STAFF REPORT
December 16, 1999
To: Works Committee
From: Barry H. Gutteridge, Commissioner, Works and Emergency Services
Subject: Prince Edward Viaduct - Don Section
Measures to Deter Suicide Attempts
(Midtown - Don River)
Purpose:
The purpose of this report is to provide further information concerning this project as requested by the Works Committee at
its meeting held on November 3, 1999
Financial Implications and Impact Statement:
Council has previously approved an expenditure of $2.5 million. The low bid for the Dereck Revington/Yolles Partnership
barrier design exceeds the budgeted amount by over $3 million. Other options presented in this report would be within the
original approved amount of $2.5 million. The Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer has reviewed this report and concurs
with the financial impact statement.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that the recommendations contained in the report to the Works Committee dated October 20, 1999 from
the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services be adopted, namely that:
1. Contract No. T-71-99, Tender Call No. 222-1999 for the installation of a safety fence on the Prince Edward Viaduct be
cancelled;
2. The Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services be authorized to issue a new Request for Proposals with a
maximum budget of $2.5 million, to solicit new design concepts and full engineering services for this project, based on a
design/build concept, with the submission being evaluated by a similar Project Steering Committee comprised of
representatives from:
(a) the Schizophrenia Society of Ontario;
(b) the Council on Suicide Preventions;
(c) the Toronto Historical Board/Heritage Toronto;
(d) Architecture and Civic Improvements, City Planning;
(e) the Public Art Policy Advisory Committee; and
(f) the Technical Services Division, Works and Emergency Services Department.
3. The appropriate City of Toronto officials be directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto.
Council Reference/Background:
On July 8, 9 and 10, 1998, Council adopted Report No. 8 of the Urban Environment and Development Committee
(UEDC), Clause No. 2, and authorized the Works and Emergency Services Department (WES) to solicit proposals for
design concepts and full architectural services for the installation of safety barriers on the Viaduct with a budget set at $1.5
million. The amount of $1.5 million was included in the terms of reference informing competitors of the parameters of the
project.
On October 1 and 2, 1998, Council adopted Report No. 11 of UEDC, Clause No. 1, recommending the preferred design by
Dereck Revington Studios/Yolles Partnership be adopted and that they be retained to prepare the detailed design and tender
documents and to provide project management and site supervision services.
Subsequent to Council's endorsement of the design, it was apparent that the design as selected, could not be constructed
within the original budgeted amount of $1.5 million.
On May 11, 12 and 13, 1999, Council adopted the recommendation of the UEDC (Report No. 7, Clause No. 2) which
directed WES to proceed with the design by Dereck Revington Studios/Yolles Partnership, to prepare the detailed design
and tender documents for the construction and to increase the funding for the project by $1.0 million to $2.5 million.
On October 6, 1999, the Bid Committee opened the tenders for Contract No. T-71-99, for the structure modification and
the installation of a safety fence on the Prince Edward Viaduct - Don Section. The low bid price was $5,558,405.92, more
than three times the original budget of $1.5 million and more than double the revised budget of $2.5 million.
At its meeting on November 3, 1999, the Works Committee referred the report dated October 20, 1999, from the
Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services to November 23, 1999 Council without recommendation and requested
staff to enter into negotiations with the three bidders to reduce the bid prices, if possible and to meet with the Project
Steering Committee to solicit private sector sponsorship.
On November 23, 24 and 25, 1999, Council struck out and referred this item back to the December 1, 1999 Works
Committee for further consideration. On December 1, 1999, the Works Committee deferred consideration of this matter
until its next meeting scheduled to be held on January 12, 2000.
Comments:
At its meeting on November 3, 1999, the Works Committee requested that staff negotiate with the three bidders to reduce
the budget price, if possible and that staff work with the project Steering Committee members to solicit private sector
sponsorship.
In preparing to negotiate with the low bidders, Dereck Revington Studio (DRS) was asked if the barrier design could be
modified in any way to lower the cost of the project. DRS responded verbally that there would be very little that could be
changed in the design, since they have already gone through a cost reduction analysis during the final design stage. To date,
we have not received written confirmation of any suggested design modifications from DRS.
Prior to approaching the three bidders, the City Solicitor and the Purchasing and Materials Management Division were
contacted to discuss negotiating with the low bidder. Staff was advised we would have to approach all three bidders and
that they must be provided with the same information regarding any changes to the contract requirements or design. The
City Solicitor has also advised that the discussions should not be construed as negotiations but rather as an approach by the
City to the bidders to obtain input to determine if the project could be revised to allow for limited re-tendering to the three
bidders. The City Solicitor has advised that negotiations with the bidders to determine a final contract is foreign to a tender
situation. Any significant changes to the project, including the City's original standard conditions, without retendering, puts
the City at risk.
On November 22, 1999, as requested by City staff, DRS submitted a list of questions to be presented to the bidders in an
attempt to solicit ideas that might potentially reduce the cost of the project. The questions were reviewed and modified by
Legal Services, Purchasing and Materials Management Division and the WES Department. On December 7, the Purchasing
and Materials Management Division faxed the list of questions to the three bidders requesting their responses by December
14, 1999. Responses were received by all three bidders and are included in the Attachments Nos. 1, 2 and 3.
In summary, the bidders stated that their bids reflect the true value of the work required and that there is minimal
opportunity for cost reduction without a significant changes to the design or contract requirements.
Subsequent to the Project Steering Committee meeting of November 17, 1999, we received a letter from Mr. M. McCamus
on behalf of the Steering Committee members reiterating their support for the DRS/Yolles Partnership design and
expressing a willingness to participate in any fundraising initiative to assist in funding the project. The Project Steering
Committee's comments are included in Attachment No. 4.
Following the meeting of the Project Steering Committee held on November 17, 1999, to discuss possible fundraising
initiatives, staff has made inquiries about the fundraising options.
WES staff have contacted staff of the Economic Development, Culture and Tourism Department who have had past
experience in fundraising activities as well as a fundraising consultant to discuss this project. Their recommendation is to
perform a feasibility study prior to any major fundraising initiative in order determine the prospects of achieving the
fundraising goals. In order to provide a quotation to perform a feasibility study, the fundraising consultant would need to
know the amount of funds required, the timeframe of the fundraising campaign or when the funds are required and the type
of corporate or private sponsorship in the form of advertising or marketing that the City is willing to permit on this project.
As directed by Council in the May 11, 1998 UEDC, Report No. 7, Clause No. 2, WES staff have authorized Bell Canada
and Toronto Hydro to proceed with the installation of 2 payphones located on the south side on the approaches of the
bridge. Work orders for this work have been issued to Bell and Toronto Hydro and they are scheduled to complete the
installation by mid to end of December 1999. Installation of the telephone lines at the northeast and northwest corners of
the bridge is more problematic and Bell is currently assessing the feasibility and cost to install these lines. As the cost of
the installation of these two telephones is expected to be substantially higher, we will report to the Works Committee again
once the investigation is completed.
Conclusions:
Based on the response received from the three tenderers, this report requests authority to cancel Contract No. T-71-99,
Tender Call No. 222-1999, for the installation of a safety fence on the Prince Edward Viaduct and also to issue a new RFP
for a new design/build concept for the project.
Contact:
W. (Bill) G. Crowther, P. Eng.
Director, Works Facilities and Structures
Technical Services Division
Tel. (416) 392-8256; Fax (416) 392-4594
E-mail: WCrowth@toronto.ca
Tom G. Denes, P. Eng.
Executive Director, Technical Services
Barry H. Gutteridge
Commissioner, Works and Emergency Services
WGC/ML/mtro
Princeed.via
List of Attachments:
Attachment No. 1 - Bridgecon Construction Ltd. letter of December 9, 1999
Attachment No. 2 - Grascan Construction Ltd. letter of December 14, 1999
Attachment No. 3 - G. Tari Limited letter of December 13, 1999
Attachment No. 4 - Schizophrenia Society of Ontario letter of December 14, 1999
