Nearly $36 billion. This is the estimated cost of the East Structuring Project (PSE) – new name given to the Eastern REM – established by the committee led by the Regional Metropolitan Transport Authority (ARTM) and unveiled last week. An amount that startled many observers and which was described as “unrealistic” by the Prime Minister, François Legault, who says he swallowed his coffee the wrong way when he learned of the expected bill for the project.
Sometimes, when we compare ourselves, we console each other, but in this case, there does not seem to be any consolation. Take the Grand Express Paris, a network of four automatic metro lines combined with the extension of two existing lines under construction around Paris. With a total length of 200 kilometers and built 90% underground, it should cost 42 billion euros, or 306 million Canadian dollars per kilometer, against 1.06 billion per kilometer for the PSE, which would be 34 kilometers long.
Stockholm also has a metro project under construction. With its 20 kilometers and 11 stations, it should reach a cost of 29.8 billion Swedish crowns, or the equivalent of 180 million Canadian dollars per kilometre. Closer to home, the Eglinton Crosstown line built in Toronto is estimated at 12.8 billion dollars, or 675 million per kilometre.
Why such a price difference?
There are many costs that are directly related [aux projets] and which are not included in the budgets in Europe. In France, for example, in the tramway projects, we do not include the redesign of the street, the lampposts and all the rest.
Making comparisons is a delicate and tedious exercise, argues Florence Junca-Adenot, associate professor in the Department of Urban Studies at UQAM. For example, the price of the PSE, which, in reality, is an entirely underground metro, can hardly be compared to that of the REM de l’Ouest, the first portion of which will be put into service by CDPQ Infra on July 31. On the one hand, this one is essentially an aerial light rail, less expensive, and on the other hand, the final bill is not yet known. The project is currently valued at 6.9 billion, but last October, CDPQ Infra warned that the costs would increase further.
“That’s not the real cost. It’s only the part officially put by CDPQ Infra in the project with the federal and provincial contribution, but there are a lot of things that are not included: the financing, the contingencies, the $800,000 from the federal government for the development of the two lanes of the REM on the Samuel-De Champlain bridge, the investments of the cities, the impacts on the transport companies which have to bring the buses back to the REM. All that is not in the cost of the project,” explains the professor.
Rules to follow
On the other hand, the PSE, steered by the ARTM, must comply with different rules, those of the Directive on the management of major public infrastructure projects of the Treasury Board. Thus, the ARTM had to include a set of elements in its estimate, such as indirect costs, the contingency reserve, financing costs and indexation according to inflation, among others.
In this context, Florence Junca-Adenot is not surprised by the high price of the PSE, which is similar to that of the extension of the blue line, which should reach 6.4 billion dollars, or also 1.06 billion per kilometer. .
A whole debate remains to be done on the proposed mode and the possibility of carrying out the project in stages. In this regard, Mr.me Junca-Adenot believes that there is nothing to prevent considering lighter modes of transport, or, if we maintain the idea of an entirely underground metro, extending the current metro lines, operated by means of trains on tires, rather than using the technology of the REM de l’Ouest, to which the PSE will not be connected.
Several observers have also deplored the fact that the ARTM, whose mandate was limited to reviewing CDPQ Infra’s REM de l’Est project, did not examine other modes of transportation, such as the tramway, in its analysis. .
As for the example of the Grand Paris Express, the cost of which is much lower, Florence Junca-Adenot remains cautious. “We’ll talk about real business when the project is finished,” she says. Everyone presents their projects according to the rules of the game in each country, but the real reality is the cost of implementation. »
The case of New York
Historically, building transport infrastructure in North America has been more expensive than in Europe, underlines Pierre Barrieau, lecturer at the University of Montreal and expert in transport planning. In New York, a call for tenders has just been launched for the extension of the subway line in Harlem, the cost of which is estimated at 7 billion US dollars, or about 3.8 billion per kilometer in Canadian dollars. “Infrastructure costs in North America are higher than in Europe,” he says. There is a lack of manpower and expertise. And the safety standards are very tight. »
A group of researchers from the Marron Institute of Urban Management (New York University), which compared transport projects carried out in 50 countries since the 1990s, has also determined that the line of the 2e Avenue in New York was the most expensive in the world, due in part to coordination problems, the expensive design of the stations and the difficulties encountered during the excavation work.
The cost calculation method also differs, points out Pierre Barrieau. “There are many costs that are directly linked [aux projets] and which are not included in the budgets in Europe. In France, for example, in the tramway projects, we do not include the redesign of the street, the lampposts and all the rest. »
When making the comparisons, other aspects must also be taken into account, such as the aerial and underground portions of the projects, which sometimes make the analysis difficult.
A trauma
Urban planner Richard Bergeron, former head of Projet Montréal, maintains that the Conseil du trésor’s directive concerning the planning of major infrastructure projects stems from the saga of the extension of the metro to Laval, inaugurated in 2007, and whose costs had gone from 380 to 745 million dollars.
“Since that time, the government has been traumatized. This trauma leads to ridiculous things like earthquake reserves [pour le PSE]. I’m surprised he didn’t take into account the hypothesis of an asteroid falling on Montreal. It is unreason. »
According to him, the scenario presented by the ARTM does not hold water. “We will not make a system like that for 40,000 users and less than 4,000 new users. That does not make any sense. »
The days when large-scale public projects were carried out quickly are over, he regrets. He cites the construction of the Montreal metro, begun in 1962 and completed in 1967. “Today, the idea is to make as many people as possible work for as long as possible. It’s always been the spirit [Société de transport de Montréal] “says Richard Bergeron.
“We talk in a vacuum,” he adds, skeptical about the realization of the project. “We left for a psychodrama that will last for years and years. And the former elected official does not budge: according to him, a surface tramway would be more appropriate for the east of Montreal, for a much lower cost.