Highway 7 - Kitchener to Guelph

[Canard]

Based on how slow the 401 expansion has been happening from 8 to 24, I wouldn't say it'd be quick at all! Past experience tells me it'll be years and years of construction.

...or maybe I'm just jaded at how fast P3 LRT construction has been happening, in comparison.

[SammyOES2]

I kind of assumed the bulk of the construction (in terms of length of road built) would be fast because it would be completely new and they wouldn't have to deal with ongoing traffic. The 412 I guess was built in approximately 3 years, so that's kind of a useful comparison. But I have no idea.

I guess the other thing is that this could be a hugely parallelizable project, so in terms of completion date the biggest barrier might just be how fast the Government is willing to spend the money. My impression so far hasn't been that they're in a huge rush, so...

[curiouschair]

I kind of assumed the bulk of the construction (in terms of length of road built) would be fast because it would be completely new and they wouldn't have to deal with ongoing traffic.  The 412 I guess was built in approximately 3 years, so that's kind of a useful comparison.  But I have no idea.  

I guess the other thing is that this could be a hugely parallelizable project, so in terms of completion date the biggest barrier might just be how fast the Government is willing to spend the money.  My impression so far hasn't been that they're in a huge rush, so...

I would guess the bridge over the grand river and the interchange with the 85 will be the critical path. I suspect also that no one is in a huge rush.

As another reference, the 407 extension took (will take) between 2 to 5 years: http://highway407east.com/project-info/p.../timeline/

[SammyOES2]

"I would guess the bridge over the grand river and the interchange with the 85 will be the critical path."

That's probably true. And I guess in fairness to the Government, they probably are working on the critical path. The work last year, this year, and next year are all probably necessary before being able to start on the actual interchange / Grand River bridge.

[rangersfan]

Hasn't the money for this project already been allocated?

[danbrotherston]

Hasn't the money for this project already been allocated?

Even if it was, which I believe it has, it hasn't necessarily all been allocated in *this* years budget, much of it will be in future years budget.

[SammyOES2]

Spending a dollar in 5 years is "better" then spending a dollar next year - even if they've committed to spending the dollar.

[Canard]

Spending a dollar in 5 years is "better" then spending a dollar next year - even if they've committed to spending the dollar.

I don't follow - why?

[tomh009]

Present value of that $1 is less than $1 if spent five years from now. You could invest the $1 now in something that pays more than 0%, and five years from now you'll have more than $1. Or to look at it the other way, you could invest maybe $0.90 to get to $1 five years from now, so the present value is $0.90.

[SammyOES2]

What Tom said (where it actually is better), but I also meant politically (and a sort-of sarcastic 'better').  

An elected Government can promise to spend a bunch of money making people happy right away but by delaying the payment not have it affect the debt/deficit before their next election.

You can get more cynical too and say that by delaying the actual payment (and the actual work) a Government gets to keep something alive as an election issue.  But I don't think that really applies in this case.

[danbrotherston]

This is all true of course, but there's an even more basic answer, it comes down to budgeting, the government only has so much money each year. Spending it over 5 years, instead of three means spending less each year.

[Pheidippides]

Or putting things off also means increased costs of materials and labour.

[jamincan]

Present value of that $1 is less than $1 if spent five years from now.  You could invest the $1 now in something that pays more than 0%, and five years from now you'll have more than $1.  Or to look at it the other way, you could invest maybe $0.90 to get to $1 five years from now, so the present value is $0.90.

I don't think this is considering the full picture. First, there is inflation to contend with, so while that dollar could grow if invested, it will likely be worth less too in real terms. Secondly, spending it now on infrastructure is just as much an investment as using it in the stock market or where ever else. It's harder to quantify the value of investments in infrastructure, but the cost of congestion to the economy is enormous, so investing to infrastructure to alleviate that can have much larger dividends in the long run.

[tomh009]

Present value of that $1 is less than $1 if spent five years from now.  You could invest the $1 now in something that pays more than 0%, and five years from now you'll have more than $1.  Or to look at it the other way, you could invest maybe $0.90 to get to $1 five years from now, so the present value is $0.90.

I don't think this is considering the full picture. First, there is inflation to contend with, so while that dollar could grow if invested, it will likely be worth less too in real terms. Secondly, spending it now on infrastructure is just as much an investment as using it in the stock market or where ever else. It's harder to quantify the value of investments in infrastructure, but the cost of congestion to the economy is enormous, so investing to infrastructure to alleviate that can have much larger dividends in the long run.

Sure, that's all true.  This was just a simplified explanation of NPV (Net Present Value).  Infrastructure investments make the equation certainly more complex.

[embe]

Any timing updates on when the Bruce street extension will take place?  Recent excavation work at the north bound exit and the Wellington exit now closed.  Worthy of a new topic or is this covered elsewhere?