Quebec City's Tram Just Got a Lot Worse

Watch this video ad-free on Nebula: nebula.tv/vide...
The Quebec City tram is a much needed and very exciting project, but massive cost increases are going to derail things before rails are even laid! Find out more in today’s video.
As always, leave a comment down below if you have ideas for our future videos. Like, subscribe, and hit the bell icon so you won't miss my next video!
=REFERENCES=
[1] www.alstom.com...
[2] www.alstom.com...
[3]railway-news.c...
[4] www.urban-tran...
[5] www.urban-tran...
[6] www.cbc.ca/new...
[7] www.cbc.ca/new...
[8] www.urban-tran...
[9] www.railway-te...
=PATREON=
If you'd like to help me make more videos & get exclusive behind the scenes access and early video releases, consider supporting my Patreon! Every dollar goes towards helping my channel grow & reach more people.
Patreon: / rmtransit
=ATTRIBUTION=
Epidemic Sound (Affiliate Link): share.epidemic...
Nexa from Fontfabric.com
Map Data © OpenStreetMap contributors: www.openstreet...
Thumbnail Photo courtesy of ronylouis
=COMMUNITY DISCORD SERVER=
Discord Server: / discord
(Not officially affiliated with the channel)
=MY SOCIAL MEDIA=
Twitter: / rm_transit
Instagram: / rm_transit
Website: rmtransit.com
Substack: reecemartin.su...
=ABOUT ME=
Ever wondered why your city's transit just doesn't seem quite up to snuff? RMTransit is here to answer that, and help you open your eyes to all of the different public transportation systems around the world!
Reece (the RM in RMTransit) is an urbanist and public transport critic residing in Toronto, Canada, with the goal of helping the world become more connected through metros, trams, buses, high-speed trains, and all other transport modes.

[@MultiCappie]

It's not just costs in "North America", Edmonton's new tram *_will be half the cost_* for: + a tunnel (but no underground stations) + the same number of stations + a major river bridge (Quebec does not plan this) + three elevated sections totaling around 4.5 kilometres (Quebec does not plan this) + three elevated stations (Quebec does not plan this) + 7km longer + Approximately *_double the number of vehicles_* + end-to-end parallel separated bicycle route and landscaping

[@fordclapperton4600]

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.

[@MultiCappie]

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

[@economicprisoner]

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.)

[@fordclapperton4600]

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.

[@MultiCappie]

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

[@AmurTiger]

2:34 No question, that IS really high. Vancouver's huge Mark V order for 205 skytrain cars is 722 million. The total project cost is also insane as 8 billion is more then both the Broadway skytrain extension and Langley skytrain extension put together and given the latter's contracts were being worked out this year any Canada-wide economic issues can't be held as a reason. Definitely a moment that makes me thankful for Translink.

[@appletree13]

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.

[@AmurTiger]

@@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.

[@HowlingWolf518]

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).

[@TROPtastic]

​@@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)

[@Dqtube]

Last month, DPP (Prague's transport company) announced the purchase of 200 new trams from Škoda (low-floor, 32 m long, 200 passengers) for CZK 16.6 billion, which is approximately CAD 1 billion. So you are right that the price is odd in your case.

[@brianalexeu]

The cost really is crazy. The German city of Kiel is building a completely new tram network about twice the length of Quebec city's for

[@robertoehlmann4401]

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

[@diedampfbrasse98]

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.

[@twindexxx]

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.

[@mrvwbug4423]

@@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.

[@lego501stTrigger]

​@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.

[@gevans446]

$8 billion for a tram is ridiculous and makes it almost not worth it to get built.

[@expojam1473]

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

[@terrancehall9762]

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

[@-Katastrophe]

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.

[@maxfi878]

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

[@Tha_Viktor]

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

[@KyrilPG]

My idea about the rolling stock contract is that Quebec City demanded a "non-renegotiable" 30 year maintenance contract. Which, given the major uncertainty about inflation, is quite a gamble on future. It is probably the reason why there were so few bidders and only Alstom remained, with a massive cost equivalent to a privatized contingency on maintenance. No manufacturer can commit to a hard contract over 3 decades without including major contingency padding for inflation. Many were burned by the recent inflation after being locked into maintenance contracts that cost them more to fulfill than they earned when signing them. Also, the local production is always more expensive, but that is marginal in comparison to the maintenance contract. If I recall correctly, Paris has contracts adjustable to inflation, with only the framework contract that is over 20 or 30 years. So they don't have to pay such a huge uncertainty penalty. Maybe Quebec City is such a rookie in procurement that they thought a monolithic maintenance contract would be the best choice.. Or more probably, it is due to the very North American issue of capital versus operational costs and they thought that such a contract would guarantee maintenance whatever happens to the operational budget over the next 3 decades... This last possibility shouldn't be overlooked, the capital vs operational budget issue creates very real problems. And I wouldn't be surprised if it was the case here : pay once and not worry about operational budget struggles for maintenance. This mess is one more blatant example of the urgent need for an infrastructure cost enquiry committee, reform of the process and real transparency efforts. Infrastructure developments in Canada (or insert the name of pretty much any developed English speaking country) should *not* cost several times what it costs in continental Western Europe. 8 billion Canadian dollars is roughly 5.45 billion euros, and it is the cost of about 200 to 250km of high-speed line in Europe (excluding UK), or the cost of a 25 to 30km long deep underground metro line in Paris, which has incomparably more urban density to work with and manage than Quebec City and terrible soil conditions ; plus of course including the command, maintenance & storage centers needed to operate the line. Maybe Quebec wanted heated rights of way and gold plated rails...? 😂🤣 More seriously, if most bidders didn't even bother or fled the tender, Quebec City probably had bizarre, uncommon, complex or almost unfeasible demands. The probable fixed-amount 30 year maintenance contract being a good example of such ill-advised demands. Great video, as always! Reece, I'm visiting a GPE building site next week, do you need footage?

[@robertcartwright4374]

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.

[@patrickbuswell]

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.

[@liamtahaney713]

Absolutely insane story. The cost of infrastructure in America is extortionate.

[@Johnny..X]

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

[@JesusChrist-qs8sx]

Quebec is in Canada

[@onesob13]

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

[@caseypenk]

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

[@APDM_Analysis]

@@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.

[@highway2heaven91]

I saw a movie last night called Norwegian Christmas and in the movie the Bergen Light Rail was prominently showcased in one of the scenes. One of the actors even said that it’s better than take to get into the city than a taxi. This was kinda odd since I haven’t seen too much rail transit being used in any TV shows or movies outside of legacy metros such as NYC, Paris, BART, etc. I wonder if you could do a video about how transit “Product Placement” in movies/TV shows (especially in North America) could help to boost support for Public Transit in North America.

[@KyrilPG]

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.

[@poongieshroomie]

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.

[@physh2596]

I am living less than a kilometer away from where the line is supposed to go. I am so hyped for this project. It's a shame how this has been handled from the start. People are making such a fuss about this necessary infrastructure. Also, there is a climate of distrust towards experts here in Quebec, which plays against the project: even if you come in with studies, facts, reasons, solutions, people dismiss them outright for stupid and irrational reasons such as the number of trees they will cut down or the 9 houses we will have to expropriate. Wish Quebec would be a model for the future but the public is not ready and very car brained.

[@mrvwbug4423]

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.

[@cdash]

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

[@dsp4392]

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.

[@AngryChicKen-VIP]

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.

[@TROPtastic]

​@@AngryChicKen-VIP 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.

[@neildriscoll599]

This video truly breaks my heart. Québec city deserve good rail transit, and seeing this fall apart is devastating. Hoping the city keeps fight hard for a good and cheaper project!

[@sylvainmichaud2262]

Remember that Québec city was the only place in the world where they've built an expressway going right into the wall of the mountain to gain access to a tunnel that was never built. Planning seems like a recurring issue.

[@darengarneaudionne]

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?

[@DenisQC]

As a Québec city citizen, I must admit, even though I knew about the exploding cost, I was willing to accept it just because we're never gonna get anything done and time is running out. Québec city is car-dependant like most North-American cities. The proposed project was supposed to be done in 2029 while there is a video here on KZbin talking about the project from... 2008. But, I must agree with the conclusion that this project is too expensive, which irritates me so much because there is so much opposition from right wing pundits that are based on stupid reasons. It's making them right. It's really disheartening to me that one of the oldest cities in North America, often visited for it's european look, is getting such poor transit treatment! Guess I'll continue going to Costco in my car on a 4-lane highway and ignore climate change!

[@ikaruseijin01]

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...

[@miss1of2]

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!

[@bouteilledeau1463]

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

[@dsp4392]

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.

[@travisxantana8999]

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

[@broman178]

The Quebec City tram issues really reminds me of what happened in Edinburgh in the UK as the tram line there encountered significant cost overruns & delays and the full line from the Airport & Newhaven got shortened to York Place as a result when it first opened in 2014 until it finally got extended/completed to Newhaven earlier this year. Perhaps a perfect example of a European tram project which encountered significant cost overruns even if the system has been relatively successful after opening, considering it still exceeded the expected ridership levels (although the recent temporary closure between Ocean Terminal & Newhaven due to an overhead defect is an example that its issues are far from over). Definitely needs a video from you in the future.

[@katrinabryce]

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

[@kjh23gk]

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.

[@KyrilPG]

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.

[@thesenamesaretaken]

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

[@KyrilPG]

@@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.

[@1978dkelly]

Transit projects in Europe and Asia: “We’ll get that done within a reasonable budget in a reasonable amount of time.“ Transit projects in North America: “We can do it for a trillion dollars over the next 100 years.”

[@tijljappens7953]

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.

[@ac1455]

@@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.

[@RodneyAvery-o2q]

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

[@GirtonOramsay]

​@@RodneyAvery-o2qNZ 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

[@RodneyAvery-o2q]

@@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.

[@tdb7992]

That is an insane amount of money for just 34 trams. I had a quick google - Melbourne just bought 50 new E-Class trams (a new generation of tram) for $700m AUD ($626m CAD, $460m USD). The trams are to be manufactured locally (Australia has insane labour costs) by the Australian branch of Bombardier (owned by Alstom). Spending over a billion is wild. I'm guessing a lot of contractors from somewhere like Deloitte/KPMG were involved in Quebec City's tender - they always cause costs to be far higher than they need be.

[@KyrilPG]

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.

[@thesenamesaretaken]

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

[@KyrilPG]

@@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.

[@alexseguin5245]

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.

[@KyrilPG]

@@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.

[@abdullahrizwan592]

Canada needs a national committee on how to reduce infrastructure costs, especially transit. This issue is getting out of hand and is going to suck our money dry.

[@offthehookbeats3159]

Great video. But the thing is, it might just be the new reality for big infrastructure projects in Canada. The QC tramway has an 1.8km tunnel. If you look at subway projects in MTL and in Toronto, it's about $1G per km of tunnel now. So right there, that explains about $2G of the $8.4G. Add to that the $2.1G for contingency, that leaves about $4.3G for the rest, which includes a bunch of stuff that would be useful for QC City, regardless of if there's a tramway or not. So yes, it's expensive, but what would be the other solution? With inflation and high interest rates, any project will be expensive.

[@jessica-rod]

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.

[@KyrilPG]

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.

[@robertcartwright4374]

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.

[@jessica-rod]

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

[@offthehookbeats3159]

@@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

[@lucaonorati5317]

Thanks for the update on this project Reece. Do you have any idea why potential bidders might not have wanted to submit a bid or why they might have dropped out?

[@rdsieben]

Same in Calgary. $1B has been spent on the Green Line and no construction starts.

[@coachinguniversitario-exit140]

Another great video! Well done, it’s time to talk about the new Maya Train in Mexico, a country that built brand new 1,500 km of train infrastructure in the last few years. It’s like the distance from Vancouver to Saskatchewan! I wonder Canada or US could built 3 times this infrastructure in the same last years with a stronger economy than Mexico … right? Instead the current infrastructure still the same …

[@Fan652w]

Thanks Reece for another extremely interesting and informative video. It seems that the whole of the developed french-speaking world is mad on tramways. Luxembourg has brought them back and has massive expansion plans. Liege has just started testing their new trams. Construction is well-advanced in Lausanne, while in Geneva a system which for a long time was down to eight kilometres is rapidly expanding. In North Africa, Algeria is almost as mad on modern trams as its former ruler France. Morocco (never officially a French colony) not only has french style TGVs, but french style trams! Contrast Quebec, which seems to have made a total mess of things!

[@transitspace4366]

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…

[@mrvwbug4423]

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.

[@TheNewGreenIsBlue]

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

[@sylvainmichaud2262]

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

[@sylvainmichaud2262]

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

[@tonyfromlasalle]

It’s also worth mentioning that Québec’s current provincial CAQ government screwed the city on this (and in turn got Mtl’s mayor to also screw them on this). Though this should not come as a surprise as famously this current CAQ government is terrible at negotiating costs, especially for public transit

[@Sakacarottes]

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

[@bouteilledeau1463]

​@@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.

[@WasephWastar]

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

[@Beau_Guerrier]

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

[@minimouette]

@@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.

[@YetAnotherGeorgeth]

$8 billion? Did they get the guys in charge of HS2 to advise on this?

[@FlorianGampe-z1c]

No, I think it's those Berlin airport guys

[@grassytramtracks]

​@@FlorianGampe-z1c and hired that engineer who wasn't actually an engineer

[@katrinabryce]

Couldn't they ask RATP or some other European transit operator to build it? That happens a lot. The London Overground is operated by Arriva which (until sometime next year) is owned by Deutsche Bahn. Deutsche Bahn are pulling out of international projects to concentrate on problems at home, so they wouldn't bid, but I'm sure others would.

[@KyrilPG]

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...

[@Vortexone112]

With the announcement a few days ago that the Scarborough LRT is up to 4.5 billion dollars I don’t know how we can possibly build these projects. We need a huge policy shift that makes them easier and less expensive to build (or maybe the disastrous P3 experiment can finally end)

[@Fifty-Days-at-Iliam]

Construction contractors when it comes to rail projects are always a money pit. yea sure you'll save money on labor costs but contractors have the ability to raise the price on the project if they want to make a bigger profit and then just blame "physical material costs". In general we should not outsource labor of public infrastructure projects to for profit private companies

[@Trevor-hs5km]

Not just Quebec City, Boston just finished the green line extension and it was 642M per mile. Mind you this project was mostly surface level light rail with rather modest stations. In addition to this, the tracks were built incorrectly and now have to be widened! Kinda proves that North America can't build rail anymore.

[@GrafEisen1]

The cost of constructing infrastructure in Canada and especially the United States is shocking...

[@BLACKSTA361]

Australia and Uk as well

[@felixhurteau2630]

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

[@BLACKSTA361]

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

[@felixhurteau2630]

@@BLACKSTA361 it's not 30x more expensive

[@MrBirdnose]

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.

[@fernbedek6302]

Even with tunnel, it’s crazy more expensive than Hamilton’s tram way. (And that’s having bridge rebuildings and other major infrastructure work.)

[@garrywallace1007]

For 8 billion I would want an underground metro line...not an on-street tram.

[@Dqtube]

2:32 If we are talking about train maintenance, you might be interested in the story of Newag from Poland.

[@romanrat5613]

You made a very important point. It doesn't matter if YOU don't care about the price, politicians and a large amount of people they represent do

[@lachd2261]

In Sydney our L2/L3 lines cost $3bn - this was way over budget and it included a cut and cover tunnel. I don’t even know how you get to $8bn!

[@edwardmiessner6502]

In contrast, Boston's Green Line Extension into Somerville and Medford cost US $2.28 billion for 6.9 km of track or US $330 mln per kilometer of track. This was on a hard to get to separate right-of-way that has active commuter rail traffic and involved the reconstruction of several bridges, the shifting over of live commuter rail tracks, the construction of a parallel bike path, and remediation of soil contaminated with hazardous waste. And all this for a five year construction period through the pandemic. Québec's CDN $8 bln for 22 km of track at CDN $450 mln per km of street- running track (granted, there's a 2 km long tunnel at 1 billion per km) in contrast sounds unbelievably expensive for simpler construction in easier to access locations.

[@onetwothreeabc]

A lot of public transportation project in North America often bear unreasonable requirements, which is probably why they go over price.

[@aquaticko]

This is like when the tunnel project in Baltimore went from four to two tracks, only electric trains were planned for (no ventilation needs), and went from double-stack to single-stack height, and the costs staid the same. Just...how?

[@planningpersonlaidbackdeep1273]

Excited to see you on Canadian Civil. Thank you for answering all our questions. :-)

[@zombieowen]

Your videos and research are so great and so appreciated!

[@lance-biggums]

Based on the "off the rails" thumbnail I thought you were gonna say they had downgraded it to a "trackless tram" (a bus) lmao

[@LeJeffy]

Two factors created a perfect storm: 1. We have to notice that cost of many infrastructure projets rise a lot in all the country. It's an inflationist context that may be caused by two years of pandemic. All costs defined in pre-pandimic period are not a good reference. 2. Also, many interventions of governement of Quebec in the past gives incerainty about the project, so this complicates financing for bidders.

[@RMTransit]

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

[@clemutyuirtaswerc]

Thank you for covering this Reece! I'm studying urban planning and sustainable transport in Quebec City and we were all devastated by the news. We need the tramway!

[@Artv2003]

As someone from Quebec, I think the priority should change to building a Sky-Train/REM type of network because it's a very sprawled cuty. Then improving the transit in downtown areas could start. For the time being we can also start improving our BRT lines with bus-only lanes that are separated to regular lanes with concrete so that cars don't use them and full signal priority for busses. Also maybe if it's possible eletrification with overhead wires.

[@nolanxuereb2914]

I wonder if the Pension fund will look into a REM style elevated metro since the finances of the Tram simply would not work out. Shifting the main east west route from Boulevard René-Lévesque O to Grande Allée just 330m to the south would likely make an viaduct politically feasible.

[@MordusdepleinairQuebec]

having lived in quebec city for a few years. the project and planned route was doomed from the start. the existing Metrobus lines are fast and the city along the planned route is mostly suburb like. not dense at all and you would have to always walk 15-20 minutes to get to the tram on sidewalks that are barely plowed in winter

[@m.e.345]

So it sounds like Quebec city wants the streetcars made at Alstom's plant at La Pocatière.. just 100 km away.

[@leseulsteve]

There's a big chunk of the cost that is put towards the redevelopment of parts of the city, I see it more as a urbanistic than just a transit project. I live minutes from where the line will pass, and I'm more excited about the changes is the neighborhood than the tram itself!

[@RMTransit]

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

[@leseulsteve]

@@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.

[@leseulsteve]

@@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!

[@JohnDoe-my5ip]

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.

[@KyrilPG]

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.

[@AlexisGarcon]

I really wanted your input on this project. Love it! Another point is that CDPQ infra is expecting profit on infrastructures if they build it. For a local transit project such as this, their input might be bad news. As for the price, I don't have any hope that it could go down...

[@mrvwbug4423]

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.

[@cdash]

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.

[@alvarez_eric]

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

[@rider9187]

I live close to Quebec City and and I have to mention one thing. The social acceptability pf this project is very low. It is below 40% even at the lower cost. People here like to go in and out of the city with cars . For the better or worse.

[@EvilFryingPan]

how the hell can a tram system cost the same as the REM

[@nolanxuereb2914]

for $8 billion they should be able to build a region wide tram network or a few metro lines

[@secretagentcat]

im so tired of transit in america man. so hopeless.... 8 billion for a damn TRAM line. why do we allow this? why do we try and explain this away, its GREED? so tiring

[@stevengalloway8052]

"Things started going off the rails". I see what you did there! 😆

[@ThisUTD55]

Your videos are very informative, well done! I suggest you look into the Atlanta streetcar project. A great example of how funds can be used to better fund bus service and BRT, much more reasonable. For some reason there is a strange obsession with streetcars and a group that pushes the idea they are absolutely needed on a crowded pedestrian path, while others are getting very skeptical.

[@effortlessgardening]

Great video! Could you do one on the EELRT and what you think about it, along with any adjustments you would make?

[@simonkemfors]

how is that cost even possible? Several public transport projects that are far, far grander in scale have been completed for much less, including a quad track railway for less than a tenth and a mainline railway tunnel for a fifth. Oh and also a tramway for a fiftieth

[@JonathonV]

I have two thoughts: 1) Québec City does need a solution like light rail. Narrow streets with tons of intersections mean that rapid bus routes don’t make for good solutions. From the airport to the downtown took me two buses and 90 minutes of time, which for a city Québec’s size is unbelievable. It’s become a car-centric city, which is unfortunate given how much it appeals to tourists. 2) Large contingency funds aren’t only bad because of the temptation to spend them. They’re also bad because in securing that much funding, although most of the funding will be granted, a lot of it will be loaned, and big loans mean big interest payments.

[@Trains_Travel_NZ]

Auckland and Wellington Light Rail projects in New Zealand have suffered the same problem, cancelled by the new government

[@thedude2596]

As a younger Quebec guy, I can tell you that the province is manage by older/boomers with no vision for the future/public transport. It's expansive, yes, but it's expansive because they missed the right time 40 years ago to do public transport well. Now it's expansive, because the city need to do way more change for any tram/metro or anything else to work in the city.

[@harmandon]

I live there and this is so upsetting to me UGH

[@diedampfbrasse98]

would have been interesting to hear why the competition dropped out/didnt bother to compete ... seems really fishy given how much cash Quebec semms to be willing to waste.

[@alvarez_eric]

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

[@itaiepstein5616]

Was cool seeing you in Montreal this week!

[@jspihlman]

You've hit an important nail on the head, when there is no competition in bidding, the lone bidder can name their price, because whose gonna stop them?

[@louiszhang3050]

Wow. $400 - 500 million per kilometre is about the same as most metro networks. In AMERICA. Paris can dig tunnels under its core for that amount of money. I'm glad they put this on pause for now. The only thing I can compare this to is the Purple Line Maryland, but even then the Purple Line is much more grade-separated than the Quebec City Tram.

[@richarddickens2438]

Did not expect to get roasted for my budgeting decisions by this channel 😂

[@rogue265]

That isn't how contingency works in Australia... But maybe different in Canada. Contingency means that there is money in the general Government for any cost overruns, however if there is a cost overrun, they still need to justify it. It is pretty unlikely that they will stop the project, but - as you can see in multiple projects, Sydney Light Rail East, Sydney Metro South East, Melbourne Metro 1, Perth Airport Rail have all had challenges to the contingency, but not all were successful... For example in Metro South East, and Melbourne Metro 1, the claim was partially validated, but didn't get the full amount the contractors wanted, and more importantly, wasn't anywhere near the full contingency budget

[@carlanthonyiral5932]

Hey reese. Im amazed that the cost of this tram is mostly equivalent to our first Philippine subway system costing about 360 billion pesos, or 8.8 billion Canadian dollars! Clearly, corruption is at seems.

[@watcherzero5256]

For the cost issue I dont think you should underestimate just how much you save on tram lines with economies of scale, the Trafford Park Line in Manchester is 5.5km and only cost £350m because they had the contractor that built the Phase 3 works stay on to complete it after the original phase 3 were completed, the contractor already had the experienced staff and equipment to hand and didnt need to build this capability from scratch, likewise it didnt require a new depot and less additional rolling stock than if it had been a standalone line as it could share assets with the rest of the network.

[@AtlantideVFX]

There should be political aspect that needed to be adressed in this analysis. The CAQ since the beginning has expressed that they didn't wanted this project being built, and requested several extension and modifications. The party has no vision, and a tramway is against their political interest. With the provincial government actively fighting against the project, no wonders private compagnies were shy to bid on it which led to high prices.

[@luigifranceschi2350]

Quebec has the most corrupt and uncompetitive market for construction of the entire continent. The industry is so protective for the local co panues that only Quebec companies can work in Quebec and only workers with local certifications and syndacate can work on Quebec sites. That brings the cost of construction in large projects to at least the double of a similar one but in Ontario.

[@davidleclerc519]

The thing is, and I'm not trying to be mean here, I don't think you actually know all the fact about a good or a bad project for quebec city unless you live in quebec city. That tramway wasn't going to remove any need for a car in this city, I know I live here!, the stretch of road where the tramway was going to be laid is already covered by tons of bus that work well for the people that don't have a car... or live in the exact vinicity of the planned tram. But, that area is also one of very very wealthy people with Olds, very old and or historic houses, they are going to oppose any new buildings high enough to compromise their views of the sky...as have already happened in the past. This particular area is going to be hard to densify further than it already is right now. On the other end, you got Lebourgneuf that is 8 kilometers from the said tram path that used to be empty fields for the past 20 or 50 years that is fast becoming the most densely populated area of the city with tons of 8 to 12 story's high appartment complexes with simple 2 lanes street dating from when there was just 10 houses per square kilometers, and where bus transit is virtually absent or so far in between that what takes 30 minutes max in traffic to reach.. (like chemin ste foy on the tram path) takes an hour or more by bus. The current public transport on the projected path needs no fixing, it's all the very big rest of the city's public transport (I mean all the is not the "Coline parlementaire" or Ste-Foy or Sillery) that needs fixing. The current project is only just "a brand-new seat" or "a different and slower seat with many stops for people that couldn't care less" while they ride to the university or cegep or whatever.

[@AlexandreCossetteQc]

I’m sad the project is going the way it is but as a resident, I’m happy to finally see a RMTransit video about the Quebec City! The budget ballooning of such project is so mysterious… We might not have the perfect transit in the end, but I have some faith that the way the CDPQ builds transit will fit fine with Quebec City population attitude. I hope they’ll find ways to make some parts of the city more accessible and profit from the increased land value, making the financing of the project easier.

[@user-mrfrog]

Maybe have the tunnel built to connect Saint-Roch (lower town) to upper town and implement an BRT (au Québec, un SRB) instead.

[@exetrius2918]

I was imagining a tram line for my local city, a city of about 20,000 residents (67,000 in the whole municipality) in a relatively low-density and car-dependent region of the Netherlands. Having no education on this subject other than YT videos, it's great to now know some cost indications! Unfortunately, 40M €/km seems rather steep... 😅

[@KyrilPG]

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.

[@bradlevantis913]

Having been involved with a project that only received one bidder I can say when that happens it should send alarm bells to the project team. Sometimes it is so specialized that only one group/contractor will bid, but many many times they know or are seeing something that you missed

[@minimouette]

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.

[@Urban_LP]

Thanks for the video, there are many reasons for the overall higher cost of the project and the crazy inflation it went trough... The government of Quebec has delayed the project many times, that added a lot of inflation in the project over the years, they asked to reduce the line and they did but at the end it costed a lot more than if the project had keep the entire length of the line. Besides that, the project of Tramway is not just a new transit system, it is also a whole revamp of the urban design of the city, adding more trees, greenery, extending sidewalk, more parks and places, etc. It would have been fantastic to have that, a lot of deception here. It's really sad to see the seventh biggest city (Metro Area) in Canada having no railed transit system, relying only on bus that are over capacity and that are not efficient at all for the most used line... Sadly, Quebec City is full of nimbys and car centric braindead people. A lot of persons when they talk about Quebec City define it as "the big village". Lots of roads, sprawled suburbs with no good transit system and very car oriented urban design. It's sad to live in a city full of people that don't want big and great projects of infrastructure come alive. Our city is beautiful but only in it's center... Without forgetting that there was more than 3 billion investment in residential and office buildings around the Tramway route... the project would have created enormous economic benefits for the city as well as a great improvement in mobility around the Tramway. It also had 3 other phases planned for the future, heading towards the suburbs and serving large city centers. The problem with CDPQ Infra is that they want to make profit before making the best transit system... the REM is nice but it's not the good system for Quebec City. Quebec City is smaller and has a more European look in Downtown. I'm pretty sure in the end Quebec will have a good transit railed system but it will be too late. Delaying every project like that over and over is not great for economic and political reasons... the tramway would have been finish for 2029. But with CDPQ infra involved we will see a new system in like 2035. Personally, I'm so sad to see the project delayed another time, being stop after so much work from experts and urbanists, after so much investments... It would have give a new look to Quebec City and the quality of life would have been so much better. After all, I'm going to move in Montreal, a far cooler and better city. Tired of Quebec City and it's politics...

[@mancampovestiminvatam]

It's called corruption. Such games are played frequently in Romania.

[@etbadaboum]

For $8 billion we'd get several metro lines in France, Toulouse is building its (heavy) Metro C line and its lengthy 27 km for 3,44 billions € (OK let's see in 2028 how it really cost but, still)

[@kilastrika]

we cant get rails in our country. We only get railed.

[@rislingpodiumperformance]

Transit projects in north america seems to be retardedly over priced. You see it in this video where you say that Paris is costing so much less per km than what is happening over here and we should be really demanding to know why our prices are so much higher and why we can't get prices down. Ottawa's LRT process for stage 2 was corrupt AF for example

[@PaulSurgenor]

Sounds likes Quebec have been learning (or not) from the Edinburgh tram playbook!

[@rossharrisonmcintyre2302]

They should look to Edinburgh, Scotland - We just completed a (very expensive) public review of the Tram crisis which saw costs spiral, and a reduction in the length of the line. Not to mention negative public opinion and reticence for future development plans. They need to learn from the gross mistakes from other cities, and use their recommendations for planning.

[@713davidh42]

Sounds like Quebec City is more U.S. American than French when trying to build and equip a modern tram line. The provision for 30-year maintenance of the trams is insane. No wonder the other tram builders didn't want to bid.

[@KyrilPG]

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.

[@713davidh42]

@@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.

[@KofieBluejay]

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

[@skyscraperfan]

It always amazes me how expensive trams are per kilometre. The proposed 42nd Street Tram had a price tag of at least $500 million many years ago and that seemed like a huge amount for a few kilometres of rail tracks and power lines and and a few trains. I had never thought that a tram line could cost billions of Canadian dollars. At that cost we probably would not have a single tram line in Berlin.

[@drdewott9154]

Holy moly. I mean 3 billion CAD is already an insane enough price tag. I just had to look for a comparison. The Odense light rail. A 14.4km long tram line in the Danish city of Odense, with 16 Stadler Variobahn trams and without any tunnels, cost just 708 milllion CAD! Even at the base price, the Quebec tram project would've been around 3 times the price of the line in Odense! And the line in Odense is even hated for its delayed opening of 2 years, and having gone overbudget itself, as well as faulty construction by its primary entrepeneur COMSA. But to think this cost just 1/3rd of what the Quebec project wouldve cost per kilometer and is now closer to 1/9th!!!

[@robertcartwright4374]

It's very puzzling. The tram project looked sound. What's happened to the price? I hope this gets sorted out. A tram line for Quebec city is a good idea, but not at any cost!

[@sebastianhofmann17]

just looked it up what the new trams in vienna costed. It is up to 156 new units for 562 Million Euros and 24 years of service.

[@iGenX2]

Hi, very instructive, thank you :)

[@GreenHornet553]

Amazing how the Quebec City government messed up so bad. Good coverage of this Reese. BTW, I know you've covered the Taipei metro before, but could you please do a video on the Kaohsiung metro?

[@finexlive]

Could you explain why a Tram make sense here like you said at 6:33, this is not Paris, it's called "the car city", most people are far from the project, this city receives in avg 124.37 inches (315.9cm) of snow per year, nothing make sense about this project, cost is too high, maintenance is gonna be to high, people won't use it, it will block roads and turns that will cause more traffic. Quebec City doesn't need a surface project, the original estimation of a metro was 4 billion, which is lower than the actual price of the tram. Most resident would rather have a solution that can help the current situation than make it worst.

[@DavidDuchov]

Quebec local here, people want a way to move in Quebec that's for sure, but so many aspect of the project seems of from the price to the tramway itself. Also we have so much snow, the city struggle to clear it when we have big snowstorm, we can't imagine how, will many street being changed forever, they would be able to keep it running without problems during the winter. With the present project, many citizen are agains't it sadly

[@ralphzechendorf1644]

The high speed line through the Netherlands (Amsterdam-Rotterdam-Breda-Belgium) was meant to cost 7 billion euros. It ended up consting 14 billion. So, a simple PLANNED tramway line costing the same as the initial budget for an HSL... that's insane. Perhaps they should look into a heavy bus system, like the one in Metz (France) ?

[@watcherzero5256]

As an update to this after reviewing the project the pension fund has recommended $15bn be spent, $7bn on two tramways, the 28km east-west tramway already proposed and a 7km north-south tramway and the rest on 30km of rapid busways and a further 30km of reserved bus lanes and high frequency bus services. The review rejected the alternate proposal of a 25km metro line on a former rail alignment as it said the route didn't provide any increase in connectivity.

[@mc_jo713]

Like the video but there’s a massive point you haven’t brought up… im from quebec city and have been following this case since the beginning. The low amount of companies submitting prices for the project is a result of the political climate in the city. The constant fight between the city and the provincial government rises the uncertainty of financing the projects which makes the price go higher and higher … the CAQ government got directly involved in the city’s affairs by pushing their car centric ideology to keep voters on their side. Now the projects is in the hands of CDPQ which is only interested in profits so the project will probably never happen! Im sad for my city

[@Hiro_Trevelyan]

It's insane cause we still complain about the price over here in Paris haha

[@cacogenicist]

First in N. America? First what, exactly? We have light rail and street cars here in Portland.

[@roachtoasties]

Even a "cheap" tram at $200,000,000 per km is $200,000 per meter. Think about it.

[@KyrilPG]

A reasonably priced tram, like in Paris is 200 to 400 millions for the *whole* line, not per kilometer. So 10 to 20km, not 1. Much much much less than 200 000 per meter...

[@antoine-olivierdeshaies-le2307]

As a local, I gotta admit how flawed everything around this project is. The region needs better transit but all the politics behind it and lack of collaboration among all involved (RTC, STL, Transport ministry, Quebec city mayor) just make the current proposition a flop and the polls show it. If we are to spend all this money, the least would be to have the studies backing it and proof more people would actually switch from private car to public transit. Yet, as soon as criticism on the logistic, details and gestion is brought, we’re immediately painted as anti-transit car enthusiasts, making the discussion counterproductive. Personally, I think the best project would be a rail-guided trolley-bus BRT similar to the one Nancy, France had. On lines where the rail guiding is available, full automation would be possible while bus drivers could employ them everywhere else. A rail would also allow the use of platform screen door thus allowing interior heated stations with off-board fare payments. The Trolley-bus should be equiped with a battery to allow for off-line driving or simply for segment where trees prevent overhead power. Goes without saying but: mostly separated lane, traffic light synchronisation, crossing the river to Lévis is a must.

[@petitkruger2175]

8 BILLION? That much for a tramway thats surface runnning for most of its route is insane. It shouldn't be more than 2-3. If i was emperor of Quebec City, i would cancel that tbh and either partner with an exsisting trasnport construction agency or go the CDPQ route.

[@Ezol1]

2:11 "Then things started to go off the rails" * Badum ts *

[@convextlc9767]

A really good video to do next as a follow up would be WHY is it so much more expensive here on NA and so luch cheaper in Europe? Is it just the kack of competition here?

[@jetfan925]

Lots of political redlining to jump through.

[@osasunaitor]

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

[@TheRandCrews]

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