HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Ottawa-Gatineau > Transportation


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1241  
Old Posted Mar 8, 2019, 6:09 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 29,160
I agree that Deans' point-blank question of whether or not all the proponents, and later the winning proponents, met the 70% could be considered a breach of confidentiality.

However, Leiper, McKenney and later Menard's versions of the question wasn't about individual bids' scoring, they only asked if the process allows for a proponent to not meet the 70% and still be considered by the steering committee.

The answer to this question could/should/would have been the same weather council had asked before the RFP was approved and launched or today now that the contracts are ready to be signed. The answer to the question isn't a moving target dependent on the RFP results. It is completely independent of the results.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1242  
Old Posted Mar 8, 2019, 8:51 PM
GoTrans GoTrans is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 695
Quote:
Originally Posted by J.OT13 View Post
Thanks for the info. Very informative.

What I don't understand is how in 2015 they thought they could achieve an 8-minute frequency (and failed), yet today, double tracking at Walkley, which was not part of the scope in 2015 or today, would only achieve a 10-minute frequency. Who was responsible for this massive waste of money in 2015 and have they been fired since then?
Of course no one was fired. The Staff and the Politicos took the consulting engineers at their word that they could get to an 8 minute schedule and be cheap at the same time. This is what happens when you don't have staff that are knowledgeable about railway/rail transit operations. The politicians still should have asked the questions to verify if the plan would actually result in an 8 minute schedule.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1243  
Old Posted Mar 8, 2019, 8:58 PM
TransitZilla TransitZilla is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,801
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoTrans View Post
Of course no one was fired. The Staff and the Politicos took the consulting engineers at their word that they could get to an 8 minute schedule and be cheap at the same time. This is what happens when you don't have staff that are knowledgeable about railway/rail transit operations. The politicians still should have asked the questions to verify if the plan would actually result in an 8 minute schedule.
I think people were fired though... the original report was brought forward by Alain Mercier and his managers at OC Transpo at the time... none of those folks are with the city anymore.

I'm not sure they were dismissed because of this project but they are no longer around...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1244  
Old Posted Mar 9, 2019, 2:22 PM
rocketphish's Avatar
rocketphish rocketphish is online now
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 14,717
Why can't we know if SNC-Lavalin passed the LRT2 technical scoring?
You might assume the winner of the $1.6-billion bid made the technical grade. But it's not clear

Joanne Chianello · CBC News
Posted: Mar 09, 2019 4:00 AM ET | Last Updated: 5 hours ago


The most unexpected moment of this week's marathon council meeting, where elected officials approved almost $9 billion in spending between the 2019 budget and the second stage of light rail, was Coun. Diane Deans asking if the winning bidders for the city's largest procurement in history had met the minimum technical score.

But the most shocking moment of the five-hour LRT discussion was the answer from the city's hired lawyer, Geoff Gilbert of Norton Rose Fulbright: we're not saying and — to be frank — it's none of your business.

Just to be clear, taxpayers are being asked to spend more than $4.66 billion on constructing the light rail expansion, but they cannot know whether the bidders actually met the minimum 70-per-cent grade in the technical assessment.

The city's senior officials and outside hired —, including Gilbert, appeared taken aback by Deans' line of questioning.

She wanted to know, in particular, about the technical score for the preferred proponent for the Trillium Line expansion, embattled SNC-Lavalin.

The Montreal-based conglomerate, currently embroiled in ongoing political controversy, is the city's top choice to extend and maintain the north-south line for the next three decades.

After all, the public surely had assumed that SNC-Lavalin — one of the lead partners in the thrice-delayed Confederation Line — would have got a passing technical grade on the contract, worth $1.6 billion over its life span.

But that can no longer be assumed.

Apparently, despite footing the bill for this massive infrastructure project, we aren't allowed to know if SNC-Lavalin scored the required 70 per cent. No one was asking for SNC-Lavalin's actual grade, only whether that technical grade met the bare minimum.

Here's what Gilbert — for whom we also foot the bill — had to say.

"Council is not supposed to verify whether … proponents met the technical score," he said. "It's council's job to take all the recommendations on the preferred proponent, assess that and make their decision."

Gilbert argued that revealing whether SNC-Lavalin met the 70-per-cent threshold breached the commercial confidentiality of the procurement process and called Deans' questions on the subject — and those of several other councillors — "very inappropriate."

According to the city, it's common practice to "not provide comment on an active procurement." But it's difficult for a layperson to understand how knowing that a proponent met the minimum requirements would jeopardize the process.

Unless, of course, a bidder didn't score 70 per cent, but somehow came out on top anyway.

Indeed, that scenario would blow up the procurement process.

Generally, the evaluation of the LRT Stage 2 bids was supposed to occur in several stages.

A team of "subject" experts studied each of the three pre-qualified bids for the Trillium Line and scored them — first as individuals evaluators and then as a team.

"In order to receive a passing score, a technical score threshold of 70 per cent for each of the criteria was required," states a city report on the evaluation process.

If a proposal passed the technical evaluation with a minimum score of 70 per cent in four key areas, it then went on to a round of financial scoring. Then, all the scores were presented to the executive steering committee — a group made up of senior city officials, including the city manager, treasurer solicitor and unnamed "advisors" — who chose the preferred proponent.

The evaluation process was confirmed during Wednesday's council meeting by Chris Swail, the director of LRT Stage 2 planning. The process was overseen by a fairness commissioner, Oliver Grant of P3 Advisors, and handled by law firm Norton Rose Fulbright.

That we cannot know whether SNC-Lavalin met the minimum grade is clearly disturbing.

But there are also other troubling questions that remain unanswered.

Why, for example, was the city not forthcoming with information about the technical scores, but did we get to hear indirectly about the financial scores?

Swail has said several times that SNC-Lavalin was "by far" the cheapest bid, which is clearly information that comes from the financial scoring in the procurement process. But somehow we can't find out if the winning bids are technically compliant.

City staff and its lawyers also wouldn't answer questions about whether there is language in rules that allows the executive steering committee — or anyone else, frankly — to allow a bid to move ahead without a 70-per-cent technical score.

Certainly, language of that nature has not appeared in any public documents on LRT Stage 2 or been communicated to council.

Councillors tried several ways to ask if it was at all possible for a bidder to win without the 70 per cent technical grade, but city staff evaded — again and again.

They were told only that the proponents were "screened through the rules."

Except that we can't see the rules.

Council voted 19 to 3 to approve LRT Stage 2, but the contract isn't signed yet. The bid from SNC-Lavalin expires at the end of the month.

Joanne Chianello is an award-winning journalist and CBC Ottawa's city affairs analyst. You can email her at [email protected] or tweet her at @jchianello.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/snc-lavalin-lrt-stage-2-technical-scoring-1.5046611
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1245  
Old Posted Mar 9, 2019, 3:37 PM
Kitchissippi's Avatar
Kitchissippi Kitchissippi is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,703
I somehow don’t understand this issue. The whole process was structured to ensure impartiality and shield the politicians from bribery. The selection committee was kept secret so that the bidders don’t know who they are.

Quote:
"In order to receive a passing score, a technical score threshold of 70 per cent for each of the criteria was required," states a city report on the evaluation process.

If a proposal passed the technical evaluation with a minimum score of 70 per cent in four key areas, it then went on to a round of financial scoring. Then, all the scores were presented to the executive steering committee — a group made up of senior city officials, including the city manager, treasurer solicitor and unnamed "advisors" — who chose the preferred proponent.
Staff said the process was followed, which indirectly implies the 70% threshold was met. To doubt this and demand an answer to a leading question pokes a hole through the impartiality and undermines the integrity of the process.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1246  
Old Posted Mar 9, 2019, 3:38 PM
OCCheetos OCCheetos is online now
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 2,118
Picture posted on the CPTDB of the tree clearing

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1247  
Old Posted Mar 9, 2019, 11:05 PM
kmcamp kmcamp is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 1,401
Wink

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kitchissippi View Post
I somehow don’t understand this issue. The whole process was structured to ensure impartiality and shield the politicians from bribery. The selection committee was kept secret so that the bidders don’t know who they are.



Staff said the process was followed, which indirectly implies the 70% threshold was met. To doubt this and demand an answer to a leading question pokes a hole through the impartiality and undermines the integrity of the process.
She's actually probably happy we went with Stage 2, she know has years of shocking exposés to write.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1248  
Old Posted Mar 9, 2019, 11:16 PM
pattherat pattherat is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kitchissippi View Post
I somehow don’t understand this issue. The whole process was structured to ensure impartiality and shield the politicians from bribery. The selection committee was kept secret so that the bidders don’t know who they are.



Staff said the process was followed, which indirectly implies the 70% threshold was met. To doubt this and demand an answer to a leading question pokes a hole through the impartiality and undermines the integrity of the process.
Agreed. As someone who has evaluated federal RFP responses, I don’t understand why nobody is piping up to say that this is done to protect the impartiality of the process.

Not sure if municipal is the same but during a federal evaluation I am not even made aware of the name of the respondents (only Company 1, Company 2, etc). Additionally, I am not supposed to discuss my scoring or thoughts with any of the other evaluators. I also don’t know the bidder’s proposed prices/costs. Once I score, it goes back to the procurement department staff who do know the company names, proposed prices, etc., but that staff are never part of the scoring/evaluation process at all.

I.e. Roles and responsibilities are separated to ensure the utmost impartiality.

Edit: spelling
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1249  
Old Posted Mar 10, 2019, 3:50 AM
Bytown Bytown is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by kmcamp View Post
She's actually probably happy we went with Stage 2, she know has years of shocking exposés to write.
Kmcamp, I sincerely hope you have more in your life than an ongoing (and overwrought) obsession with Joanne Chianello doing her job.

Maybe with some maturity over time, you'll learn to understand the quote "Whatever a patron desires to get published is advertising; whatever he wants to keep out of the paper is news." Until then, always a pleasure to see you out here shilling on a level that would make Hubley blush.

--

In any case, and especially for others who share kmcamp's rosy retrospection of the journalism of the good ol' days (M-CBC-GA?), here is a good historical perspective by Colin Churcher on coverage of the Trillium Line going all the way back to reporting on the pilot project back in 1999.

Right out of the gate, it's worth a read. Witness Councillor Gord Hunter saying "It's time to bail on the rail" and Councillor Molly McGoldrick-Larsen saying "This is going to be a disaster" because of Council voting 12-6 to spend $16 million on the line

Last edited by Bytown; Mar 10, 2019 at 3:57 AM. Reason: Attribution
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1250  
Old Posted Mar 10, 2019, 4:58 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 29,160
Quote:
Originally Posted by bradnixon View Post
I think people were fired though... the original report was brought forward by Alain Mercier and his managers at OC Transpo at the time... none of those folks are with the city anymore.

I'm not sure they were dismissed because of this project but they are no longer around...
Manconi was sworn in as head of OC Transpo in 2012, after Mercier was fired. The Trillium "upgrade" construction started in 2014. So was it planned under Mercier or Manconi. Did it take that long to implement if it was planned under Mercier's watch?

Manconi's tenure as OC Transpo boss has been plagued by issues; the failure of the Trilllium "upgrade", frequent Trillium shutdowns, numerous Confederation delays, bus routes changing in anticipation for the train that still hasn't arrived, two deadly bus crashes. Yet he seems to command a lot of respect at City Hall. He has this no non-sense, no BS, honest approach, most of the time (was not satisfied by his answers after the Westboro crash, but I'm hopeful OC takes the necessary steps to prevent yet another disaster when the time comes). During the Stage 2 debate, McKenney suggested that her "yes" vote was swayed by Manconi's confidence in the project. She did not seem to trust the judgement of other City staff.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pattherat View Post
Agreed. As someone who has evaluated federal RFP responses, I don’t understand why nobody is piping up to say that this is done to protect the impartiality of the process.

Not sure if municipal is the same but during a federal evaluation I am not even made aware of the name of the respondents (only Company 1, Company 2, etc). Additionally, I am not supposed to discuss my scoring or thoughts with any of the other evaluators. I also don’t know the bidder’s proposed prices/costs. Once I score, it goes back to the procurement department staff who do know the company names, proposed prices, etc., but that staff are never part of the scoring/evaluation process at all.

I.e. Roles and responsibilities are separated to ensure the utmost impartiality.

Edit: spelling
One thing that concerns me is that the lowest bid always seems to win. If the recommendations are based on overall ranking, it seems unlikely that the lowest bid would always be ranked highest.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1251  
Old Posted Mar 10, 2019, 5:44 PM
PHrenetic PHrenetic is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,029
Quote:
Originally Posted by J.OT13 View Post
...........

One thing that concerns me is that the lowest bid always seems to win. If the recommendations are based on overall ranking, it seems unlikely that the lowest bid would always be ranked highest.
Good Day.

It depends on the assigned weightings to the various factors in the final overall assessment.
Unfortunately, it seems that all too often the financials carry an inordinate amount of weight.
IMHO. (and yes, I too did technical evaluations on RFP submissions.)

Generally, NoJoy!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1252  
Old Posted Mar 11, 2019, 1:36 PM
kmcamp kmcamp is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 1,401
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bytown View Post
Kmcamp, I sincerely hope you have more in your life than an ongoing (and overwrought) obsession with Joanne Chianello doing her job.

Maybe with some maturity over time, you'll learn to understand the quote "Whatever a patron desires to get published is advertising; whatever he wants to keep out of the paper is news." Until then, always a pleasure to see you out here shilling on a level that would make Hubley blush.

--

In any case, and especially for others who share kmcamp's rosy retrospection of the journalism of the good ol' days (M-CBC-GA?), here is a good historical perspective by Colin Churcher on coverage of the Trillium Line going all the way back to reporting on the pilot project back in 1999.

Right out of the gate, it's worth a read. Witness Councillor Gord Hunter saying "It's time to bail on the rail" and Councillor Molly McGoldrick-Larsen saying "This is going to be a disaster" because of Council voting 12-6 to spend $16 million on the line
So, according to you, we're allowed to have opinions on council decisions, technical decisions, etc, and can call council liars and such but I'm not allowed to have an opinion on how she covered the story?!

Suppression of a story is very different than disagreeing with the tone of how a story was written. Freedom of the press doesn't mean that you can't disagree with them, and remember news is a business as well (hence all stories having an "angle"), not an impartial arbiter.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1253  
Old Posted Mar 16, 2019, 6:49 PM
PHrenetic PHrenetic is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,029
Good Day.

A CTV item Feb.28 on the new developments in Riverside south included some info in the T-Line extension beyond Bowsville-EarlArmstrong into Riverside South.

https://ottawa.ctvnews.ca/2-000-new-homes-planned-for-riverside-south-1.4317273

The first graphic, which is the leader for a video, is a map of the area, including the planned (and future) T-Line route, including all the way across, == and stations == both proposed / planned, and future.
It is at an angle, and slightly fuzzy on blow-up, but discernable.

EnJoy!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1254  
Old Posted Mar 16, 2019, 7:05 PM
NX/UR NX/UR is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 3
There are also these maps:

http://webcast.ottawa.ca/plan/All_Image%...24%20Draft%20Plan%20of%20Subdivision.PDF

http://webcast.ottawa.ca/plan/All_Image%...aft%20Plan%20of%20Subdivision%20%232.PDF

It's a little old (dated 2015) and labels the T-line alignment as BRT, but it still shows the possible route.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1255  
Old Posted Mar 22, 2019, 8:21 AM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 9,255
@CBCOttawa: SNC-Lavalin failed to meet technical threshold for $1.6B LRT contract: sources https://t.co/62xvTsCiM8 #ottnews #ottawa https://t.co/HwhObZh6lz
Quote:
SNC-Lavalin failed to meet technical threshold for $1.6B LRT contract: sources

Montreal-based company's rivals easily met technical score, sources tell CBC

Joanne Chianello · CBC News · Posted: Mar 22, 2019 4:00 AM ET | Last Updated: 2 hours ago

SNC-Lavalin won the $1.6-billion contract to extend and maintain Ottawa's north-south LRT line even though it didn't achieve the minimum technical score to qualify for the project — a threshold its competitors met easily, CBC News has learned.

The Montreal-based company beat out two other consortia to extend the Trillium Line from Greenboro into Riverside South, a decision cemented with a 19-3 vote by Ottawa city council on March 6.

However, sources with direct knowledge of the Stage 2 evaluation process told CBC that SNC-Lavalin failed to achieve the minimum technical score of 70 per cent, a requirement set out in publicly available documents.

CBC is not naming the three sources because they are not authorized to speak with the media.

SNC-Lavalin, currently at the centre of a major political controversy, is also one of the key partners in Rideau Transit Group, the consortium building the thrice-delayed first stage of Ottawa's LRT system.

The troubled company was one of three pre-qualified bidders for the extension of the Trillium Line. The other two — Trillium Link and Trillium Extension Alliance — scored well above the minimum technical grade of 70 per cent, according to CBC's sources.

City 'stands by' process
City officials and their hired experts overseeing the procurement process have steadfastly refused to confirm whether SNC-Lavalin met the technical threshold.

When council debated and ultimately approved the spending for LRT Stage 2, which includes extending both the east-west Confederation Line and the north-south Trillium Line, Coun. Diane Deans asked if the winning bids had met the minimum 70 per cent score.

She was told the scores were commercially confidential. Deans replied she wasn't asking for the score, only to be assured the winning bids met the threshold.


Coun. Diane Deans expresses frustration that city staff refused to confirm whether SNC-Lavalin met the technical requirements for the Trillium Line contract. 1:12
Again this week, the city refused to say whether SNC-Lavalin made the minimum grade, citing commercial confidentiality of the process.

Given more than two business days to respond to inquiries, the city refused to provide an in-person interview, sending instead an email attributed to Chris Swail, the director of O-Train planning.

"The city stands by the overall integrity of the procurement process in no uncertain terms," according to Swail's statement.

The statement also says city officials "are all satisfied with the results" of the procurement process and in "the winning proponent's ability and capacity to design, build and maintain the Trillium Line extension."

SNC-Lavalin has built rail systems all over the world, including the award-winning Canada Line in Vancouver.

"We are very proud of the proposal we submitted and look forward to getting started," said an SNC-Lavalin spokesperson in an email.

The engineering and construction giant said it has no knowledge of the breakdown of the score as the process is confidential.

How the bids were evaluated
The procurement process was overseen by law firm Norton Rose Fulbright, consultants Deloitte, fairness commissioner Oliver Grant, city-hired engineering experts and the city's own staff.

According to the statement from Swail, the three technical proposals were reviewed by a team of experts for "completeness" and "conformance" to make sure the submissions met the requirements of the contract.

In order to receive a passing score, a technical score threshold of 70 per cent for each of the criteria was required.
- City of Ottawa report
But these "completeness" and "conformance" reviews are not the same as the technical scoring, and in fact were conducted before the bids were scored for their technical merit.

The technical evaluation for the shortlisted bids occurred in two stages, according to public city documents.

Individual expert evaluators reviewed and scored the submitted bids for the Trillium Line on a number of criteria including project design, engineering and operations.

"In order to receive a passing score, a technical score threshold of 70 per cent for each of the criteria was required," states a city report.

The evaluators then came together to decide on a so-called "consensus" score out of a maximum of 500 points.

It is common in procurement processes that a bid that doesn't make the technical grade be disqualified and barred from the financial evaluation round. This week, the city would not say whether this was the case with the LRT Stage 2 procurement.

According to a statement attributed to Chris Swail, Ottawa's director of O-Train planning, all the bids 'were deemed conformant' to the city's requirements. But that assessment is separate from the technical scoring. (CBC)
Secret committee
But Swail did appear to confirm it earlier this month.

At the March 6 council meeting, Deans asked specifically about the process: "Pre-qualification, followed by technical scoring, and then if you passed the 70 per cent threshold, you went onto financial assessment. Is that correct?"

Swail answered: "That is correct."

The financial evaluation also consisted of several stages, and the resulting consensus score was also out of a maximum of 500 points.

The technical and financial scores were then combined to produce a "final ranking."

SNC-Lavalin said it was told by the city that it was the preferred proponent, "which means that our total score placed us first." It is possible that a bid could have the overall highest score, but still not have met the 70 per cent minimum technical threshold.

The bid evaluation steering committee oversaw this whole evaluation process, but no one knows who these people are — the membership of the committee is secret.

Geoffrey Gilbert, centre, a Norton Rose Fulbright lawyer, told councillors on March 6 that they didn't need to know whether SNC-Lavalin met the technical score. (Kate Porter/CBC)
The steering committee presented the final technical and financial scores, as well as the overall rankings, to an executive steering committee comprised of the city's most senior staff including the city manager, the city solicitor, the treasurer and the head of OC Transpo.

It's the executive steering committee that recommended the preferred proponent to council, which ultimately had the final say on whether to approve SNC-Lavalin for the Trillium contract. But council made that decision without knowing whether the company met the minimum technical score.

According to Norton Rose Fulbright lawyer Geoffrey Gilbert, "council is not supposed to verify whether … proponents met the technical score. It's council's job to take all the recommendations on the preferred proponent, assess that and make their decision."

Unanswered questions
That SNC-Lavalin failed to meet the minimum technical grade raises a number of issues.

First, how did the company make it through to the financial evaluation round?

Asked if there are provisions in the request for proposals that would allow a bidder to win without earning a 70 per cent grade, the city wouldn't explicitly say. Instead, Swail's statement repeats the argument that "specific details that are commercially sensitive or relate to proponent evaluations are kept confidential to protect the integrity of the bidding process and its results."

Chris Swail, centre, said during last month's technical briefing on the Stage 2 LRT contract that SNC-Lavalin was by far the lowest bidder. (Kate Porter/CBC)
Norton Rose Fulbright lawyers also cite confidentiality as the reason for refusing to confirm whether SNC-Lavalin met the minimum technical score. But Swail has spoken a number of times about the Montreal company's financial score.

"They were by far the lowest bid," Swail said last month of SNC-Lavalin's proposal. He's also said SNC-Lavalin was the only proponent to come in under the city's price target.

While SNC-Lavalin's bid will cost the city $230 million more in the short term than planned, the company promises to save the city $100 million over its 27-year maintenance contract.

The contract is not yet signed and SNC-Lavalin's bid expires at the end of the month.

Last edited by waterloowarrior; Mar 22, 2019 at 10:35 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1256  
Old Posted Mar 22, 2019, 11:17 AM
PHrenetic PHrenetic is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,029
Good Day.

As per my posts 1240 and 1251 this thread.....BINGO !

All too much 'government' procurement goes down this rabbit hole.
And we all end up paying a much higher price overall down the road (or rail),
for poorer infrastructure and service.

I've been here, overridden by financials (and other 'considerations')....
and from a tech PoV...... it —.

NoJoy!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1257  
Old Posted Mar 22, 2019, 1:09 PM
kmcamp kmcamp is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 1,401
Quote:
Originally Posted by PHrenetic View Post
Good Day.

As per my posts 1240 and 1251 this thread.....BINGO !

All too much 'government' procurement goes down this rabbit hole.
And we all end up paying a much higher price overall down the road (or rail),
for poorer infrastructure and service.

I've been here, overridden by financials (and other 'considerations')....
and from a tech PoV...... it —.

NoJoy!
It's hard to say what went on here, since we'll never know what the scores were or why. I'm going to guess though it has little to do with the trains and signalling, and a lot with how they obviously "value engineered" by doing things like ramps instead of elevators wherever possible, and the platforms themselves aren't really any improvement than what we have today, bus shelters rather than the elaborate confed line stations.

The CBC though is really trying to draw a parallel to Lavscam, although if you look at the other bidders many of them have been tied to questionable dealings themselves
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1258  
Old Posted Mar 22, 2019, 1:11 PM
OCCheetos OCCheetos is online now
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 2,118
Quote:
Originally Posted by kmcamp View Post
It's hard to say what went on here, since we'll never know what the scores were or why. I'm going to guess though it has little to do with the trains and signalling
The trains were procured separately anyway.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1259  
Old Posted Mar 22, 2019, 1:17 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 29,160
This just proves that the technical scoring has absolutely no weight on the selection process. It's purely about who submits the lowest bid.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1260  
Old Posted Mar 22, 2019, 1:24 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 29,160
I'd be curious to go back to 2012 and see if RTG won purely on price.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Ottawa-Gatineau > Transportation
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:41 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.