah, people crap a lot on Translink, but they're actually pretty awesome. They're not Europe/Asia level, but they're better than most in NA.

@@appletree13 Yeah and I think a lot of it just comes down to consistency. While Translink projects haven't had the ambitious scope of something like REM they've kept something on the back or front burner for a few decades strait and have, in my view, built up institutional expertise and capacity with few equals in NA, certainly in Canada. Hopefully I'm not proven wrong on the upcoming Langley extension but so far so good with that and Broadway.

IMO it's partially because BC gets less funding, so we have to be resourceful with what we get. By contrast, ON and QC's infinite budgets increase bloat and mismanagement (don't want to say corruption without proof, but I wouldn't be surprised).

​@@AmurTiger the Langley and Broadway extension construction has been taken over by the province, so hopefully that doesn't have bad consequences (there are cost savings and timeline savings for the Langley one at least)

to put this into perspective: Kiel has not put a single shovel in the ground, yet. The

yeah, german infrastructure projects always are estimated on the very lower end, pretty much all balloon once they get a green light and the insanly flexible contracts are signed ... thats what a lack of consequences for politicians and bureaucrats create.

They need to consider some devices in the university with which the catanary would interfere with as example. It will be much more expensive than 1 billion if problems like that occur. As far as I know they will either build a wall or something or put batteries in the trams for that part.

@@twindexxx Run DC power for the tram. Less RF interference. If it's not connected to the national rail network, then it shouldn't be forced to use 15kv AC like German main lines use. Trams are often run on 640v DC or 750v DC as it is anyway.

​@diedampfbrasse98 Transit is necessary infrastructure, it will cost what it will cost, we just need to make sure it's built to benefit the most people possible.

Good point. Things like this always come down to some combination of greed and incompetence, and it's encouraging to see the incompetence, because that can be fixed.

Good point. Fixed prices will always make the purchasing party pay for the same service. Nobody will bid on a potentially cash negative venture and assume the risks unless they make a HUGE markup.

Concordo com você! E acrescento: no Brasil é mais caro ainda!

Quebec is in Canada

​@@JesusChrist-qs8sx which is in (North) America

@@onesob13I have literally never heard anyone refer to Canada as part of America 😂

@@caseypenk I know where I’ve heard that, it’s NA players. When US and Canada both suck at similar things, other regions group them together as NA. Ironically similar in the case of transportation.

You also have to factor in the cronyism that is endemic to Quebec, it's very much the "bon vieux club de garçons" at the provincial level. They may speak french, but their internal politics look much more like what you'd see at the state level in the US.

@@mrvwbug4423 after all, it’s one of the most conservative region in Canada in terms of CPC’s membership.

Can confirm, I attended the public consultations and people were decrying the most inane stuff. The trees thing is pure idiocracy. It's like this stuff needs to be taught in schools from an early age if we want these projects to become socially acceptable at some point.

are you willing to pay 10,000$ for having it ? I lived there for 15 years , it's a mess but we are far from Shangai in terms of traffic problems , even far from montreal. 100 years ago THERE WAS a tramway. it wasnt adapted to the winter and the ups/downs, also the city is build on strong rock, expensive to drill. So 10K$ to complete the project , do you pay ? 10B$/1M citizens = 10,000$ / citizen JUST remember it was 4B$ a few months ago... Just put more buses and make the metrobus system FREE. It will be much cheaper and we know it works.

​@@AngryTurturkeykey the old tramway was probably removed as a result of the automotive lobby. Steel on steel with sanding is better adapted to winter and hilly conditions than rubber on asphalt. That doesn't mean there isn't a place for buses at all (they're great to build demand and BRTs can be very capable), but trams on dedicated right of way have their place. They're quite successful in northern Europe which also has winter and hills.

Is this why A-440 highway have these weird ramps as if they were suppose to connect the highway to something else in the Saint-Roch district?

Though in the case of the movie, I'd wager that the product placement is Bergen, as a tourist destination, rather than the tram. Don't you think? Showing that a city has efficient and comfortable public transportation can be a great way to promote the city to potential tourists. Given the name Norwegian Christmas, it was probably shown outside of Norway, so advertising the tram to non locals would be pointless anyway.

Yes, I have been saying imagine we get taylor swift, bts, beyonce, snoop dogg, or any sports player to say hey take transit to the game or concert. Or to feature it in a music video or something. As sad as it is, people take a lot of influence from public figures.

I suspect that Quebec City requested non-adjustable / non-renegotiable maintenance contracts, which force manufacturers to provision for potential high inflation in the next 30 years. It's a form or privatized contingency padding on maintenance. The client pays once for all-inclusive (or quasi) maintenance over 3 decades. No manufacturer would touch such type of contract without a big fat padding to cover most potential inflation scenarios, as it could bankrupt them if they were locked into such contract and inflation skyrocketed. The only interest of this type of contract is if the client has ample capital funds but worry about the operational budget in the future, but it's also very expensive. It's once again an example of privatized risk being costly.

​@@KyrilPGwhat happens if the company goes bankrupt anyway?

@@thesenamesaretaken When it's a giant like Alstom or Siemens, you can be sure there will be some sort of bailout as they are "too big to fail". But that's why contracts like these are very expensive, so as not to ruin the company if inflation rises and they are obligated to provide maintenance at a pure loss. And for smaller manufacturers, they are usually bought by a giant, like Bombardier was by Alstom, and their contracts are inherited. Some contracts can be pretty poisonous, as Alstom discovered when buying Bombardier. Their bottom line is affected by costly inherited contracts.

I feel like buying trams should be like going to a car dealership. The cost is always the same, no matter who buys this. Charging 10 times the price "just because they can" is completely immoral price gouging and should be just made illegal.

@@alexseguin5245 But that's almost certainly not what they did... check reply above. And it can't be like a car dealership, there are way too many variables : Model, options, customization... Particular specifications like electrification or motorization, sizes (length, width, height),... Location of manufacturing, is it local or in the country of origin, provenance of materials like metals or glass... Some countries will demand local production and / or locally sourced metals and glass... Rank in the production queue, time of delivery and period of manufacturing... If produced elsewhere, the shipping can be different... Size of the order or grouping with other orders, etc. Client's country legal framework and certification requirements... And probably many other variables that escaped my mind. And there's also a certain adaptation to the means of each country / location. A manufacturer will not sell at the same price to a poor country versus to Dubai... They'll make close to no profit with the poor country's order, producing the trains or trams during low activity periods over a longer time frame for example. While they will sell at a higher price in Dubai to compensate. Trains or trams will never be standardized in pricing, it's impossible. Cars aren't priced the same between countries either, and dealerships offer rebates for various reasons. Even planes, which are a lot more standardized physically and technically than trains, are not priced the same between clients. But trains or trams have so many different variables that it's impossible. Plus, there wouldn't be any real competition and innovation would be limited if all trams had to be priced the same. It's not a mass consumption product, they are all produced on request and take a long time to be built. A fleet of trains can be produced over several years, sometimes up to 10 years. And in 10 years the worker's wages increase, etc. Look at the various trains that exist, many are the same "model" but look different, because every group of trains is in fact a custom job. Usually, the more you buy, the more you get a rebate, but also if your order allows the manufacturer to book its factories steadily over a long periods of time. Forr example, if a client orders 100 trains but requests to be delivered all the 100 trains in a short period, it may cost a lot more per unit than if they bought 80 trains but spread over 2 or 3 years. Because if the manufacturer cannot program a steady production over a certain period, they have to hire a lot of temporary workers or subcontract to other factories. A decade or so ago, SNCF ordered some TGV's for the sole reason of keeping one particular factory running between major orders. Now there are not enough factories nor employees to build all the orders fast enough. And maybe in a few years, after the current boom in orders and production, the company will have a hard time to maintain the work in all of their factories. This in itself is a major reason why trains or trams have varying prices.

I am surprised the CAQ hasn't cancelled it since they insist that public transit should not be the taxpayer's problem, and they are phasing out subsidies over the next 5 years...

Je suis pas mal sur que si Legault avait pas branler dans le manche autant sur son soutien au projet, les coûts aurait pas explosé comme ça parce que plus de compagnies auraient été willing de bidder sur le projet... Donc plus de compétition... L'échec de ce projet-là est exclusivement aux pieds de la CAQ!

@@miss1of2 La CAQ a déjà oublié, faut songer au troisième lien!!

I'm in the same boat. I live right next to the planned route and completing the project would probably increase the value of my property, but at this point I'd rather see the current administration abandon the project and use the money for better, plowed cycling paths. Quebec City is actually decent at building those, and there are arguably more benefits to cycling than there are to trains. I wouldn't be against turning Quebec City into the North American Oulu. Trains are great, but not when they're that expensive, especially considering that I'm not even sure I would've used the service considering the stellar cost of a monthly pass.

pas sur tu prendrais le tramway avec tes 400$ d''epicerie du costco quand i fait -30 !

Legault got so mad his third link project got shelved he decided to kill any chance Québec had at good transit

​@@guyl9456 Because any public transit project requires approval from the government by law, by then the government will partially fund it. This government has no vision however. 8 billion dollars for a tramway is too much, but 10 B$ for an 8 km freeway tunnel is a fine investment according to them.

@@guyl9456 because this city project is funded by everyone's taxes. 8 billion dollars is a lot for a city of 500 000 people.

@bouteilledeau1463 yep and also that the 3rd link will be less efficient than the existing bridges.... It's 100% corruption.

@@bouteilledeau1463 and yet, that 10b$ project have many studies advising against it but they keep pushing for it, while also putting on hold the 8B$ project that have tons of studies supporting it, contribution to unstability abouth it and boosting the cost.

No, I think it's those Berlin airport guys

​@@user-jq4fk3wb4u and hired that engineer who wasn't actually an engineer

Don't put all of europe in one category though. If you look at the balooning cost of HS2 in the UK, there is nothing reasonable with that cost. I think it has a lot to do with keeping the ball rolling. If you want a tram project, don't just plan one but plan a whole series if them. Like how Delhi buildt there entire subway system in 20 years, how shanghai buildt theirs in 30 years and how the French got their tram boom. You should make sure that the expertise of a previous project gets used on a next project. This of course requires a lot of long term planning that seems to be very difficult for some governents.

@@tijljappens7953NA, the UK, Australia, and NZ are absolute dogwater at building HSR for some reason. Some say the cost is inexperience, but It’s not as if we’re developing new tech, we literally would’ve just had to copy other systems and buy some trains. Opposite to what people say commenting about China’s HSR, you don’t need authoritarianism for low cost HSR as France, Japan, Germany, etc disprove. It’s not natural disasters or geography as Italy, Spain, S Korea, and Japan prove. It’s not about such a large network being unreadable since China can do it and Europe as a whole if you count European countries together. We just suck at HSR, plain and simple without excuse.

​@@ac1455Australia and New Zealand have never built high speed railways.

​@@user-mb3dx3nn5cNZ doesn't really have much reason to either. Frequent rail services between Wellington and Auckland would be good enough. Australia should absolutely have one though given the larger distances between their big cities

@@GirtonOramsay NZ definitely doesn't need HSR and there's probably not much need for more Auckland - Wellington train services beyond what currently exists. What they likely need are more commuter services, like Auckland - Hamilton, which began recently. The distances between Australian capital cities are too great for HSR to be competitive with flying. Maybe they should do shorter distances first like Sydney - Newcastle or Brisbane - Gold Coast and see how that goes.

But even then, those numbers are super high. The Eglinton Crosstown (also about 19 km), including cost overruns, is currently at around $13 billion. That route has 10 km of underground tunnel, over five times as much as QC. The same goes for Toronto's streetcars: even with their broad gauge and other modifications, the recent order of 60 came in at $568 million, including expanding a carhouse. Something went really wrong with the costs on the QC tramway.

But what is the justification for such high costs of tunneling? 1 kilometer of tunnel in continental Western Europe is usually between 125 and 250 million euros (180-370 M CAN$), like in Paris GPE, under much higher density and in pretty complicated soil (and including the purchase of many TBM's). Spain builds for even less. And if I'm not mistaken, QC's tunnel would be mostly through rock,which is pretty straightforward and doesn't require builders to artificially freeze the ground hard nor to water proof everything to prevent flooding, etc. All costs should be questioned, especially tunneling, they shouldn't be accepted as simply the new normal. Or new infrastructure projects will be systematically threatened by costs even before passing the idea or proposition stage.

On the other hand, if you look at the Broadway Skytrain extension in Vancouver, that's costing around $530 million per km of tunnel. So even in Canada, it can be done more cheaply.

​@@clarification007 All Canadian, the numbers Reece gave for Quebec City are CAD as well. So roughly USD 10 billion?

@@jessica-rod I'm super late, and I'm not familiar with the Eglinton line, I'm only familiar with projects in Québec. But I think the QC tramway would have cost much less if there hadn't been any "political" delays. The QC government asked the city to change the project significantly, and it added a 2-3 year delay, and by then, the mayor (Labeaume) knew it would make the costs explode. He called it in 2021. But right now, I'm talking about projects that are in development phase, it looks like QC's tramway is priced "fairly" for a Canadian project. Unless someone can prove me wrong. But new projects are super expensive right now. By the way I'm no expert at this

Yup, the international branch of RATP could lead the project, or EGIS Rail... Or any of the French or Spanish companies that have a ton of experience building these and do consulting, project management, etc worldwide. But maybe the authorities fear the strict cost management of these companies...

Well Quebec successfully emulated France for the Montreal metro construction during the 60s. Actually, it wasn’t just emulating, as France itself did the planning and some of the work supervision. But it looks like today, Quebec is less interested in learning good practices from its founding nation, as seen with other bad/overpriced projects across Quebec. And fun fact, CDPQ Infra’s headmaster who leads the first REM project is a Frenchman…

Well that's because Quebec may like to emulate French infrastructure projects, but they run their province like a US state with all the cronyism and special interests that come with that.

Reading English Engineering journals or visiting any English-speaking city with good transit is strictly forbidden according to Quebec law.

@@transitspace4366 I wouldn't call the elevated _Metropolitain_ expressway, built in the same way at the same time, a success.

@@TheNewGreenIsBlue You're the winner. There always has to be a bigot with a stupid comment when talking about Québec.

An argument between Edinburgh City Council and the Scottish Government at the start of the process didn't help matters there.

The first stage was bad, but wasn't the second stage on budget and on schedule? That suggests lessons were learned and bodes well for further expansion.

Usually when comparing with European costs, it is European *except* *UK* costs. The outrageously inflated infrastructure costs "disease" seems to affect almost all developed English speaking countries. Just look at CAHSR, HS2, Sydney Metro, Melbourne Metro tunnel and suburban loop, Canada's HSR propositions or Auckland metro project in New Zealand. All are crazy expensive compared to continental Western Europe.

​@@KyrilPGlesson learned: stop speaking English. Iechyd da!

@@thesenamesaretaken It might have to do also with the judicial system and the principles linked to common law, etc. They are inherently linked to English speaking countries, whereas others that have well functioning laws and judicial systems do have a different structure (like Roman law / Napoleonic law derived), which can help put an end to endless procedures when the judicial time is passed.

There are post pandemic projects which have pricing which is significantly lower as well

Australia and Uk as well

That's because we actually need to pay people good money. Construction crews in Europe are paid like crap.

@@felixhurteau2630 So it's 30 times more expensive cause you pay people good wage?😂 the delusion

@@BLACKSTA361 it's not 30x more expensive

The US is just hopelessly incompetent at infrastructure. Look at our high speed rail. We have one line in CA that's so expensive and delayed it'll probably never be finished, and one in Florida that kills people on a regular basis because it's not grade separated.

Yes but this doesn't appear to be a good practice, bundling non transit projects in inflates the price of both

@@RMTransit you're right it makes comparisons with other project harder. We have to keep in mind also that the insertion of the line is tricky, for exemple it is not on the side of highways like some exemple you gave. We're probably not the only ones in the world, but due to the historical character of the city, we are very concerned about a cheaper but uglier solution that will come from the new project managers.

@@RMTransit Thanks for the video btw, we're deeply in need of just commentaries on the project. It is very emotional here, the opposants who are afraid that it will split the city in half have done a good job to do just that metaphorically!

This is the biggest pathology in NA infra. You can’t just build *the thing*. It’s so hard to build anything here, that when a project finally gets going, everyone has to tack on their pet project. Even if those pet projects are arguably higher cost benefit than the overall project, it’s still terrible. Too many finance ghouls involved in it all, playing shell games.

Though in Paris too there's a part of urbanistic renewal and yet the costs remain reasonable. As for the historical character, many French cities perfectly managed it : Nice or Bordeaux for example, have substantial sections running in streets that are entirely classified for preservation. Sometimes including the cobbles and other very specific things. Certain sections don't have contact wires and trams running there use batteries or switchable contact bands / plates in the ground that were beautifully integrated during a street "re-beautification" under strict supervision from historical preservation institutions. So there's really not much reasons to worry about that. Or do they think the French would trash their historical streets with fugly infrastructure? And I really don't understand the worry about the tram splitting the city in half... how could it do that? Tram tracks / rights of way are much less of an urban fabric scar than any form of road for cars.

For that project to turn a profit at 8bn, those would be $100 tram rides or more. And that might be American dollars not Canadian dollars haha.

Because of this, the REM has the monopoly on public transport on the Champlain bridge. It means no buses can cross the bridge. It’s very bad considering that options is very important when it comes to public transport.

@@cdashIndeed, that would be an issue in Quebec city.

For the remaining consortium, they were unable to secure the money. For the others, its unclear.

And most likely was a fixed contract, so Alstom wouldn't be dumb enough to sign a non-renegotiable contract for a low amount, with so much uncertainty about inflation. I'd say Quebec City is either a rookie in procurement and tried to externalize all risks and contingencies. Or they are motivated by the sempiternally North American issue of capital funds versus operational funds. With the city's transportation authorities preferring a huge upfront capital investment to reduce worries about a steady and sufficient operational budget (thus including maintenance). If, like many NA cities, they can't be sure that the tram's operational will be sufficiently financed every year for the next 3 decades, they may have preferred to pay a huge "maintenance package" amount that includes provisions for a severe inflation hike.

@@KyrilPGThis and your previous comment to "tdb7992" make sense. Either way the people of Quebec City lose because an apparently much-needed tram line has been sidelined.

I mean, Quebec City is a city in North America, with a North American culture. Why would we expect them to act differently?

There's also nothing stopping them from bringing in one of the companies that built those French tramways.

Lots of political redlining to jump through.

Also lots of lobbying against public transport in North America, making everything more complicated

It doesn’t help transit building is not much in house if there’s not much constant construction and expansion of the systems.

That's Paris costs, in super densely urbanized areas, and with the biggest trams (2.65m wide, 7 elements long), which means a wide right of way, and maintenance & storage centers built on costly land. Provincial cities in France have lower costs per kilometer, so your small city should have lower costs too. It probably doesn't need to be able to carry 200 000 passengers every day, nor to have its maintenance center take the place of an apartment building in prime real estate locations.

You really think that a couple of people who put signs on their lawn and around their centuries old trees which are meant to be cut down for the project are the reason the cost shot up from 3.3. billions to more than 10 billions? Really?

Before the 2022 provincial elections the provincial government shut the door for the metro, but the current government is so incoherent I wouldn't be shocked if they said metro in QC is good now.

my personal theory is the firm opposition from the provincial government about the project. they speak publicly on how the tram project is a war against car, that they will do everything to stop the project etc. This kind of infuriate me because WTF to provincial government is doing in municipal politics. Okay yeah you can complain about the cost because part of the funding come from there, but saying stuff like this is a war against cars??? bruh, wtf. manage the province, but let cities decide how they want to build their transit system.