So what are the options for the City? Turn down all bids as being excessive and reissue the bidding process, delaying everything? Accept one of the bids and go forward? I believe the whole purpose of a public bidding process is they cannot choose bits and pieces. I believe they can take exception to how specific items in the bids were worded if they believe they do not conform to the project specifications. But typically this is only done to justify ignoring a low bid as being non-conforming.

 

Any way you want to cut it, this seems to be sending the project costs upward, certainly not good news.

 

As for the City-Duke announcement is was a two-in-one. Yes they announced an operating agreement. But they also announced handling the payment for utility relocation over to the court. I don't consider that an agreement but rather a cop out. Regardless, don't blame us, blame the court.

 

I was taking advantage of some free time last night and perused the bids.... would the city be able to split up different components of the construction process? Because for some things Messer/Prus was significantly cheaper than the others, and for other things one of the other bids was cheaper. Or would the city use this information in the negotiation process with the companies to get lower bids? OR... is it a take it or leave it thing?

 

I believe bids on public projects are a take it or leave it thing. I do not believe a negotiation process is included. That is the whole purpose of a closed, sealed bid. You have you chance, put in a bid. Where does it say in the specifications you will have the opportunity to negotiate the various line items in your bid?

 

The City could go back and break the specifications down into separate finite elements and then reissue the whole process for separate bids, delaying everything. In my experience this usually actually drives the bid costs up, as companies anticipate only a partial award affecting their cost efficiency.

 

Many years ago the company I was employed with received a bid request from the US military for machinery, all alike. The bid specified you could submit a quote on varying quantities on the total to be delivered. At that time it was a huge order for all of the participants. We discussed how to formulate our bid. Many argued to aim at 25% of the quantity, figuring they would split the order between at least 4 competitors. I argued for a No-Bid response for all of the lesser quantities and a single bid for the whole shooting match. And it went into quite an argument. My points were 1) Who of our competitors are capable of producing the entire order in the delivery time-frame? and 2) Who of our competitors can come close to the unit cost we will quote on the whole shebang?

 

Finally the company President agreed it was all or nothing. We got the order. I have to admit in some areas it put us back as our capacity was fulfilled for several years and we had to send business our competitors way.  But the order we received required technology well beyond our standard product and the money to pay for it. That single order set us aside from our competitors for several years.

The city can barter a bid but the lowest bidder probably isn’t going to come down much.  The city can always axe certain luxury items or extras off the project, commonly called value engineering (happens in almost every project once bids are received), or they can change some things to alternates and only build them if they find the extra cash.  Bids coming in over budget is pretty much a standard in the construction industry, be it a house, an office building, or a streetcar.  Just quickly browsing the bid list, there are a few things ripe for VE’ing out almost entirely, and quite a few things that have scopes that could be reduced.

The city can barter a bid but the lowest bidder probably isn’t going to come down much.  The city can always axe certain luxury items or extras off the project, commonly called value engineering (happens in almost every project once bids are received), or they can change some things to alternates and only build them if they find the extra cash.  Bids coming in over budget is pretty much a standard in the construction industry, be it a house, an office building, or a streetcar.  Just quickly browsing the bid list, there are a few things ripe for VE’ing out almost entirely, and quite a few things that have scopes that could be reduced.

 

Well said.  Most bids do initially come in at least somewhat overpriced, and then adjustments are made to the scope of work in order to accomplish the general goal of the project, in this case, the streetcar tracks and shelters.  Things such as the automated ticket machines at every shelter could be changed to ticket machines on each streetcar itself, eliminating 13 machines if there is one placed on all five streetcars.

 

Edit: Although there are some items that can be value-engineered out of the project, it will be difficult to reduce the cost $30 million.  Not saying it can't be done, but I guess that's why they pay Dohoney the big bucks.

Just out of curiousity, and I support the streetcar project in prinicpal, but there comes a time when the costs to construct outweigh the benefits. I believe the initial price tag was 115 million, now they are saying 150 million, could go up more.

 

Everyone essentially has a price, in everyone on the forum's mind, what figure do they have in their head that if the streetcar costs rose to that level, it would not be economically viable or make sense to build?

$200 million?

$500 Million?

$1 Billion?

Or it is worth building at any cost because the benefits cannnot be quantified and that once it is built the value to the community will be priceless no matter what the value?

 

Interested in hearing people's thoughts

The different price tags that have been thrown around correlate to different sized routes. For example, the $185 million figure included the link up Vine Street to UC.

I think there is a top price... not sure what it is... for the current route/plan, I'd say probably around $200M. But like you say in the second half of your post, the benefit to the city has many intangible/unquantifiable aspects. So that's a soft number for me.

We've also already spent close to $50 million on the project I believe. That is not something to just scoff at and scrap the project.

We've also already spent close to $50 million on the project I believe. That is not something to just scoff at and scrap the project.

 

According to Smitherman, Amy Murray, and Cranley, that's exactly what they want to do and plan to do if they are elected

Ryan, you say keep it going if that $50 million ends up being only 10% of the overall cost? that logic makes no sense. If you pull the plug because after spending $50 million it was because that money was spent poorly without proper planning. If the project mushrooms to 1 billion or more (I am not saying it will) then 50 million is a tiny drop in the bucket.

 

The more time that goes by, and the higher the project costs go will only peel off more and more support for it and then all that will be left are the zealots that want it built at all costs and despite all other programs.

We've also already spent close to $50 million on the project I believe. That is not something to just scoff at and scrap the project.

 

According to Smitherman, Amy Murray, and Cranley, that's exactly what they want to do and plan to do if they are elected

 

^ And because of that, I'm sure each contractor added a significant risk premium to its bid.

If I remember correctly, the downtown loop is expected to have a 2.7-to-1 benefit-to-cost ratio according to the two studies that have been done. Which means that, technically, the project could cost 2.7 times more than originally planned and we'd still break even. So even if the project ends up being 20% over budget, it's still an insanely high ROI. And I'm sure ODOT is occasionally 10% or 20% over-budget on a $150 million highway interchange and the media doesn't even pay attention to it.

 

The other thing to remember is that we need to build it while materials, labor, and interest rates are cheap. The longer we wait, the higher those costs will go. The fact that the project has been delayed a few years thanks to COAST's antics has probably added a few million to the cost already. In other words, COAST is responsible for additional government spending.

Just out of curiousity, and I support the streetcar project in prinicpal, but there comes a time when the costs to construct outweigh the benefits. I believe the initial price tag was 115 million, now they are saying 150 million, could go up more.

 

Everyone essentially has a price, in everyone on the forum's mind, what figure do they have in their head that if the streetcar costs rose to that level, it would not be economically viable or make sense to build?

$200 million?

$500 Million?

$1 Billion?

Or it is worth building at any cost because the benefits cannnot be quantified and that once it is built the value to the community will be priceless no matter what the value?

 

Interested in hearing people's thoughts

 

Which COASTie are you Mr X? Incidentally, Mark Miller has been continuously tweeting about the streetcar using the GOCOAST account for 23 straight hours now non-stop. you can do things like that when you are unemployed.

Isn't phase Two from OTR to the Zoo much longer than Phase one? So that second phase may cost 100m just form these bids? How does these cost happen in Cincinnati? When they did the initial study, didn't they have engineers tell them how much it would cost? Could we have saved 20+ million if this was started two years ago?

Hearing from a source in City Hall that the city is looking at two options:

 

1. Ask the federal government for additional funds.  According to my source, the city is "very, very unlikely to get more federal money." (I think for pretty obvious reasons)

 

2. Rebid the entire project with changes to its scope of work. My source says this would probably cause bid prices to stay the same, if not increase because now all the developers interested in the project know that the city has its back against the wall.

 

Again, not sure how accurate this is, but the same source told me that the 3 bids that came in were 30% higher than expected which turned out to be true.

Just out of curiousity, and I support the streetcar project in prinicpal, but there comes a time when the costs to construct outweigh the benefits. I believe the initial price tag was 115 million, now they are saying 150 million, could go up more.

 

Everyone essentially has a price, in everyone on the forum's mind, what figure do they have in their head that if the streetcar costs rose to that level, it would not be economically viable or make sense to build?

$200 million?

$500 Million?

$1 Billion?

Or it is worth building at any cost because the benefits cannnot be quantified and that once it is built the value to the community will be priceless no matter what the value?

 

Interested in hearing people's thoughts

 

Which COASTie are you Mr X?

 

 

I thought the question was pretty reasonable. Completion of the streetcar probably shouldn't go ahead if the costs will exceed the benefits, though I don't really see that happening.

 

Inexplicably, the streetcar will (again) be the most important issue in the 2013 election. Only in Cincinnati. While it should have been expected that the streetcar bids would be greater than the city's estimate (Dohoney said so himself), I don't think Qualls and the other pro-streetcar candidates can suffer too many of these political attacks from Cranley and the Enquirer between now and November. Or am I just being paranoid?

Just out of curiousity, and I support the streetcar project in prinicpal, but there comes a time when the costs to construct outweigh the benefits. I believe the initial price tag was 115 million, now they are saying 150 million, could go up more.

 

Everyone essentially has a price, in everyone on the forum's mind, what figure do they have in their head that if the streetcar costs rose to that level, it would not be economically viable or make sense to build?

$200 million?

$500 Million?

$1 Billion?

Or it is worth building at any cost because the benefits cannnot be quantified and that once it is built the value to the community will be priceless no matter what the value?

 

Interested in hearing people's thoughts

 

Which COASTie are you Mr X?

 

 

I don't think Qualls and the other pro-streetcar candidates can suffer too many of these political attacks from Cranley and the Enquirer between now and November. Or am I just being paranoid?

 

Not at all being paranoid.  This streetcar has been a lightning rod for misinformation and political opportunists. 

 

1) The Enquirer and 700wlw have been/will be pro Cranley and they will endorse nearly every anti-streetcar candidate on the ballot. 

2)Chris Smitherman and his blind followers will solidly support cranley and anti-streetcar candidates (Bond Hill/Avondale/North Avondale are his strongholds)

3) Cranley will significantly out-raise Qualls during this campaign

4) The streetcar barely survived the last ballot initiative

5) Council terms are now 4 years. 

6) Cranley, Murray and Smitherman have both stated they will kill the project if they can. ...Regardless of construction...regardless if the cars are built and here...regardless if tracks are laid....regardless if the first day of the line being opened is 1 minute from now

7) Cranley, Murray and Smitherman have both stated repeatedly they will kill all future phases of the streetcar

 

 

Its conceivable that John Cranley, a man who's running on solely 1 issue(anti-streetcar), a man with no ideas/plans/vision, could be mayor for 4 years with an anti-streetcar/rail council.    They would literally return to the exact same status quo policies of the late 90's early 2000's

Well, this ^ is encouraging.  :roll: :drunk:

Cranley "Its time to stop the Streetcar Project"

 

http://www.wcpo.com/dpp/news/local_news/Cranley-Time-for-Cincinnati-to-stop-streetcar-project

 

“This is becoming an enormous boondoggle,” Cranley said. “It’s time to say enough is enough and stop it.”

From the Biz Courier

Cincinnati might scrap streetcar track bids, start over

All three bids received last Friday came in much higher than the city’s estimate of $44.6 million. The lowest bid, from a joint venture of Messer Construction Co., Prus and Delta Railroad came in at $70.9 million. The high bid, from a joint venture between Atlas and Kokosing, came in at more than $87.5 million.

That means the lowest bid is more than $26 million higher than the city estimated.

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2013/02/14/cincinnati-might-scrap-streetcar-track.html

The issue could be the designer of the streetcar, over-designed it, IE too many bells and whistles.

 

this is waht happens When you have a engineering cartel.  costs go up.

^ What bells and whistles? The project is fairly bare-bones as it is. The streetcar shelters are simple structures that can be prefabricated off-site, and to my knowledge nothing particularly lavish is planned for the maintenance facility. The vehicles themselves are not part of this bid package.

 

When you speak in vague generalities and provide no specific examples, it gives the appearance of having an agenda with little basis in reality.

 

Hearing from a source in City Hall that the city is looking at two options:

 

1. Ask the federal government for additional funds.  According to my source, the city is "very, very unlikely to get more federal money." (I think for pretty obvious reasons)

 

2. Rebid the entire project with changes to its scope of work. My source says this would probably cause bid prices to stay the same, if not increase because now all the developers interested in the project know that the city has its back against the wall.

 

Again, not sure how accurate this is, but the same source told me that the 3 bids that came in were 30% higher than expected which turned out to be true.

 

For a while, there was serious talk of cutting out the initial phase of the streetcar route south of Government Square. Some more federal money appeared, so the streetcar was able to go all the way down to 2nd Street again. Any chance of going ahead with the Findlay Market - Government Square segment, while putting off the Government Square - Banks segment until additional funding is secured? That would at least allow the project to get underway instead of yet more delays caused by re-bidding the project or (God forbid) scrapping the project altogether if this turns into a political debacle that allows Cranley and/or an anti-streetcar majority to gain control of City Hall.

Well this is a big ol' kick in the groin.

Roxanne Quall's chimes in.  http://www.wcpo.com/dpp/news/local_news/Qualls-No-blank-check-for-streetcar-project-tells-staffers-to-stay-wihin-budget

Well it is safe to say this will delay the project opening until after the All-Star game.

This begs the question of why one of these contractors (such as Messer) wasn't involved on the project as a consultant from very the beginning, including the initial feasibility studies where the first cost estimates were prepared. Their input earlier in the project could have identified ways to keep costs down, and/or provided for a more realistic initial cost estimate for the city to work from. This is becoming the norm on more and more public projects, to avoid surprises like these when the bids come in.

This begs the question of why one of these contractors (such as Messer) wasn't involved on the project as a consultant from very the beginning, including the initial feasibility studies where the first cost estimates were prepared. Their input earlier in the project could have identified ways to keep costs down, and/or provided for a more realistic initial cost estimate for the city to work from. This is becoming the norm on more and more public projects, to avoid surprises like these when the bids come in.

 

Yep, but we are talking about politicians who are not experts. Bringing in experts, who represent your best interests, from day 1 makes too much

sense.

The politicians themselves may not be experts, but they had experts like HDR, Parsons Brinckerhoff, and streetcar officials from Portland involved in the project from the very beginning. And there's nothing about the bid process on this project that's inherently different than on any other construction project the city is involved in.

This begs the question...

 

FYI:

 

In modern days, English speakers are prone to use "begs the question" as a way of saying "raises the question". However, the former denotes a failure to explicitly raise an essential premise, so that it may be taken as given, whereas the latter simply functions as a segue for whatever comes to mind.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beg_the_question

 

Not trying to be a dick, just thought you might be interested.

The politicians themselves may not be experts, but they had experts like HDR, Parsons Brinckerhoff, and streetcar officials from Portland involved in the project from the very beginning. And there's nothing about the bid process on this project that's inherently different than on any other construction project the city is involved in.

 

And for many construction projects they could use representation. The bid process might not be inherently different but that doesn't mean they

can't improve a ton. Years ago, GSA finally figured out that that their people were awful at building buildings and negotiating leases so they

engaged outside representation and they get better deals and better leases. (they keep expanding though and that is an issue).

what LIG said & I have heard P&B tends to be fairly overpriced.

I also remember reading an article by Lind or Weyerich that discussed what streetcar installation should cost & Cincinnati was at the high end of the range.

Now Qualls appears to be running in circles - heck, she was the one who demanded the segment up to Clifton....

Not trying to be a dick...

 

I think pedant is the word you're looking for.

>Now Qualls appears to be running in circles - heck, she was the one who demanded the segment up to Clifton....

 

No, now she's going to act like a streetcar critic, which will neutralize Cranley. 

Roxanne Quall's chimes in.  http://www.wcpo.com/dpp/news/local_news/Qualls-No-blank-check-for-streetcar-project-tells-staffers-to-stay-wihin-budget

 

What a god-awful abortion of a response.  We got to cut costs, but, at the same time, accelerate the schedule so it's open 6-8 months earlier than currently planned so we have it for the ASG.  But first let's slow-down to figure out how.  Just terrible, flat terrible.

 

This is shaping up to be like '98 when she got wiped by non-entity Chabot.

What a god-awful abortion of a response.  We got to cut costs, but, at the same time, accelerate the schedule so it's open 6-8 months earlier than currently planned so we have it for the ASG.  But first let's slow-down to figure out how.  Just terrible, flat terrible.

 

This is shaping up to be like '98 when she got wiped by non-entity Chabot.

 

I think you're hearing what you want to hear from this. No where did she say slow down. She said, value engineer the system to get it constructed with current funds. No where did she say slow down.

 

Duke utility relocation can continue while this ordeal gets sorted out. With a slightly shorter route possible (no Government Square to GABP) it would be possible to alter the specs and submit a request for new bids without missing any time. I'm not saying it is going to happen that way or that is the best alternative, but it is very possible.

I think you're hearing what you want to hear from this. No where did she say slow down. She said, value engineer the system to get it constructed with current funds. No where did she say slow down.

 

Maybe, but she does say "step-back" and re-assess in the memo, I read that as slowing down or at least requiring it.

 

http://cincinnati.com/blogs/politics/2013/02/14/read-qualls-streetcar-memo/

Fair enough. I read that as, "look at the project as a whole" as in stepping back to get a better view of something very large.

Barry Horstman ‏@barryhorstman

High construction bids put Cincy streetcar debate back on front burner inside and outside City Hall. In Friday's Enquirer. @cincienquirer

 

Barry Horstman ‏@barryhorstman

Sign this is big moment for Cincy streetcar: got more calls, emails today than any time since last referendum.

^Barry's toupee must be in a real tizzy.

Not trying to be a dick...

 

I think pedant is the word you're looking for.

 

I was mistaken. Apparently you are not the curious type. My humblest apologies.

^ I'm curious about many things; I just don't need to see UO threads being hijacked for off-topic chatter.

 

Back to the streetcar: It needs to be made clear to Mallory and Qualls that abandoning the streetcar project at this stage is simply not an option. We've come this far, and this is the closest Cincinnati has come to having rail transit in generations. If it fails now, the streetcar will join the subway and other projects that are routinely held up by naysayers to demonstrate that the city is fundamentally incapable of building rail transit, and the naysayers would be proven right. While the city's renaissance may continue without the streetcar, it would certainly be drastically curtailed, and possibly even reversed. It would certainly cement my decision to move elsewhere once I'm done with grad school here.

^I almost feel bad saying this since I love this city so much, but if the streetcar doesn't end up happening I'm not sure my desire to live here will remain, at least not at its current level. There is a lot of awesome in this city, but being someone who has no desire to ever own a car, the fundamentals of public transportation in this city need to improve for me to view my life here as being able to be as full as I want it to and the streetcar is a huge part of this for when I graduate grad school next year.

 

For those of you who have more experience with rail projects, maybe from other cities and such, what GENERALLY happens in these situations? It seems that at the very minimum the Government Square to The Banks part can be eliminated but I feel that's chopping off a HUGE amount of the marketability of this project. Maybe I missed it, but is there much bulk in these bids that can be eliminated? Not knowing the ins and outs of all aspects of streetcar infrastructure, does the current design have the ability to be cheapened enough to make the current proposed line fully possible with some alterations?

 

Also, I saw someone say that the chances of getting additional federal funds is next to impossible. Is this accurate? It would seem that with the amount of money already promised that there are people that believe in this project and with a good case for why more money is necessary could possibly cover these additional expenses.

 

Also, does anyone know if the city has pursued selling naming or advertising rights for the streetcar? Obviously this couldn't cover the entirety of the additional costs in these bids, but it could certainly help to have the stops, cars, and entire line named after major corporations interested.

I love driving and would even consider myself somewhat of a car enthusiast (I love watching BBC's Top Gear, and if money were no object I'd buy the new 2013 Range Rover in a heartbeat), but after spending $5+ gallon for gas in California over the summer, and $3000 for a new transmission on the drive back to Cincinnati in December, I'm quickly coming around to the idea that I'd rather spend what scarce money I have on things that aren't car-related.

 

Out of curiosity, I ran some hypothetical household budgets based on salary figures and expenses I could reasonably expect to have in Cincinnati, New York, London, and Los Angeles. Much to my surprise, NYC actually came out on top in terms of the amount of money left over at the end of each month, even though I'd be paying at least double for rent there compared to Cincinnati. The reason? A higher salary there is certainly a big factor, but the kicker is the fact that I'd only be paying $104 a month for a subway pass, as opposed to several hundred a month for car payments, gas, parking, maintenance, and insurance. (Los Angeles, as you might imagine, came in dead-last in my hypothetical budget, as it combines a cost of living that approaches NYC with the need to own a car. London comes out only slightly ahead of LA because the cost of living there makes NYC look like a bargain by comparison.) Combined with the fact that I've lived in NYC before and already have good friends, an extensive professional network, and a great church community there, the burden is already on Cincinnati to convince me why I should stay here long-term. A few trendy bars and restaurants in OTR won't cut it alone, as there are a hundred in Manhattan for every one here. I have roots here in Cincinnati, but I've spent almost my entire adult life in Chicago and NYC. Building the streetcar shows that Cincinnati is serious about joining the big leagues in terms of being a real city, but if Cincinnati can't pull that off with a project as simple and inexpensive as this, then it will demonstrate that it doesn't deserve to be in the big leagues and that my future lies elsewhere.

what LIG said & I have heard P&B tends to be fairly overpriced.

I also remember reading an article by Lind or Weyerich that discussed what streetcar installation should cost & Cincinnati was at the high end of the range.

Now Qualls appears to be running in circles - heck, she was the one who demanded the segment up to Clifton....

 

Here's the report I was babbling about by Weyrich AND Lind. Unfortunately it's from 2002 so I am sure prices should be higher. Anyway, they say $10M/mile

http://www.apta.com/resources/reportsandpublications/Documents/weyrich-streetcars.pdf

 

It's election season. Cranley is presenting himself as the candidate who is willing to kill the streetcar no matter how much money and time has already been put into the project. Qualls is presenting herself as the candidate who is keeping the current mayor "in check", making sure the project doesn't go over-budget, and asking the city to do everything it can to finish construction by the All Star Game.

 

One thing we've learned from Issues 9 and 48 is there is overwhelming support for some kind of rail transit in Cincinnati. Hopefully Qualls can play up the fact that the streetcar will be a part of a larger network of light rail and commuter rail lines. Cranley doesn't have anything to say except "no".

Out of curiosity, I ran some hypothetical household budgets based on salary figures and expenses I could reasonably expect to have in Cincinnati, New York, London, and Los Angeles.

 

You and I must be similar people then haha. I literally did the exact same thing this past summer when I was offered a job after grad school at the firm I was working at in Hyde Park. Like you, New York came out ahead of Cincinnati based on what I could expect to be paid there with a masters of architecture and what I know I'd get paid here if I was forced to buy a car which is unfortunately very much still necessary in this city. It's amazing how much owning and operating a car draws from your bank account.

 

I seriously hope that Qualls wins and that there is a streetcar/rail majority so that this city can see four more years of pushing towards better transportation opposed to just returning to the ways I always hear about when people talk about the Cincinnati from before my move here for school. I fell in love with this city pretty quickly and part of that was the push to be progressive and the streetcar kind of epitomizes this.

What the hell is this? Another way to back door anonymous comments on the Enquirer?

 

http://cincinnati.com/blogs/politics/2013/02/15/what-city-council-is-hearing-about-the-streetcar/

Pg ripping on the streetcar on 700wlw

By now I'm just an outside observer, but this looks like a fatal blow. Unless they can come up with $30 million.

WLW saying that the cost was originally estimated at $45mil and is now over $130mil and nearing 300% over the original estimate. 

 

 

.... and that how can the City have money for a Streetcar but cannot come up with money for a new bridge...