LeBreton Flats 2.0 (RendezVous LeBreton) | Cancelled - Page 27

c_speed3108 · #**521** Posted **Feb 19, 2015, 1:01 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Catenary

That's the norm for this type of stuff, and won't come close to covering the costs these companies incur preparing a proposal. The Confederation Line bidders got far more than that.

Indeed. The confederation line losing bidders got $2 million each, although I believe the city did get access to their design ideas (and can have the winner use them) as part of that price.

$75000 is almost nothing. Won't even pay a couple full time staffers to do the work.

1overcosc · #**522** Posted **Feb 19, 2015, 1:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Capital Shaun

"Each qualified proponent will receive a financial contribution of $75,000 to prepare a high-quality design proposal and financial plan to be submitted to the NCC in November 2015."

What? We're giving each developer $75,000?

The logic is payment to all helps encourage them to invest lots in design.

If you're one of four bidders for a major project, you might be hesitant to go all out and spend lots of money on a great bid because there's a chance you'll lose the bid and end up wasting all that investment. By providing some sort of guaranteed 'consolation payment' to those who lose, it eliminates that fear and encourages higher quality proposals. It's actually a pretty standard part of P3 projects... for example the Confederation Line.

OTSkyline · #**523** Posted **Feb 19, 2015, 3:36 PM**

The group that is proposing a "HQ of a major international organization", surely they have to have already some sort of an proposed agreement with an org. already... I can't see them proposing this, potentially winning the competition, and then not being able to build the proposal as they have no tennant... So, wonder who it might be?

Could be good for jobs but then again... it'll just be a glorified office building. Not very accessible or open to the public or all Canadians...

eemy · #**524** Posted **Feb 19, 2015, 3:37 PM**

Move the UN to Lebreton Flats? I'd be okay with that.

MountainView · #**525** Posted **Feb 19, 2015, 4:22 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeremy_haak

Move the UN to Lebreton Flats? I'd be okay with that.

That was my first thought (read: dream) too. But no way it'll happen. If the UN, WHO, or similar moved here it would have unbelievably great economical benefits for the city.

Horus · #**526** Posted **Feb 19, 2015, 4:26 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by OTSkyline

The group that is proposing a "HQ of a major international organization", surely they have to have already some sort of an proposed agreement with an org. already... I can't see them proposing this, potentially winning the competition, and then not being able to build the proposal as they have no tennant... So, wonder who it might be?

When I heard "HQ of major international organization", I first thought of this:

It even has green space!

Arcologist · #**527** Posted **Feb 19, 2015, 4:27 PM**

For the love of God, can the NCC not do anything right?

Why are they not sharing the RFQ and RFPs with the public?!?

Absurd!!!

HighwayStar · #**528** Posted **Feb 19, 2015, 4:37 PM**

and other than the "We're secret and we are special and this is the way it's always been done" excuse.... is there *any* reason whatsoever for all this secrecy?? Maybe this really is the time to make noise for NCC Abolition ??

waterloowarrior · #**529** Posted **Feb 19, 2015, 4:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arcologist

For the love of God, can the NCC not do anything right?

Why are they not sharing the RFQ and RFPs with the public?!?

Absurd!!!

The RFQ documentation is all online
http://www.ncc-ccn.gc.ca/planning/ma...lebreton-flats

J.OT13 · #**530** Posted **Feb 19, 2015, 5:11 PM**

I understand why they might withhold some information right now, but once the final proposals are in, I sure hope they consult with the public. They always hold national consultations for all Canadians when they want to, say change the type of grass they use in a park, so I would assume that something game changing like this warrants proper consultation.

J.OT13 · #**531** Posted **Feb 19, 2015, 5:13 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by OTSkyline

The group that is proposing a "HQ of a major international organization", surely they have to have already some sort of an proposed agreement with an org. already... I can't see them proposing this, potentially winning the competition, and then not being able to build the proposal as they have no tennant... So, wonder who it might be?

Could be good for jobs but then again... it'll just be a glorified office building. Not very accessible or open to the public or all Canadians...

I can't see some huge organization place their bets on one proposal to move to a new city and/or country. I think it might just be a pipe dream. Either that or the National Archives is somehow considered a "major international organization".

citydwlr · #**532** Posted **Feb 19, 2015, 6:00 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

The logic is payment to all helps encourage them to invest lots in design.

If you're one of four bidders for a major project, you might be hesitant to go all out and spend lots of money on a great bid because there's a chance you'll lose the bid and end up wasting all that investment. By providing some sort of guaranteed 'consolation payment' to those who lose, it eliminates that fear and encourages higher quality proposals. It's actually a pretty standard part of P3 projects... for example the Confederation Line.

Just to add to this, there was a question brought up in Addendum #3 of the RFQ that talked about compensation for the proponents:

Quote:

Q11: Does the NCC intend on providing any compensation to proponents?

A11: As specified in the RFQ document, the NCC will provide a financial contribution in the amount of $50,000 (or more, depending on the number of prequalified proponents retained) to the proponents qualified through the RFQ stage, but unsuccessful through the RFP stage, in order to encourage the preparation of high-quality design proposals by partially offsetting the considerable costs of developing these proposals. The terms of this contribution will be defined in greater detail at the RFP stage.

Closing comment by the NCC: Proponents are encouraged via the process identified in the RFQ to raise questions, and submit comments on challenges faced for the development of a proposal. The NCC is interested in obtaining any feedback on how the process could be improved, in order to attract viable proposals for a world-class project.

During the RFP process, in addition to its proposal, each of the qualified proponents will be required to submit up to three anonymous poster boards that the NCC will use for public comments to be presented by the NCC during the evaluation process. Submission requirements will be defined in greater detail in the RFP document.

waterloowarrior · #**533** Posted **Feb 19, 2015, 6:17 PM**

^ Interesting... they also mention public comments based on anonymous display boards.

HighwayStar · #**534** Posted **Feb 19, 2015, 6:32 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

^ Interesting... they also mention public comments based on anonymous display boards.

which will just set off a media (and SSP) speculative frenzy of trying to match the players to the pictures... oy.... what a silly process...

eemy · #**535** Posted **Feb 19, 2015, 7:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Horus

When I heard "HQ of major international organization", I first thought of this:

It even has green space!

Ha! I love it!

Horus · #**536** Posted **Feb 19, 2015, 8:00 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeremy_haak

Move the UN to Lebreton Flats? I'd be okay with that.

Small sidebar - this was (and still is) a better proposed location for the UN than at LeBreton Flats.

http://niagarafallsupclose.com/wp-co...avy-Island.jpg

acottawa · #**537** Posted **Feb 20, 2015, 12:46 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by OTSkyline

The group that is proposing a "HQ of a major international organization", surely they have to have already some sort of an proposed agreement with an org. already... I can't see them proposing this, potentially winning the competition, and then not being able to build the proposal as they have no tennant... So, wonder who it might be?

This is the part that sets off red flags for me. The closest thing Ottawa has to an international organization is the forum of the federations, which is a fairly small organization currently housed in a single suite in a downtown office building. And I'm almost certain that if a real international organization (a UN agency or something) wanted to relocate to Ottawa they would just ask the federal government for land and get it (they have sunk a huge amount of money into the ICAO HQ in montreal). So either "international organization" really means something else (embassy, NGO, think tank) or they didn't have to demonstrate much in the way of a planned tenant when they pitched these proposals to the NCC (and if these guys win there will be a hoarded off area saying "site of future international organization.") Arena is looking real good right now.

Kitchissippi · #**538** Posted **Feb 20, 2015, 1:36 AM**

This site is almost as big as the Centretown CBD and will likely take decades to fully develop, especially in a lacklustre economy. While we might see a major aspect like an arena within 5 years, there'll probably be a lot of empty land for a while. I could see the NCC awarding points to a team who can make the area look presentable in the short term i.e. provide "temporary parkland" instead of the bleak wasteland that it is now. Beyond the Sesquicentennial, Ottawa doesn't really have any major milestones to shoot for, which means no reason to rush. Any major public institution proposed will also need a large government commitment which at this point is pure speculation.

Catenary · #**539** Posted **Feb 20, 2015, 3:04 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by acottawa

This is the part that sets off red flags for me. The closest thing Ottawa has to an international organization is the forum of the federations, which is a fairly small organization currently housed in a single suite in a downtown office building. And I'm almost certain that if a real international organization (a UN agency or something) wanted to relocate to Ottawa they would just ask the federal government for land and get it (they have sunk a huge amount of money into the ICAO HQ in montreal). So either "international organization" really means something else (embassy, NGO, think tank) or they didn't have to demonstrate much in the way of a planned tenant when they pitched these proposals to the NCC (and if these guys win there will be a hoarded off area saying "site of future international organization.") Arena is looking real good right now.

ICAO was the first thing I thought of when they said international organization. Just as an example of what it could be.

acottawa · #**540** Posted **Feb 20, 2015, 3:30 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

This site is almost as big as the Centretown CBD and will likely take decades to fully develop, especially in a lacklustre economy. While we might see a major aspect like an arena within 5 years, there'll probably be a lot of empty land for a while. I could see the NCC awarding points to a team who can make the area look presentable in the short term i.e. provide "temporary parkland" instead of the bleak wasteland that it is now. Beyond the Sesquicentennial, Ottawa doesn't really have any major milestones to shoot for, which means no reason to rush. Any major public institution proposed will also need a large government commitment which at this point is pure speculation.

A process seems to be underway
http://www.ncc-ccn.gc.ca/capital-pla...m-improvements