Catbus

514 Buses - get Montreal bus schedules via cell phone

ant6n — Tue, 11 Oct 2011 05:11:13 +0000

If you are one of the two thirds of Canadian cell phone users who do not have a smart phone, you might find yourself late at night at a bus stop, waiting a very long time for the next bus home. If you had a smart phone with a Google maps app or the new STM app, you would probably have checked when the next bus comes, and waited longer inside that warm bar, or at the party where you were.

Sure, you could get the paper flyers of the relevant bus schedules, if you know where to get them, but it's still all very cumbersome. You could also use the phone service of the STM, telling you the next buses for one given stop. But it will only tell you the schedule if you know the 5-digit stop number and bus line - and you'll only find those once you are at the stop, so you still gotta wait there. And you won't find out about other nearby lines and stops.

So at last weekend's Back to School Hackathon, I thought it would be a good idea to try to make life a bit easier for those of us who still have that dumb phone, and developed a simple sms-based application that will tell you the next buses near a given address. You can just text your current address, intersection, postal code or point of interest to

514-600-1287 (that's 514-6001-BUS)***
and it will find nearby bus stops, and give the next scheduled departures.

Try the web-version:

address:

As you can see, the app returns a very compact result**:

At the top it shows the time relative to which the schedule is displayed
It will show a compact name for each bus stop, with the distance (in metres) from your supplied address
for each bus stop, it will show the buses, together with their direction (W,E,S,N), and the next couple of buses, in minutes relative to the displayed time

The app properly deals with weekend days, holidays, night buses. It will also deal with special characters that show up in the original schedule (">" or "+"). They will be displayed, and usually mean that the bus is taking some alternate route. The system knows 96% of the bus stops (although some might be located incorrectly). and supports the following options:

the first word can be set of option characters. W, E, S, N will display only buses in the supplied direction, H will display wheelchair accessible buses using '*'. Multiple characters can be used in one word. Example: "WEH 688 Sherbrooke" will show all westbound and eastbound buses, and show handicapped access.
You can add a trailling "in number", where the number is in minutes. This will provide the schedules relative to a time in the future. Example: "h3a 2t5 in 30" will show buses near postal code H3A 2T5 in 30 minutes.

This application, given the 160 character limitation, naturally does no actual routing. It just gives scheduled departures. You still have to know your lines. This fits the idea that many people do know the routes of buses that are relevant to them, even if their don't know the schedules. This complements the idea of the frequent service network - you know how to get there, but you would like some independence regarding schedules. By making this an sms app rather than a smart phone app, I hope for this to be useful to more people.

Some argue that smartphones are not a game changer for transit. But tools like this should help reduce some of the stress associated with taking buses - the wait at the stop - and maybe will make some travelling a bit more enjoayble.

disclaimer: This is currently beta. The phone number may change. The phone system may not respond at times (in which case try resending your request).

**Update: Due to a recent outage at tropo, the sms service, I changed the system to respond via another service, twilio. So the system will now respond with a different number (which should also accept requests - but it is a US number). Along with this change the format of the response changed to show absolute times rather than relative times.
***Update: After the service called twilio started offering canadian phone numbers with sms support, I have switched over the service to this new number. The old number ((514) 418-0428), should still work for a while.

The STM and the illusion of participation

ant6n — Fri, 03 Dec 2010 16:16:08 +0000

The STM, Montreal's public transportation agency, presents itself as fresh and new and user-oriented, with a recently revamped corporate design (which is admittedly pretty nifty) and a public campaign involving tv spots and a new blog. They try to project an image of user focus. Just now the STM offered a new set of exciting choices to its users: the color scheme of the new metro cars. The choices are: blue and white, white and blue, and... blue and white. Really... If the only choice they allow Montrealers to make is the color of the cars, why not at least have an open competition allowing the submission of actual designs - rather than this top-down approach? This is not the first time the agency has invited Montrealers to vote: back in March, users could choose a new seating configuration in the metro cars (which needed more standing room for the rush hour crush). This was a two-step process with somewhat narrow choices. The STM probably should have gotten somebody to explain that maybe putting benches all along the sides is the best compromise to keep the most seats while providing much more standing space, even if it doesn't look like it on paper and gets rid of those precious individual seats. Back then the vote seemed like a ruse, an attempt to conceal the fact that the metro was at capacity, and the new contract still in the courts. Now, the bitter aftertaste is the price of the cars - up to a billion dollars more to replace the whole fleet, because nobody seemed to have a problem with foregoing the open bidding process and awarding the contract directly to a Bombardier-Alstom cartell, despite a cheaper offer from a foreign builder. Nobody, except some opposition in the city council, and of course many users - but they don't have much say. We don't get all that much say, whether it is about awarding an expensive contract to put GPS units into buses and build a new communication center (the suburb of Laval paid much less), or about selling station and metro line names to the highest bidder (particularly ironic: the color scheme of the metros car is part of our identity and heritage, but the system itself apparently is not). I also don't remember any public hearings regarding their recent fare hike, either. They simply get announced. Unlike in New York, where the recent fare hike was part of a long and angsty debate (the conclusion of which was to make the unlimited ride card more expensive, rather than cap it). There was a debate this summer about putting air conditioning into buses and new metro cars, but right away the STM decided top-down that it would cost too much money. It was not deemed a priority, and the funds would be better spent on service improvements.

future bus shelter - sharp, but empty. Image via fagstein.

Yet just recently, the agency introduced new sharp, but dysfunctional bus shelters, that are slated to replace existing ones. The new ones have exactly the same geometry; they are simply more expensive. Admittedly, the STM did ask their users for their opinion. But just like when asking us our opinion regarding the "bus of the future" line 467 upgrades (which are actually pretty nifty), our participation is more like a foot note. A survey that feels a bit as if it is mostly in place to reaffirm the usefulness of the investment. My problem is not that their service is bad, or that the organization is going in the wrong direction. In fact most of the initiatives are good - the frequent service network, the 'bus service of the future', the new corporate design. And I don't disagree that the metro cars should follow the heritage colors, and are part of the Montreal's identity. And that most of the times, transport planners probably make better choices than the crowds. I simply don't like how they interact with their users. Why pretend that the users have some sort of say? And why take already decided issues (e.g. the removal of seats from the metro), and let people ratify them via mundane votes that attempt to hide the underlying decision? Participation should not be a marketing-tool, but a way for a public institution to be accountable to the public. And trying to give people a sense that they are being listened to should not come through a giant campaign to illicit votes on mundane choices, but, well, listening. Trying to talk to them can be a bit difficult. On car-free day earlier this year, where some local transportation agencies each had a stand, I spoke to STM representatives (some hired PR people, really) and tried to point out a small mistake on their 10-minute max map. They weren't really interested. I also emailed the STM. They didn't respond, and the mistake is still there online. In fact they never answered any of my emails. At the same event I had a lengthy discuission with a representative from the RTL (the transit agency of the South Shore suburbs) about the merits of fixed interval schedules and timed transfers; leaving a much more positive impression without all the spark. The silly thing is that Montrealers will choose the traditional color scheme.

Bike Contrails

ant6n — Thu, 02 Dec 2010 17:12:43 +0000

Contrails is a project to turn bicycles into a paint brush. The goal is to create a device that attaches to a bike and leaves a washable chalk like trail - a bike contrail. The Brooklyn, New York based organization behind the idea recently completed a successful kickstarter, raising ten thousand dollars. This will allow them to mass produce 2000 devices for relatively cheap, giving half of them away to non-profits.

You may call it public collective art, or just a nuisance. I think it's a pretty neat idea. Like ants marking their paths with pheromones, it will show where bicyclists go. I am not sure whether it can help increase safety per se, as the group claims, but it will surely increase the visibility of bicycling. Which could help to make people more aware of this mode of transportation and encourage more cycling. Plus, it looks like a fun toy to use.
images and video via bike contrail

Construction of the Train de l’Est begins – at 87,000$ per commuter

ant6n — Fri, 22 Oct 2010 01:31:21 +0000

Last week the AMT started the construction of the first stations of the Train de l'Est, a new commuter rail line linking the downtown of Montreal with Montreal-Nord, the east of the Island, as well as Repentigny and Mascouche off the island. The line goes through the electrified Mont-Royal Tunnel, then along a single-tracked CN right of way until the East of the island, then 12km on a new track in the median of the 640 highway to Mascouche. The first trains are projected to roll in September 2012, probably as far as Pointe-Aux-Trembles or Repentigny. It's the revival of a shorter all-electrified line, which ceased operation in 1968.

Train de l'Est as projected by the AMT

This is a project that the suburbs have been lobbying for for years. And this is the main problem with this project -- it is very much oriented just for them. 478 million dollars are spent to move a projected 5500 suburbanites downtown and back - 11000 trips on a weekday on a 53km-long line along a track that mostly exists today. That's 87,000$ dollars a person - one could buy cars for all passengers at a fraction of the cost. It's more expensive per rider than the ridiculous 16$ Billion Second Avenue Subway in New York (probably the most expensive transit project ever). Also In comparison, the extension of Montréal's Orange line into Laval at 745 million dollars brought in 30 thousand new weekeday commuters. That's 25,000$ per person to blast a completely new subway tunnel under a river, not to add a couple of stations to a mostly existing track. The issue is not that the project is too expensive, although it should probably be cheaper - it was originally projected at 300 million. The problem is that it's not designed to get a enough riders, especially on the island. It's not an effective use of resources, both financial and infrastructure (e.g. rail right of ways). It's not that there is no demand. The line passes through the North of Montreal, through the boroughs of Montreal-Nord, Ahuntsic Cartierville, Villeray-Saint-Michel-Parc Extension and Saint-Leonard, which have a total population of 420,000. It intersects and runs parallel to some of Montreal's most frequented bus lines.

the 139 (Pie-IX) with 40,000 daily trips,
the 67 (St-Michel) with 40,000 (in 2008),
the 121 (Sauvé) with 38,000, and
the 69 (Gouin) with 27,000.

All these bus lines feed people into the distant metro system to get them downtown. The four lines alone see more than ten times the traffic the train is supposed to get. Earlier this year, Spacing Montreal published an article entitled Montréal-Nord in exile: Public transit and social exclusion, which explores the connection between the troubled areas in the North of Montreal and its public transit woes, and the hope for the new train. But right now I find it doubtful that many riders will be able to benefit from this train. Sure, it will be faster, but there are very few stations in Montreal Nord - only 2 along a 6.5km stretch (Montreal-North at Pie-IX, Saint-Leonard at Lacordaire), so people have to travel farther to reach a train stop. The trains will only have 5 or 6 departures during rush hour, whereas the buses come at least every 10 minutes. This means you have to plan your daily schedule completely around the train. But you still have to pay a higher fare - almost 50% more for the monthly pass, up to twice regular fare for students. And by the time the trains pass through Montreal-Nord, they are going to be packed, making the trip basically as unpleasant as the bus ride. The AMT plans to build an "intermodal hub" at Anjou, but are at the same time putting 4223 parking spots along the line, with a provision to add 1322 more - so every projected rider is to arrive by car (I've written about the commuter rail's misguided focus on Park and Ride facilities, they are not "intermodal hubs"). So the focus is not on urban dwellers, many of whom do not own a car, but rather on suburbanites. And thus the train becomes an extension of the car into downtown, rather than the extension of transit out; it encourages sprawl and perpetuates car-dependent life styles. But how could the project be expanded to improve service in Monreal? A possible way to expand this project to improve service to the north of Montreal would be to construct a surface metro, similar to the plan the city already had back in 1981, putting several stations along the badly served, heavily populated, bus-riding neighborhoods around Montreal-Nord. New, dedicated, electrified double-tracks could be installed up to Papineau, then single tracks to Anjou. With a passing point around Viau, this would allow service as often as every 10 minutes to Anjou. Such a schedule could be accomplished with only 6 or 7 trains, all just running back and forth, totaling around 200 departures a day. If only one single track where built, one could serve Papineau every 20 minutes, or Saint-Leonard (Lacordaire) every 30 minutes, both using only 2 trains. 200 departures a day with 7 trains Currently the AMT plans to provide 16 departures with 5 trains. In the morning, all trains start at Mascouche and get dumped into Gare Centrale. Only few run back and forth more than once. You need a lot of trains for fairly little service, and you need a lot of space downtown to store those trains during the day. But on the current CN-owned non-electrified freight track you cannot easily provide more service. On one hand, running on diesel is much more expensive than running on electricity; the AMT could not afford to send back nearly empty trains. On the other hand, CN would not allow that much passenger traffic on their freight line. Note how despite the many extra stations, the travel time could actually be similar to the currently projected ones: electrified trains accelerate much faster than Diesel trains. The new dual mode trains that the AMT will use are almost twice as powerful in electric mode. Modern light-weight electric multiple unit trains like Alstom's Coradia Nordic (built for Sweden's Commuter Trains), Siemens Desiro, or Stadler's FLIRT etc. etc. are even quicker and could easily make the above schedule given good track conditions, and decrease travel time from Montreal-Nord up to 50%. Having many existing train manufacturers also means that they are more affordable due to the competition (unlike the rubber-tyred metro). maybe 10 to 20 million dollars for a whole train carrying a thousand people.

Coradia Nordic operates down to -35°C, goes up to 160Km/h (wiki-cc Udo Schröter)

Now the AMT will tell you (and has told me in the past), that this is not their market; that travel within the city should be done by bus or by metro. But given the expense and slowness of metro expansion, and the need to provide more transit in the area, the AMT should really get into the rapid transit game inside the city. The 10 minute service as shown above, together with the diesel operation to Mascouche could easily carry 80,000 trips a day, maybe more, at a cost of 200 to 400 million dollars extra, including rolling stock, if the design is kept lean and functional. The CEO of the AMT, Joël Gauthier, believes, and he is probably correct, that there will be much more demand than 11000 trips a day. The idea is to put the train into place with 16 departures a day, and expand it if there is more demand - in negotiation with CN. This sounds a bit like "let's create a crappy service, and if it's successful, we'll try to make it better maybe." Lets hope that at least the current stations are built so that more tracks can easily be added, and maybe one day the surface metro can become a reality.

Breakthrough of the Longest Tunnel in the World

ant6n — Fri, 15 Oct 2010 18:14:33 +0000

The longest tunnel in the world is now in Switzerland. Since 8:00 Eastern Time this morning, when a TBM broke through the walls to form the Gotthard Base Tunnel. This 57Km train tunnel, to be completed around 2017, at a cost to the tune of 1300$ for every person in Switzerland, represents this country's vision of a future on rails; to get the freight away from the congested roads of the Alps; to cut down travel times between Switzerland and Italy by about an hour with trains traveling at 250Km/h through the underground passageway; to connect Northern and Southern Europe divided by the massive mountains. And In North America we watch with envy.

Car-Shaped Bike Rack Design

ant6n — Tue, 12 Oct 2010 21:27:23 +0000

This is too clever not to share. It's a concept for a bicycle rack, an entry to Designboom’s IIDA Competition. It shows bicycles reclaiming the space taken by cars. Also illustrates nicely how much parking space a car takes compared to a bike. via inhabitat

Bike Share Maps Around the World

ant6n — Tue, 12 Oct 2010 17:55:06 +0000

Bicycle sharing has been spreading across the world. Velib in Paris, Bixi in Montreal, most recently Capital bike share in Washington DC, etc. etc. The newest generation of bike sharing can provide more mobility than any other form of transit for short distances in dense urban areas. You can hop on at a station, and drop off the bike at another. You don't have to worry about getting your bike stolen, or where to park your car. You can get to some place by bike but than continue walking or taking public transit. Which is not true for cars or bikes - you always have to come back and pick it up. For many trips within downtown areas, it's simply the fastest way to get around, if you're willing to lug around these somewhat heavy bicycles. Although the metro has much higher average speeds, the long winded walks down to the station and waiting times mean that you can be faster on a bike operating at street level. There's also less stress due to waiting, because the bikes are waiting for you at the station ... well, in theory. The biggest problem with modern bike sharing systems is that stations can be full, and they can be empty. If there is no bike at a station, you can walk to the next one and hope to find one there. This means you cannot rely on this form of transport, especially in mono-functional job centers, as the Yonah Freemark at the TransportPolitic argues. He also finds that a bike share system needs a high density of stations, which might be a problem for Washington's bike share: The systems seem to be targeting shorter trips where walking is possible as a backup. This might be one of the reasons why bike sharing tends to replace walking and transit trips rather than car trips. A survey in Montreal found that less than 10% of trips on Montreal's Bixi would've been done by car. Uncertainty is a big problem - it means stress. It is stressful to take a bus that often comes late if it all; just like it is stressful to drive downtown when the parking situation is uncertain. Stress makes a form of transport less appealing and less competitive compared to others. Wandering through downtown after 5pm searching for a bike is not just annoying, it compromises the whole idea of the easy-hop-on-hop-off bike share system. This is where real time maps come in. They can bring back some of appeal to the system by giving back the certainty where the bikes are. You still have to walk longer to get to your bike, but at least you know that there is one, and that you find the closest one to where you are. Olivier at Suprageography made some really neat maps. Originally just for London, Now for fifteen cities around the world:

The maps include fancy features like showing an animation of the distribution of bikes during the last 24 hours (only for really fast computers), and showing the distribution of bikes at a given station during the last 24 hours. While these are neat visualizations, it's doubtful whether they are going to be very useful to users seeking to improve their biking experience. What would be nice to see is some improvement in performance so that more mobile and netbook users can benefit. Given that there has been continual development, this is probably not so far off.

Transit ridership Higher in Canada than in US, Australia

ant6n — Fri, 08 Oct 2010 20:15:02 +0000

Canadian cities get consistently higher transit ridership ratios than cities in the US or Australia, according to a recent article at Human Transit.

image via HumanTransit.com

The graph shows the percentage of people commuting to work by public transit, compared to the population of the cities. The transit share tends to be higher for larger populations -- but at the same time there is the trend that Canadian cities see a higher transit mode share. This anomaly might be due to the great weather, better concentration of employment centers, higher apartment renting levels, or a perception that people take the bus to be progressive rather than because they are poor. Either way, this is how Jarret puts it:

In any case, we're on the leadup to Canadian Thanksgiving, so I thought this little occasion for Canadian triumphalism would be apt.

Montreal metro cars: Bombardier wins contract, Taxpayers loose

ant6n — Wed, 06 Oct 2010 07:10:18 +0000

Berri Metro station - The system is at full capacity now, new cars would really be nice - cc flickr abdallahh

Now it's official. Instead of trying to get the new Montreal metro cars at market value, Quebec just confirmed that the contract is directly going to be given to Bombardier. Without a bidding process. This comes just a few days after the government asked the STM to delay the opening of the bidding process, so that the province can pass a law that would allow the STM to directly negotiate with Bombardier/Alstom based on their 2008 bid. The Montreal blog fagstein offers this timeline:

May 2006: The Quebec government announces it's going to hand a $1.2-billion contract to build new metro cars to Bombardier without putting it out to tenders. It reasons that Bombardier is the only company that can build the cars in Quebec on rubber wheels. Competitor Alstom immediately points out that it could have done the same.

June 2006: Alstom sues.

January 2008: A judge rules in favour of Alstom, which he says has a right to bid on the contract.

February 2008: The Quebec government starts from scratch, opening up bidding for the contract.

November 2008: Bombardier and Alstom submit a joint bid on the contract. Being the only bidders, they quickly get it.

November 2009: The Quebec government decides to double the scope of the contract from 340 to 765 cars, replacing not just the oldest cars but the entire fleet.

December 2009: Chinese company ZhuZhou comes out of nowhere and demands to be able to bid on the new contract. ZhuZhou promptly sues. A Spanish company, CAF, does the same.

January 2010: A judge rules that because of the expanded scope of the contract, these new companies should be allowed to bid. The STM puts out a call for interest, but competitors argue it's rigged to ensure that Bombardier-Alstom gets the contract. ZhuZhou says it will sue.

March 2010: Both China's ZhuZhou and Spain's CAF express interest in bidding for the expanded metro contract.

May 2010: Bombardier-Alstom sues.

June 2010: A judge rules against Bombardier-Alstom, saying the STM can put out a public call for bids on the expanded metro contract.

July 2010: The STM decides to start from scratch for a third time, opening up bidding for the expanded contract

October 2010: The Quebec government decides it will start from scratch a fourth time, and just hand over a $1.3-billion contract without putting it up for bids. It cites the urgency of acquiring new cars. CAF says it will sue.

He also offers a projection on what will happen next, which can be found in his article here. It already is very fishy how Alstom first sued to get an open bidding process on the cars -- the whole point of which is to get a market value deal for the taxpayer -- but then suddenly joined with Bombardier just to undermine that exact same process. It is also strange that the call for bids at that time had restrictions that would only allow Alstom and Bombardier to bid. It required that any bidding company had rubber tyre metro technology running somewhere for at least 5 years. This made the whole bidding process moot. That's why Spanish CAF sued to begin with, to get a chance to bid as well. Now CAF, desperate to get the contract, just offered to build the metro cars for only 1.4$ million dollars - almost the same amount that they got paid by the Santiage metro System to build basically the same metro cars. In comparison, Bombardier/Alstom is currently asking for 2.6$ million. This is down from originally asking 3.3$ million; just the threat of an open bidding process lowered the price. But That's still 1.22$ billion vs caf's 670$ million offer for the whole order - 550$ million less. And this being a continuation of the 2008 bid, before the order get expanded to the whole fleet, the difference would grow as the STM would exercise the option to order more cars at the same prize. The difference could grow to over 1$ billion dollars. Now why would the government push this through if it represents such a huge burden on the tax payer? Cars = Too old? The claim the Charest government makes is that the metro car issue is becoming urgent, that they cars not to replaced soon. And sure, the oldest cars are from 1963, almost 50 years old. But just this summer the STM confirmed that the metro cars are old but safe. The maintenance costs will grow in the next couple of years, but it seems hard that they will grow to hundreds of millions of dollars. At the same time I wonder how many months the bidding process will delay the delivery of the cars. My guess is that the final negotiations, engineering and testing will overshadow the bidding time, anyway. CAF = Unreliable? The claim on the side of Bombardier/Alstom is that their technology is much more reliable, that caf simply doesn't have the expertize. "There's no way that (Montrealers) should be the STM's guinea pigs, with all the risks that it entails, including the maintenance of these cars for the next 40 years", they claim. But CAF is building rubber tyred metro cars for Santiago, and they also hired former Bombardier employees. Surely that should give them at least some credibility. Another claim is that caf won't build most of the cars in Quebec. Yet, a requirement of bidding is that 60% of the work has to be done in Quebec either way. In any case this is a requirement that should be tested by the open bidding process, and not by claims of the competitor, or the gut feeling of some politicians. Bombardier = good for Quebec? Quebecers have positive feelings towards Bombardier. The company was found in Quebec, started as a small shop in the Eastern Townships. It built the first metro cars. It creates jobs. Quebecers have dear feelings towards the company, they are one of 'us'. But in the end of the day Bombardier is just a company, a multi-national one, that answers to its stock holders and not the people of Quebec. It is not a guarantor of jobs in Quebec. This summer the company just showed that when it cut back on jobs in the plant where it intended to build the metro cars, and threatened to shut it down of they wouldn't get the contract. At the same time Bombardiers is building rolling stock all over the world. Bombardier doesn't really care about Quebec, maybe then they would offer the taxpayers a better deal. At the same time, given that caf would have to assemble the metro cars in Quebec, the Spanish bidder would have to open a plant here as well, anyway. So the contract will create jobs in this province, no matter who is getting it. Contract with Bombardier = Votes? There is another angle to the story. The decision to fast-track the metro contract might be due to electoral goals. The riding of Kamarouska-Temiscouata, where the Bombardier plant is located, is about to have a by-election to replace national assembly member Claude Bechard, who passed away on September 8th. Surely saving a thousand jobs in that region will gain the Liberals some support, and they might win the seat. If that is actually the case as some suggest, then this will be a very expensive way of buying the seat. As an article in 'argent' puts it: $ 100 000 per vote. Whatever the actual reason is for this maneuver, something is seriously wrong here. This whole bungled deal, despite going on for years, has not resulted in the best possible deal. CAF is not amused, and even the Spanish Ambassador is getting involved. It is ironic that this comes just as Quebec is outraged over a trolling MacLean's article proclaiming Quebec to be "the most corrupt province". Even the Quebec government demanding an apology. Now the same government is mysteriously giving Bombardier an over-expensive contract. And the taxpayers are going to have to pay.

Is Montréal paying too much for BRT on Pie-IX?

ant6n — Fri, 01 Oct 2010 15:55:14 +0000

According to a recent gazette article, the cost to build 15km of bus rapid transit along Pie-IX is projected to cost 305M$. This includes154M$ for 10km in Montreal, 125$M for 5km in Laval, and 26$M for unforseen expenses. The higher relative cost in Laval is due to having to modify on/off ramps, and building parking lots. Now Yonah Freemark at the Transport Politic asks whether Montreal might be paying too much. He compares that to Besançon, a small city which prides itself building the cheapest TRAM system in France:

It’s a question Americans should be asking themselves, since the costs of transit investments seem to be spiraling out of control even as the demand for alternative transportation options has increased and the funds to support them have diminished. Besançon, a city of about 115,000 in a region of about twice that size, has managed to develop a project whose costs are acceptable — “optimized,” the local transit agency calls them — even in a small metropolitan area. Besançon will be getting a light rail line fully in its own right-of-way that extends over nine miles and thirty stations, all for a price of €228 million ($310 million), with construction beginning this fall. The city expects about 43,000 daily riders once the project opens in 2015. This is no streetcar, and yet plenty of U.S. cities are thinking about spending far more per mile on those limited ridership, low-performance systems.

He goes into a further analysis on how they cut costs, by avoiding surface construction as much as possible (i.e. ban cars instead of rebuilding streets) keeping station design simple, and getting the best prize on their rolling stock. Apparently the city negotiated with six candidates to produce the rolling stock, fostering competition. It then awarded the contract to CAF (the Spanish company that would like to build the Montreal metro cars..), and now pay 30% less than Houston for similar technology from the same company. The lower cost is partly due to not requiring much customization. The example might not be very comparable to Montréal, and what the city hopes to achieve on Pie-IX. And one could argue that if you buy cheap you get cheap. But in the end of the day, the desire to keep costs low on transportation projects is a virtue that seems to be lacking in Quebec, and the rest of North America. And it means that tax payers will pay more to get less, and will have to wait.