The infrastructure challenge
Owners, geotechnical engineers and contractors experience the same uncertainty differently. When those perspectives are separated, subsurface variability can become cost escalation, delay, dispute and compromised asset performance.
Budgets and public commitments are established early, while the most consequential conditions may remain below the resolution of available investigations. Owners inherit the financial, schedule and lifecycle consequences.
A geotechnical baseline report is essential for describing anticipated conditions and allocating risk. It cannot observe every pathway, lens, interface or local anomaly between investigation points.
Contractors must price incomplete information, sequence around changing conditions and protect production. When reality departs from assumptions, change management and claims can displace technical problem-solving.
A systemic pattern
McKinsey reported that 98% of megaprojects in its dataset incurred cost overruns or delays, with an average cost increase of 80% and average schedule slippage of 20 months.1
The Canadian context
A University of Toronto School of Cities study found that Canada ranked ninth-highest among the countries examined, at an average of approximately $396 million per kilometre versus a global average of $242 million. The study placed the forecast Ontario Line above $1 billion per kilometre.2
That evidence does not support calling Toronto categorically “the most expensive in the world.” It does establish that Toronto and Canada operate at the high-cost end of the international spectrum—and that project delivery practices, policies and governance are major parts of the explanation.
Beyond the baseline
Toronto and Vancouver inherit complex geological histories: glacial deposits, variable tills and granular seams, buried valleys, groundwater pathways and disturbed urban interfaces. Investigations and GBRs remain indispensable, but they are models of anticipated conditions—not complete maps of the subsurface.
A Canadian Geotechnical Society case study of a 15-kilometre Ontario sewer tunnel found that even a GBR developed after extensive investigation was inefficient in fully describing the complex natural baseline; departures contributed to major contractor claims.4
Risk cannot be eliminated by transferring it. It must be made observable, controllable and verifiable.
The domino effect
DURBE provides integrated turnkey solutions to control water movement and condition the ground before and during construction, and to stop water ingress and rehabilitate existing assets after construction. The objective is to resolve the underlying mechanism—not simply manage its visible consequences.
Start a technical conversation
DURBE connects ground characterization, performance design, monitored delivery and verification in one practical framework.