[Northern Light]

I don’t think Merx operates as you understand it.

It’s effectively a commercial site. They charge user fees. Their business model is to balance the user charges between posters (who they need to attract, hence low or no cost to them) and readers (predominantly bidders on work) who will swallow the charge as a cost of business development, hence can be charged more.

The value proposition of merx is that it offers a single, one-stop source for tender calls that provides uniform presentation and timeline enforcement right across the public sector - hence eases effort by bidders scanning for public sector opportunities, and expecting fairness of treatment and access to same. Also helps cost/quality of goods/services procured by increasing the pool of suppliers - who might otherwise not find out about opportunities and never bid.

I don’t believe Merx’s business model speaks to transparency, public oversight or public access to info. If you want the underlying information and don’t want to enrich merx in the process, you can approach ML under a FOI banner…. in which case expect to pay far more.

I want the detail as much as anyone on Ut, but having a hissy fit over a user charge won’t help much. Maybe Rogers would lower their internet fees to offset the merx charge so you get the info at lower cost? Merx is just one link in the info chain.

- Paul

Tenders were all previously issued in-house by the public sector.

Many public sector agencies/governments continue to post their tenders on their own websites.

The City of Toronto does this; so does the TTC.

There is no real added cost to providing free d/l on those government owned sites.

This is not dependent on Merx.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

Not sure, going to bring it forward for everyone, including the associated commentary.

View attachment 333842

Won't somebody think of the children!

 

[DirectionNorth]

I don’t think Merx operates as you understand it.

It’s effectively a commercial site. They charge user fees. Their business model is to balance the user charges between posters (who they need to attract, hence low or no cost to them) and readers (predominantly bidders on work) who will swallow the charge as a cost of business development, hence can be charged more.

But why would it be a commercial site? How much money do they make vs. the harm in lack of transparency? Metrolinx is a public agency. If Walmart, or Toyota, or whatever were to do this, it would be reasonable.

So I want to ask the question: what's the harm in having this information be public?

The value proposition of Merx is that it offers a single, one-stop source for tender calls that provides uniform presentation and timeline enforcement right across the public sector - hence eases effort by bidders scanning for public sector opportunities, and expecting fairness of treatment and access to same. Also helps cost/quality of goods/services procured by increasing the pool of suppliers - who might otherwise not find out about opportunities and never bid.

I don’t believe Merx’s business model speaks to transparency, public oversight or public access to info. If you want the underlying information and don’t want to enrich merx in the process, you can approach ML under a FOI banner…. in which case expect to pay far more.

Again, I ask: is there a reason (other than "it's their business model) for the documents to be private? How much would it cost the government to have Merx as a free site?

I want the detail as much as anyone on Ut, but having a hissy fit over a user charge won’t help much. Maybe Rogers would lower their internet fees to offset the merx charge so you get the info at lower cost? Merx is just one link in the info chain.

Characterizing the other side as having a "hissy fit" never helps your case. Keep that in mind.


I support both lower internet fees (it's cheaper to roam using US networks than to use Canadian networks!) and having Merx as a free website. Merx is a link, but it's a crucial one - we all have wi-fi (given that this is a website), and wi-fi is useful. But not all of us can or will pay 1/2 the internet price to access what should be public documents.

 

[Undead]

Getting kinda off topic folks

 

[crs1026]

Characterizing the other side as having a "hissy fit" never helps your case. Keep that in mind.

Sorry, mea culpa. There was probably a more respectful way of suggesting that posters were overrating their interests as spectators ahead of ML’s need to run a business.

While I’m not usually found in the camp of Ml defenders, I have some sympathy with their effort to stay out of controversy over procurement matters. That’s a huge reputational and legal minefield, which the media is ready and willing to jump on, even regarding trivial but easy-to-sensationalise details. Even a small clarification or embellishment which leaks out of a tendering process through some other channel is problemmatic. Using an app like Merx is a pretty prudent and broadly accepted way of avoiding hot water..

Maintaining some publicly accessible portal in rigid parallel conformity to Merx , perhaps on the ML web site, is at minimum an avoidable cost and at worst source of risk. One dead link….

And while I’m definitely a critic of ML on the subject of transparency, I’m not sure this is an example of that. For $40 you get the whole bundle. The procurement process is not where we need more accountability…. it’s the back door relationship between pols, ML, and developers where we need greater transparency…. and in the outreach/consultation machine. Sure, I would prefer it to be free of charge, but I can understand why ML would not jump to change their established process for our comfort.

- Paul

 

[dowlingm]

Metrolinx could commit to putting all bid documents in the public domain using their own website as soon as contracts are finalized and signed, no?

 

[DirectionNorth]

While I’m not usually found in the camp of Ml defenders, I have some sympathy with their effort to stay out of controversy over procurement matters.

That's a way I haven't thought of before.

That’s a huge reputational and legal minefield, which the media is ready and willing to jump on, even regarding trivial but easy-to-sensationalise details. Even a small clarification or embellishment which leaks out of a tendering process through some other channel is problemmatic. Using an app like Merx is a pretty prudent and broadly accepted way of avoiding hot water..

I would think that NIMBYs are the problem. The Star or CTC have the money (if not the will) to pay $40 for this, though who on their staff wants to go through 1000s of pages of technical reports is an issue.

Maintaining some publicly accessible portal in rigid parallel conformity to Merx , perhaps on the ML web site, is at minimum an avoidable cost and at worst source of risk. One dead link….

It doesn't necessarily have to be the exact same thing, but I do want to see bird's eye view drawings and some side views.

And while I’m definitely a critic of ML on the subject of transparency, I’m not sure this is an example of that. For $40 you get the whole bundle. The procurement process is not where we need more accountability…. it’s the back door relationship between pols, ML, and developers where we need greater transparency…. and in the outreach/consultation machine. Sure, I would prefer it to be free of charge, but I can understand why ML would not jump to change their established process for our comfort.

- Paul

If it were a choice between what you described and the drawings, I would choose transparency in the decision making process every time. But we all know that that's never going to happen, and I think a more limited release of these drawings and papers is still going to be benefital.

 

[crs1026]

That's a way I haven't thought of before.

I would think that NIMBYs are the problem. The Star or CTC have the money (if not the will) to pay $40 for this, though who on their staff wants to go through 1000s of pages of technical reports is an issue.

It doesn't necessarily have to be the exact same thing, but I do want to see bird's eye view drawings and some side views.

If it were a choice between what you described and the drawings, I would choose transparency in the decision making process every time. But we all know that that's never going to happen, and I think a more limited release of these drawings and papers is still going to be benefital.

The root cause of the problem with Ml is that they frequently take away a great deal of public input, much of it valid pushback and constructive criticism, as well as the pure NIMBYism, and immediately go directly to procurement. So the tender becomes the only public response and the only way of finding out what ML did with the input. If there is an intervening ML “here’s what we heard, and here’s how we incorporated it” response, it’s so full of corporatespeak and utter bs that it’s of no value.

The result is that people have to plumb the tender to see what sneaky stuff ML is pulling off. (Fool me once, silly you, but fool me twice, silly me…..)

Plus, their plans vaccilate so frequently that they may not actually know whether the new track will be built on the north side, versus the south side, until the tender is issued… which kind of freezes the design for a bit, at least until they can issue a change order…..

So yeah, there’s a real transparency problem, and a lack of design discipline, and a lack of respect for the public.

The tender process is a free meal for contract lawyers, and pure sour grapes. Find one little nitpick in how the contract is handled, claim the process was biased, claim the spec was rigged to steer the contract towards a favoured bidder or somebody’s brother’s company. Doesn’t need to be a valid complaint, if you can attract negative attention to the process. It’s not hard to understand how procurement types become so process bound. It’s the safest path.

- Paul

 

[drum118]

July 26
Shot Mount Dennis today thanks to the parking lot on the 401 going east to where I wanted to go in the first place.

Will post more on the Mount Dennis thread for the Crosstown LRT, but work is on going for the new platforms. I looked at the site where they plan to build a 32s tower at the back of the station entrance and beside the bank. The tower will be next to the sound barrier wall with next to no parking, otherwise a bitch to get cars in/out on that street.

Unionville
I just uploaded the photos I shot of Unionville in June thank to my laptop crashing on our trip to the east coast that I could not work on when I had down time. I got 9 years out of the laptop and will get a new one next year before heading oversea since I don't need one until then. Shot a few more today and no idea when they will be on line.

Steeles
Going out on the limb, will say the Steeles underpass could be finish by Dec. They have started to form the base and top of the support for the new walkway over Steeles from the north side that will be on both side of the new GO overpass. You can see the whole area now as the dirt is now removed and where the stairs will go to get to the walkway. No idea if an elevator is plan for both stairs and will say no since Metrolinx only like one elevator like TTC. Not much has happen for the station and platforms, but digging trenches for the south end of the new west platform.

The westbound turning lane being dug up as well the east inbound to the mall on the north site. Could be wrong, but looks like precast panels are being place in front of the shoring wall on the north side on the west side. Huge hole with supports in the westbound lane on the east side and depending on what taking place as well how long will have an impact on the December completion.

Agincourt
Like black, then you will love the black look of the new station. The rest of the track for the south end for the west track is stack on top of the track at the north end. Still a lot of work still to be done. 2022 opening date.

 

[drum118]

Port Credit
The stair to Platform 1 in the station is tape off all the way to the top.

The Mary Fix Creek Revitalizing is almost twice as wide than before with core drilling taking place at the west end today. They are starting to form a sloping base next to the new retaining wall and the new gallize drain. The slop is less than the current one.

Hard to say now if the top of the new trench will be cap to allow for more parking as it would have to be precast floor planking.

June 29 photos and today shots to come next month

 

[drum118]

Metrolinx has stop leasing parking space from Canadian Tire for Bramalea GO Station as CT trailers fill most of that area up now. Even with haft of the exist parking lot being rebuilt, more than enough space for parking.

They have started to work on the new bus bay area, but no road to the street yet or where the bus bays are to go.

Another all black station.

 

[alexb]

Rutherford Grade Separation - that's a lot of concrete!

 

[drum118]

That one hell of a thick wall....................Don't believe in using less concrete to build the dam. You could build some towers foundation on those walls.

 

[Streety McCarface]

That one hell of a thick wall....................Don't believe in using less concrete to build the dam. You could build some towers foundation on those walls.

Welcome to AREMA. Metrolinx Spec made this somehow more cost effective than permanent deep foundations.

 

[ssiguy2]

With all these under/overpasses, will the core area of GO be completely grade separated? I'm not taking about GO commuter but rather just the RER sections.