Barcelona’s Metro Continues Its Expansion at a Relatively Cheap Price

[TrickyRicky]

I wonder to what extent how Spain's infrastructure companies interact with the government weighs on this question? Spain has some of the top infrastructure companies in the world, it is one of their strengths. Through regulation and subsidization I could see the Spanish government and it's infrastructure sector working out synergies for domestic projects. I think however we can only admire this to some extent. Spain is in for a lot of economic pain in the near future. Clearly infrastructure has been a sacred cow in that country because they were able to leverage excessive domestic development to create companies with global expertise. I think they can no longer afford to treat infrastructure spending with such reverence in an era of debt crisis and 20% unemployment.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

If Barcelona is building a new subway line snaking around downtown, how would they cut and cover anything other than maybe a few segments? Between the narrow streets, required depths, the Spaniards' talent for boring tunnels, etc., why would they cut and cover? The lessons we can learn are probably less about technological details and more about finding a way to get things done, finding and maximizing synergies, as TrickyRicky says, wherever possible. They made transit a priority and did what it took to get it done, and they seem to get entire projects done in the time it takes Toronto to make a list of reasons why a project is impossible.

As for other cost differences, I would assume that a new Barcelona line running through areas already well-served by subway lines would require next to nothing in terms of bus terminals, parking lots, kiss'n'ride zones, any kind of large public presence, even, other than entrance huts and a few substations and vents and hatches. This might slash the size of concourses and mezzanines, slash property acquisitions, as well as reduce the cost and shorten the timeline of building the actual stations. Alone, this factor could easily save 5%. Just to compare, the massive underground bus terminal at Steeles proposed for the Yonge extension would add more than $150M to what the cost of a station would otherwise be. 5% here and 5% there could add up quickly.

It has been funny, though, to listen to consultants and officials in the past talking about the Yonge subway extension say they'll keep the budget contained (compared to the Spadina extension...yes, the budget already started out more bloated) and the project well managed by trying to get the Spanish to build the extension, Dragados, etc. Ask them if there's any plan to employ on the Yonge extension any of the architects or engineers or construction companies that are building Spadina, and they say "Oh, lord, no. That's a totally different project." I don't know if the idea is still to try to get some Madrid Magic, but what's the point if they're only going to do so on one transit project?

 

[DarnDirtyApe]

Tunnel and station size have a big impact on overall cost. The Barcelona metro expansions are built using one using giant tunnel, with stations also located within the tunnel. I'm not sure if we use single or dual tunnels now in Toronto, but the stations are all cut and cover construction which adds significantly to the cost.

 

[TrickyRicky]

I'm not aware of what kind of subway they are building in Barcelona. I was in London in June however and it refreshed my memory of how small the trains are, or to put it another way how large the subway trains are in Toronto. Taking the Piccadilly line to Heathrow, and then the subway here from Kipling in one day...the experience is so different I would hesitate to call them the same thing, other than the fact that both run (partially) underground. No wonder our subways are so expensive. Why do we run freight train size trains in our subway? Perhaps those more informed about transit can explain the difference.

 

[MisterF]

I'm not aware of what kind of subway they are building in Barcelona. I was in London in June however and it refreshed my memory of how small the trains are, or to put it another way how large the subway trains are in Toronto. Taking the Piccadilly line to Heathrow, and then the subway here from Kipling in one day...the experience is so different I would hesitate to call them the same thing, other than the fact that both run (partially) underground. No wonder our subways are so expensive. Why do we run freight train size trains in our subway? Perhaps those more informed about transit can explain the difference.

I've noticed the same thing. Maybe if Toronto didn't build colossal tunnels and stations it would be able to afford more than 2 1/2 subway lines. I don't have an explanation, but it's not limited to subways - we build highways the same way. A typical 4 lane highway in Ontario is about 3 times wider than a typical 4 lane highway in Europe.