O-Train Line 2/4 [Stage 2 | Greenboro to Limebank/Airport] | In Service

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

One big flaw in the process was lumping together the Stage 2 C-line and T-line approvals. There should have been a way to vote yes on one and no to the other.

I would have liked to see it divided up into 3 bids (east, west and south). Other than the fact that the construction is on the same line, the east and west projects have little in common and could have easily been built by different groups.

The only reason I can see for lumping the approval into one vote is to prevent councillors from only voting in favour of the segment that benefits their constituents rather than looking at what is best for the city as a whole.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

One big flaw in the process was lumping together the Stage 2 C-line and T-line approvals. There should have been a way to vote yes on one and no to the other.

I agree. Two different contacts, two very different projects. It makes no sense that bidders were given the same amount of time to build their submissions considering how much more complicated Confederation Stage 2 was.

Originally Posted by PHrenetic

Good Day.

To me, with my experience of RFP evaluations, it also perfectly exemplifies the extraordinary preponderance of Financial scorings over Technical scorings in the final 'analysis'.

OUCH !

AND. the latest business pages on SNC-Lavalin.....
https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/snc-lavalin-1.5232893
wherein they have yet again cut margins and projections, especially on the devolving turnkey projects arm of the organization.

One gets to wondering about just how and by how much they underbid to or beyond the bone to 'get the contract' ?
And will we pay the eventual 'price' for the 'miscalculation' ?

OUCH !

SNC's decision to cease its involvement in any new P3 project is worrying. What if they deliberately presented a low-ball bid with the intention completing the build phase of the project on the cheap and selling the maintenance aspect to another company, thus leaving a problem plagued line to the next consortium and eventually the City. The whole point of P3 from the municipality's point of view is that the builder will, hopefully, design and build a quality system in order to minimize issues during the decades long maintenance and operations contract. If the company that wins a P3 plans to sell the maintenance arm even before starting construction, you're asking for trouble.

Of course, we don't know if that is truly their intention, but I believe it is a very plausible scenario. I'm really hoping that was not the case during the design and build of Confederation Stage 1.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by roger1818

I would have liked to see it divided up into 3 bids (east, west and south). Other than the fact that the construction is on the same line, the east and west projects have little in common and could have easily been built by different groups.

The only reason I can see for lumping the approval into one vote is to prevent councillors from only voting in favour of the segment that benefits their constituents rather than looking at what is best for the city as a whole.

That would have been even better. The east portion of Stage 2 was probably pretty simple to figure out. They could have started the construction a year ago as initially planned. The west leg is by the the most complicated of the bunch and is the only one that could justify an extension.

I think the reason that they bundled east and west is that they figured they could get a better price (buy in bulk, if you will), but I don't believe that's necessarily true.

Another possible reason is the shortage of labour. Easier for one (or two with Trillium) consortium to hire the subcontractors needed instead of having two (or three with Trillium) compete for the same or similar trades.

[PHrenetic]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

..........

SNC's decision to cease its involvement in any new P3 project is worrying. What if they deliberately presented a low-ball bid with the intention completing the build phase of the project on the cheap and selling the maintenance aspect to another company, thus leaving a problem plagued line to the next consortium and eventually the City. The whole point of P3 from the municipality's point of view is that the builder will, hopefully, design and build a quality system in order to minimize issues during the decades long maintenance and operations contract. If the company that wins a P3 plans to sell the maintenance arm even before starting construction, you're asking for trouble.

Of course, we don't know if that is truly their intention, but I believe it is a very plausible scenario. I'm really hoping that was not the case during the design and build of Confederation Stage 1.

Good Day.

Yep..... my prediction of post 1476, July 23rd.

Good Day.
or not..... SNC-Lavalin is re-organizing......possibly with a view to continuing to sell off 'non-core' assets.

And we are now caught up in it......as I had wondered when I first read reports of their re-org.
SNC has a case of "seller's remorse"....... Is Ottawa going to catch a case of "buyer's remorse" ?
If not now, then somewhere down the line when the construction is complete,
and it converts to a long-term maintenance asset that -really- is just aching to be sold off,
like they are in process of with their share of the 407 ?

and post 1480 , July 24.

yep...P3 indeed, and that is exactly what they said they are exiting after completing the construction of these projects.
IE: what of the post-construction long-term maintenance ? My estimate - sold off.

As for hoping not the case..... to be straight, I also think the same, that this had not been the long-term plan when they bid (in the 407 and in Stage 1, and in this case too),
but that this has come about through corporate evolution and (for them) necessity.

NoJoy!

[OCCheetos]

Does anyone have a copy, or know where I could find a copy of the memo that was sent out on Friday?

[Nepean]

[QUOTE=J.OT13;8649274]Here's my take on this; I don't think there was any corruption between the City and SNC Lavalin however, there was clear incompetence, and likely some corruption, illegal or not, within the City.]
snip

+1

It is obvious that the RFP was rigged so the cheapest option won -- even if it was of a lower quality, and could end up costing more in longterm repairs -- and that city council was misled. For me these are the central issues, not some ultra legal argument that section such and such in the RFP was strictly followed. It looks like Ottawa is going to get a subpar line for Phase 2 from a company linked to corrupt practices in other countries, while our elected officials were likely lied to be city staff. In my view this is simply disgraceful. If I were one of the losing bids I would explore legal options to see if I could sue the city.

[VANRIDERFAN]

[QUOTE=Nepean;8650603]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Here's my take on this; I don't think there was any corruption between the City and SNC Lavalin however, there was clear incompetence, and likely some corruption, illegal or not, within the City.]
snip

+1

It is obvious that the RFP was rigged so the cheapest option won -- even if it was of a lower quality, and could end up costing more in longterm repairs -- and that city council was misled. For me these are the central issues, not some ultra legal argument that section such and such in the RFP was strictly followed. It looks like Ottawa is going to get a subpar line for Phase 2 from a company linked to corrupt practices in other countries, while our elected officials were likely lied to be city staff. In my view this is simply disgraceful. If I were one of the losing bids I would explore legal options to see if I could sue the city.

Could end up costing more? More like guaranteed to cost more. How many — times do all levels of government have to relearn this lesson. We sell a project to the public that we are saving money and then later administrations get roasted because they are saddled with bill of having to pay for the upgrades to get basic service!
I could fill a book with examples of great amounts of money wasted by going with the cheaper options!

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by VANRIDERFAN

Could end up costing more? More like guaranteed to cost more. How many — times do all levels of government have to relearn this lesson. We sell a project to the public that we are saving money and then later administrations get roasted because they are saddled with bill of having to pay for the upgrades to get basic service!
I could fill a book with examples of great amounts of money wasted by going with the cheaper options!

The Trillium plan was flawed from the get-go and would have ended up costing more in the long run regardless of who won because of low frequency/capacity. But by selecting the cheapest bid instead of the most competent, it will end up costing much more.

I doubt these new revelations will make any difference, but I wouldn't be too upset if Stage 2 Trillium were to be cancelled so that we could take a few years to re-visit the best way forward (minimum, double track and electrify the current system and add Gladstone+Walkley Stations. Possibly add South Keys and extend to the airport).

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

The Trillium plan was flawed from the get-go and would have ended up costing more in the long run regardless of who won because of low frequency/capacity. But by selecting the cheapest bid instead of the most competent, it will end up costing much more.

I doubt these new revelations will make any difference, but I wouldn't be too upset if Stage 2 Trillium were to be cancelled so that we could take a few years to re-visit the best way forward (minimum, double track and electrify the current system and add Gladstone+Walkley Stations. Possibly add South Keys and extend to the airport).

Oh no. Like press the reset button again???? How much will it cost the city this time?

The problem is that we have delayed things so much already, and traffic issues are becoming so bad, that we will need to pay out for cancelling the contract + spend hundreds of millions on improving road infrastructure. This can't wait any longer.

Any significant changes in design will mean another 10 year delay at least. This includes upgrading the Greenboro to Bayview section.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Oh no. Like press the reset button again???? How much will it cost the city this time?

The problem is that we have delayed things so much already, and traffic issues are becoming so bad, that we will need to pay out for cancelling the contract + spend hundreds of millions on improving road infrastructure. This can't wait any longer.

Any significant changes in design will mean another 10 year delay at least. This includes upgrading the Greenboro to Bayview section.

The optics of another reset would be very bad indeed. I don't think it will happen, but I personally wouldn't be upset because the current plan, though better than the status quo, will not serve the population well-into the future. It will likely require months of shutdowns and hundreds of millions in investment to upgrade the line within a few years of opening.

Since you are one of the biggest critics of the current Trillium plan, I'm surprised you wouldn't even want to consider the possibility.

[OCCheetos]

I was thinking back to what @roger1818 said a while back about the possibility of the frequencies having been under-promised with a hope to over-deliver with maybe 10-minute frequencies.

With the decision to go with PTC on the line this should in theory allow trains to travel closer to track speed for longer periods of time compared to with Indusi. Also with the signalling system being completely redone maybe it'll get rid of those awful time delays in the signals at passing tracks. It's still just wishful thinking though.


On another note, the project agreement posted has the project requirements fully redacted (Schedule 15) although some, but not all parts of that section were part of that set of documents that got uploaded to a public dropbox by accident a while back...

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by VANRIDERFAN

Could end up costing more? More like guaranteed to cost more. How many — times do all levels of government have to relearn this lesson.

As long as the public continues to get sticker shock with major projects, this is what politicians and the bureaucracy will keep doing.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

The Trillium plan was flawed from the get-go and would have ended up costing more in the long run regardless of who won because of low frequency/capacity. But by selecting the cheapest bid instead of the most competent, it will end up costing much more.

I doubt these new revelations will make any difference, but I wouldn't be too upset if Stage 2 Trillium were to be cancelled so that we could take a few years to re-visit the best way forward (minimum, double track and electrify the current system and add Gladstone+Walkley Stations. Possibly add South Keys and extend to the airport).

What? Hell no.

If it gets cancelled, the temptation post Confed Stage 2 to put that money into Barrhaven and Kanata extensions instead of the Trillium Line will be far too high.

This nonsensical view that major infrastructure should always be all or nothing is not a POV that results in better outcomes. Most often, we get nothing instead. Far easier for a politician to spend the money elsewhere or not spend at all.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Oh no. Like press the reset button again???? How much will it cost the city this time?

If the reset were done unilaterally by the city, then I agree with you; however, with SNC-Lavalin wanting to get out of PPPs, then maybe it would be better to let them bow out the contract and select the number 2, than force them to live up to their obligations under the contract.

[rocketphish]

SNC-Lavalin committed to Trillium Line expansion despite new corporate direction

Jon Willing, Ottawa Citizen
Updated: August 7, 2019

SNC-Lavalin says it’s committed to building the Trillium Line expansion and maintaining the north-south O-Train line for 27 years, despite the company’s signalling it’s no longer pursuing big fixed-price construction contracts because of the financial risk.

The city and SNC reached financial close of their Trillium Line contract on March 29.

Four months later, SNC announced a new strategic direction that will mean the Montreal company won’t bid on future fixed-price construction projects. The projects, the company’s interim chief executive and president said on July 22, “have been the root cause of the company’s performance issues.”

Ottawa city council voted 19-3 in March to sign a contract with SNC, under the project name TransitNEXT, to build the Trillium Line extensions to Riverside South and the Ottawa International Airport.

SNC is on the hook for maintaining all Trillium Line assets, including the pre-expansion infrastructure and new Stadler diesel trains, until 2048.

A SNC spokesman said the company will fulfil contractual obligations of its current lump-sum turnkey projects, like the Trillium Line expansion.

“We look forward to design, build, finance and maintain the new extension, and also assume responsibility for the long-term maintenance of the existing Trillium Line,” Nicolas Ryan said in an email.

SNC will remain a major player in the Canadian infrastructure market and is “fully committed” to the Canadian market and the City of Ottawa, Ryan said.

The company is concentrating on its professional services in engineering, design and project management, nuclear and infrastructure operations and maintenance.

The city’s O-Train construction director, Michael Morgan, said: “The city is confident that (SNC-Lavalin) will deliver the Stage 2 O-Train Trillium Line extension project in line with the requirements of the project agreement.”

SNC is also a partner in the Rideau Transit Group with ACS Infrastructure Canada and EllisDon.

RTG is constructing the $2.1-billion first phase of LRT and its affiliate, Rideau Transit Maintenance, has a 30-year maintenance deal with the city to look after the Confederation Line, including LRT second-phase extensions. Construction of the first phase was originally scheduled to be done in May 2018. It’s currently in the middle of what the city hopes is the final testing.

When it comes to the Trillium Line expansion, SNC beat two other shortlisted groups in the city’s contract competition.

The other shortlisted groups were Trillium Link (a consortium of Acciona, Fengate, CAF, CIMA+, Momentum, Thomas Cavanagh, Cobalt Architects and GRC Architects) and Trillium Extension Alliance (a consortium of Plenary, Colas, R.W. Tomlinson, Plan Group, WSP, Bird Construction and Mass Electric).

The city revealed last Friday that SNC didn’t meet the minimum technical score threshold in the Trillium Line expansion procurement, but the company was still considered for the contract and ultimately won on the strength of its financial proposal.

Councillors like Diane Deans, Theresa Kavanagh and Shawn Menard have criticized the city for releasing information long after council approved the largest infrastructure procurement in the city’s history. Council members weren’t allowed by staff to see the bid scoring during the active procurement program, which only officially ended in recent weeks.

All three Trillium Line bids were considered technically “compliant” and eligible for scoring.

The final technical score is the culmination of scores in four categories: general technical requirements, design submission, construction submission and maintenance and rehabilitation.

SNC’s final technical score was 67.27 per cent. Here’s how the categories broke down: general technical requirements, 70.71 per cent; design submission, 63.58 per cent; construction submission, 71.86 per cent; and, maintenance and rehabilitation, 65.4 per cent.

All the technical category scores for the other two finalist bidders were above 80 per cent.

SNC’s financial proposal scored much better than the other two, and even though the company’s technical score was very low, the financial score was enough to give the company the top ranking at the end of the bidding process.

The executive steering committee of top-level staff made decisions on the proposals without knowing the identities of the companies behind the bids, as per the fairness provisions of the procurement program.

According to the city, there was legal justification to allow SNC to continue in the procurement, even thought it didn’t meet the technical threshold.

Morgan, the O-Train construction director, said the city had a “good faith obligation to consider all of the circumstances” with regards to the discretion staff had to evaluate a proposal, no matter if it met the 70-per-cent technical score threshold.

“This led to a careful evaluation with the legal advisers and fairness commissioner of several factors, including the severity of the (difference) between the actual technical scores and the 70-per-cent threshold and the fact that the proponent had been deemed compliant by the subject matter experts in the compliance review,” Morgan said in an email.

“The risk of a bid challenge from a party and its impact on the process also needed to be considered. Bid challenge can carry significant legal implications including without limitation injunctive relief.”

Mayor Jim Watson is away and was unavailable to comment Tuesday.

[email protected]
twitter.com/JonathanWilling

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-new...xpansion-despite-new-corporate-direction

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

Does anyone have a copy, or know where I could find a copy of the memo that was sent out on Friday?

Shane posted the documents on O-Train Fans.

https://www.otrainfans.ca/forum/topic/20...ion-updates/?do=findComment&comment=1099

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

The optics of another reset would be very bad indeed. I don't think it will happen, but I personally wouldn't be upset because the current plan, though better than the status quo, will not serve the population well-into the future. It will likely require months of shutdowns and hundreds of millions in investment to upgrade the line within a few years of opening.

Since you are one of the biggest critics of the current Trillium plan, I'm surprised you wouldn't even want to consider the possibility.

Yes, I have been a big critic of the plan and I will continue to be a critic. Why wouldn't I be? I live a few minutes from one of the stations, and it is mostly useless and when I have used it, it has failed me. Phase 2 does not improve the situation. Even if we got it down to 10 minute frequency, it will make a big difference because it makes transfers more reliable and predictable. But there is no promise of accomplishing even that. The plan calls for 12 minute frequency after Phase 2. This means that it will continue to make for unreliable transfers.

I also have to live my life in the south end and I see horrendous traffic conditions and there is an enormous difference between where I live inside the Greenbelt and my neighbours just to the south. It is only going get worse, much worse. Just look at Bank Street in the Leitrim area and you see a hodge-podge of additions of turn lanes without addressing the real problem, that the road should be 4 lanes to accommodate volume. But the city's long-term road plan is so ambitious and costly that they can't put in a proper temporary solution that will likely be satisfactory for the next 15 years.

So, we can't continue to wait for transit improvements while road improvements are just a patchwork mess. Part of the problem with road improvements is the ward layout. Who is actually going to come to bat for the area when ward boundaries have three different councilors serving the Leitrim area. It is not a priority for any of them it seems.

We have been talking about the North-South route since at least 2003, a natural evolution of the original trial O-Train. I have been waiting for 13 years since the 2006 cancellation. You have no idea how defeated I have been since that happened and how disappointed I have been with the city for their failure to get things moving. The past upgrade failure that slowed trains down didn't help and the failure to get the infill stations built at Walkley and Gladstone just boggles the mind. Lengthy wait times at the terminal stations suggest that those stations would have had no impact on frequency.

We have already waited half a generation for something to happen. Yes, it is still a lousy plan and we will have spent all the money earmarked for the original plan that would have delivered much better service despite its weaknesses. At this point, something needs to be built and at least my friends to the south will get something better than the status quo, I have to accept that the people of Hunt Club/South Keys/Greenboro/Blossom Park get nothing and will likely continue to get nothing for the rest of our lifetimes.

So, with great reservations, I accept that pushing the reset button a second time and waiting yet another 10 years is not a good idea.

If we can somehow find a way within Phase 2, to deliver 10 minute frequency, we will see tangible improvements. But I am not holding my breath.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by rocketphish

SNC-Lavalin committed to Trillium Line expansion despite new corporate direction

Jon Willing, Ottawa Citizen
Updated: August 7, 2019

SNC-Lavalin says it’s committed to building the Trillium Line expansion and maintaining the north-south O-Train line for 27 years, despite the company’s signalling it’s no longer pursuing big fixed-price construction contracts because of the financial risk.

The city and SNC reached financial close of their Trillium Line contract on March 29.

Four months later, SNC announced a new strategic direction that will mean the Montreal company won’t bid on future fixed-price construction projects. The projects, the company’s interim chief executive and president said on July 22, “have been the root cause of the company’s performance issues.”

Ottawa city council voted 19-3 in March to sign a contract with SNC, under the project name TransitNEXT, to build the Trillium Line extensions to Riverside South and the Ottawa International Airport.

SNC is on the hook for maintaining all Trillium Line assets, including the pre-expansion infrastructure and new Stadler diesel trains, until 2048.

A SNC spokesman said the company will fulfil contractual obligations of its current lump-sum turnkey projects, like the Trillium Line expansion.

“We look forward to design, build, finance and maintain the new extension, and also assume responsibility for the long-term maintenance of the existing Trillium Line,” Nicolas Ryan said in an email.

SNC will remain a major player in the Canadian infrastructure market and is “fully committed” to the Canadian market and the City of Ottawa, Ryan said.

The company is concentrating on its professional services in engineering, design and project management, nuclear and infrastructure operations and maintenance.

The city’s O-Train construction director, Michael Morgan, said: “The city is confident that (SNC-Lavalin) will deliver the Stage 2 O-Train Trillium Line extension project in line with the requirements of the project agreement.”

SNC is also a partner in the Rideau Transit Group with ACS Infrastructure Canada and EllisDon.

RTG is constructing the $2.1-billion first phase of LRT and its affiliate, Rideau Transit Maintenance, has a 30-year maintenance deal with the city to look after the Confederation Line, including LRT second-phase extensions. Construction of the first phase was originally scheduled to be done in May 2018. It’s currently in the middle of what the city hopes is the final testing.

When it comes to the Trillium Line expansion, SNC beat two other shortlisted groups in the city’s contract competition.

The other shortlisted groups were Trillium Link (a consortium of Acciona, Fengate, CAF, CIMA+, Momentum, Thomas Cavanagh, Cobalt Architects and GRC Architects) and Trillium Extension Alliance (a consortium of Plenary, Colas, R.W. Tomlinson, Plan Group, WSP, Bird Construction and Mass Electric).

The city revealed last Friday that SNC didn’t meet the minimum technical score threshold in the Trillium Line expansion procurement, but the company was still considered for the contract and ultimately won on the strength of its financial proposal.

Councillors like Diane Deans, Theresa Kavanagh and Shawn Menard have criticized the city for releasing information long after council approved the largest infrastructure procurement in the city’s history. Council members weren’t allowed by staff to see the bid scoring during the active procurement program, which only officially ended in recent weeks.

All three Trillium Line bids were considered technically “compliant” and eligible for scoring.

The final technical score is the culmination of scores in four categories: general technical requirements, design submission, construction submission and maintenance and rehabilitation.

SNC’s final technical score was 67.27 per cent. Here’s how the categories broke down: general technical requirements, 70.71 per cent; design submission, 63.58 per cent; construction submission, 71.86 per cent; and, maintenance and rehabilitation, 65.4 per cent.

All the technical category scores for the other two finalist bidders were above 80 per cent.

SNC’s financial proposal scored much better than the other two, and even though the company’s technical score was very low, the financial score was enough to give the company the top ranking at the end of the bidding process.

The executive steering committee of top-level staff made decisions on the proposals without knowing the identities of the companies behind the bids, as per the fairness provisions of the procurement program.

According to the city, there was legal justification to allow SNC to continue in the procurement, even thought it didn’t meet the technical threshold.

Morgan, the O-Train construction director, said the city had a “good faith obligation to consider all of the circumstances” with regards to the discretion staff had to evaluate a proposal, no matter if it met the 70-per-cent technical score threshold.

“This led to a careful evaluation with the legal advisers and fairness commissioner of several factors, including the severity of the (difference) between the actual technical scores and the 70-per-cent threshold and the fact that the proponent had been deemed compliant by the subject matter experts in the compliance review,” Morgan said in an email.

“The risk of a bid challenge from a party and its impact on the process also needed to be considered. Bid challenge can carry significant legal implications including without limitation injunctive relief.”

Mayor Jim Watson is away and was unavailable to comment Tuesday.

[email protected]
twitter.com/JonathanWilling

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-new...xpansion-despite-new-corporate-direction

It seems to me that what would be unacceptable for the Confederation Line, is considered acceptable for the Trillium Line. Since 2006, the Trillium Line is just an afterthought. I have seen at public meetings that cost trumps public usability of the route. Everything points to this on how cost trumped technical merit. We will likely never know what the two other bidders were offering that made them so much better technically.

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Shane posted the documents on O-Train Fans.

https://www.otrainfans.ca/forum/topic/20...ion-updates/?do=findComment&comment=1099

Unfortunately those aren't the memo that was apparently sent out. The memo details the actual scoring of each submission which is what I'm curious about.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

Unfortunately those aren't the memo that was apparently sent out. The memo details the actual scoring of each submission which is what I'm curious about.

If that leaks, we can expect people getting fired and lawsuits to start flying.