montréal REM (ligne A) - Discussion générale

[mtlurb]

il y a 54 minutes, Morse Attack a dit :

Are you really mad that public land was given to a public organisation to do a public works project?

You prefer that the government pay he government to do a government project?

I think his point is that it "deflates" real costs of the project.

If these lands were to be commercialized (sold on the market), the cost of project would be higher or much higher.

But we are past that scenario now.

[ToxiK]

il y a 2 minutes, mtlurb a dit :

I think his point is that it "deflates" real costs of the project.

If these lands were to be commercialized (sold on the market), the cost of project would be higher or much higher.

But we are past that scenario now.

And good for the Caisse to see a good business opportunity that others missed.

[Morse Attack]

7 minutes ago, mtlurb said:

I think his point is that it "deflates" real costs of the project.

If these lands were to be commercialized (sold on the market), the cost of project would be higher or much higher.

But we are past that scenario now.

Yes, that makes sense and its a good point.

However, being able to negociate something for free (or for a reduced cost) should be considered as an advantage to the project. Also, being able to spot an opportunity and build a low cost project because you specifically planned it to go through land you knew was already public is also an advantage that the Caisse brought to the table!!!

If the private sector piloted the project and were shopping for capital investment, and they had a lower project cost because they were able to negociate free land, that would definitly be considered a plus for the investors. That should be considered in the budget.

In this case, I think the ARTM would have gotten pretty much the same deal. Unless they really suck at accounting, negotiation and budget montage. Why would you the taxpayer want to see the cost of free government land on the project budget? Even if they bought the land full price, its juste the government paying itself from one pocket to the other. 

In short, if the costs are lower for the taxpayer, its because the Caisse did their homework.

[mtlurb]

Yes but, hear me out.

Tomorrow morning, a politician wants to be cool and hip... 

Politician: "Hey bro, we can do a REM for 120M/KM, lets do 50KM and reach Saint-Colomban, we did, we can do it again"

Gullible electorate: " OMG want!!" 

MTLURB: 🤦‍♂️

5 years later

Politician: "But but but... it cost more because we had to expropriate all these lands going to Saint-Colomban"

--------

The reality is that price tag of 120M/km is heavily impacted by little or no expropriations and it should be said.

[SameGuy]

...and much foundational infra already built.

[ToxiK]

il y a 7 minutes, SameGuy a dit :

...and much foundational infra already built.

Those infra were underused by AMT.  Again, it was a business opportunity.  The Caisse saw the real value of the Deux-Montagne line and took advantage of it (and put in the investments that the AMT would never have done).

[champdemars]

Il y a 2 heures, mtlurb a dit :

Yes but, hear me out.

Tomorrow morning, a politician wants to be cool and hip... 

Politician: "Hey bro, we can do a REM for 120M/KM, lets do 50KM and reach Saint-Colomban, we did, we can do it again"

Gullible electorate: " OMG want!!" 

MTLURB: 🤦‍♂️

5 years later

Politician: "But but but... it cost more because we had to expropriate all these lands going to Saint-Colomban"

--------

The reality is that price tag of 120M/km is heavily impacted by little or no expropriations and it should be said.

C’est ce qu’on a vu avec le REM de l’Est. C’était 2x plus court comme ligne pour un prix plus élevé. Mais quand même moins cher comme proposition que celle de l’ARTM.

 

il y a 1 minute, ToxiK a dit :

Those infra were underused by AMT.  Again, it was a business opportunity.  The Caisse saw the real value of the Deux-Montagne line and took advantage of it (and put in the investments that the AMT would never have done).

Exact et je miserais une grosse somme que l’ARTM n’aurait jamais vu ou osé exploiter cette opportunité.

[ToxiK]

il y a 1 minute, champdemars a dit :

Exact et je miserai une grosse somme que l’ARTM n’aurait jamais vu ou osé exploiter cette opportunité.

Non, mais pour 36 milliards $, ils osent... le demander

[SameGuy]

16 minutes ago, ToxiK said:

Those infra were underused by AMT.  Again, it was a business opportunity.  The Caisse saw the real value of the Deux-Montagne line and took advantage of it (and put in the investments that the AMT would never have done).

Absolutely. I do not decry them the opportunity taken. Just providing a reality check to anyone waving pompoms claiming the Caisse is the Second Coming because they could build a 67 km transit system for $120M/km.

[montrealgoalie]

2 hours ago, SameGuy said:

Absolutely. I do not decry them the opportunity taken. Just providing a reality check to anyone waving pompoms claiming the Caisse is the Second Coming because they could build a 67 km transit system for $120M/km.

Which is why their estimate for their version of the REM de l'Est came in at 10 billion, since there wasn't really any reused infrastructure, all new tunnels etc.