Construction: mostly a big scam

This is why I absolutely adore Naomi Lakritz, columnist for the Calgary Herald. She always finds a very direct approach to thinking about things:

[W]hy has it taken the city three years to extend this section of track four kilometres, but it took only four years to build the Canadian Pacific Railroad across Canada, including blasting through the Rocky Mountains?

Quite. And she's absolutely right. What is more, as Lakritz points out, when they built the CPR, the workers also had to deal with the constant threat of attacks by Indian tribes.

The whole construction industry (residential, infrastructure, etc.) has become a racket, a scam. One only needs to watch construction workers anywhere to see that a lot of time is wasted (deliberately) so as to pad the final invoice. By the same token, perfectly good sidewalks or intersections are regularly ripped wide open and asphalted over again – not because it was necessary but because those on the crew needed a "make-work program".

The slow crawl with which the LRT is expanded in Calgary is a joke, especially when looked at against the backdrop of the good old pioneering days.

The same was true of the additional Sheppard subway line in Toronto – a measly four or five stops in total, without providing any real relief to the other lines or, more importantly, the car traffic along the 401 as well as Steele and Finch Avenues. That "line" took almost a decade and a half to complete, overshooting its original schedule by several years and several billion dollars – with the communist Toronto mayor David Miller musing years later, after he had run the city's finances fully into the ground (quelle surprise), about shutting down the entire Sheppard line because the city could no longer afford to operate it. What a joke.

Any construction project could be completed in 75%, if not 50%, of the time it ends up taking. The extra time only serves to pad bills and invoices.

Time to return to the ways of the good old days.

Comments

[Aaron]

The research of Bent Flyvbjerg might show some answers. I read his paper entitled "Comparison of Capital Costs per Route-Kilometre in Urban Rail.", and by his logic, the main cause for variation in capital costs is whether or not the project is above, at, or below grade. Seeing how the C-Train expansion is at grade, its costs and delays would be the lowest of all options. It's excuses, plain and simple. That thing should have been done a long time ago. That's the nature of 'Cost Plus', although I'm not certain this project was bid as such.

[SoContent]

Too true all of the above and Aaron's comments. As a former senior project manager on some global megaprojects (only 1 in Canada) it is a disgrace, even contractors on homes in Alberta perform poorly and mediocre. The solution? P3 and global transnational intergrated teams on projects like C Train that should be P3 and the same for future Hwy 2 regional corridor rapid rail in Alberta. What scares me is the Russians and Indians are doing it and in time as years go by will be doing work here no matter what unions complain or object to; a wake up call. On Werner's work as a web columnist, while I don't agree on everything it is exceptional and first class.

[Werner Patels]

Just a side note to SoContent: But that's the beauty of it. Readers don't have to agree with everything I write. If they did, there would be no reason for me to write.

The real point to make, though, is that web columnists must put their best foot forward when presenting arguments. Not everyone will agree or draw the same conclusions, but at least I can't be faulted for not trying.

As for the construction topic: the construction industry is rife with, let's call it, padding. It's not a clean industry by any standard -- too many excuses, as Aaron also wrote, and too many shortcuts that are designed to fatten profits without shortening the overall project time.