Group to ponder blue line
An expert group will be pondering the blue line extension and how to make it feasible within the already quite large budget as projected costs continue to grow.
I have a creeping suspicion that what they’re actually meant to do is find a way to tell us the extension is cancelled in favour of the REM. Anyone want to bet against me?
Mark 09:46 on 2021-04-14 Permalink
“On a un métro à cinq stations autour de 1 milliard par station, aujourd’hui, alors qu’il y a un Réseau express métropolitain (REM) qui va se construire avec 23 stations pour 10 milliards. Il faut rétablir les choses”
I’m all for keeping the blue line costs down, but let’s be real here. 10B only demonstrates construction costs and doesn’t include what is needed to be paid to the Caisse to meet their investment. I’m simplifying here, but that’s like saying: here’s is house 1 (metro), it costs 300k, but it’s yours after. Here is house 2 (REM), it costs 200k! Ok let’s go with house 2 then…..oops, we forgot to read the fine print: we need to pay 7% a year for 20 years…damn….and 750k later, you’ll still making payments on house 2.
CDPQ spent 3B on the first REM. To get a 7% (8?) annual return, we need to find 11B over 20 years (which is the typical timeframe of a PPP). That 11B has to come from somewhere: fares, municipal royalties, etc. Let’s add in the fact that ridership will likely be lower due to WFH and it seems obvious that the cost to the public is going to much higher. That’s how I understand the model, but if anyone has other info, please correct me if I’m wrong.
Ant6n 12:19 on 2021-04-14 Permalink
@Mark
Actually its worse. The REM isn’t a typical PPP, the timeframe is infinity.
Bill Binns 12:53 on 2021-04-14 Permalink
It’s easier for them to throw another token 7 figure amount of money at the Blue line for more studies. Will the Blue Line extension make the wind smell any different? We’ll, we better find out before putting a shovel in the ground!