Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD-140-91 THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF NEWCASTLE DN: CONSULT.GPA REPORT Meeting: General Purpose and Administration Committee File # Date: Monday, June 17, 1991 Res. # By-Law# Report#: PD-140-91 File#: PLN 15 . 1 Subject: NEWCASTLE WATERFRONT STUDY CONSULTANT SELECTION Recommendations: - It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PD-140-91 be received; 2 . THAT Staff be authorized to retain the services of Bird and Hale Ltd. in association with sub-consultants, Walker Wright Young Associated Ltd. , Mar-land Engineering Ltd. and Read Voorhees and Associates Ltd. for the preparation of the Newcastle Waterfront Study; 3 . THAT the sum of $78,432 . 00, be drawn from the O.H.A.P. Reserve Fund (Account No. 1110-00167-0000) ; 4 . THAT the two other shortlisted consultants, Hough Stansbury Woodland and Project Planning who submitted detailed proposals be thanked for their interest in this project; 5 . THAT the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Ministry of Tourism and Recreation be advised. 1. BACKGROUND 1. 1 On October 29, 1990 Council approved the Terms of Reference for the Newcastle Waterfront Study, subject securing grants from senior government partners . Council also approved $ 35,000 . 00 to be allocated from the 1991 Current Budget to be towards the costs of the Study. 1.2 On April 5, 1991, Staff were advised that $ 50, 000 . 00 had been granted to the Town from the Ministry of Tourism and Recreation, Community Waterfront Study,., IIE CYCL­ PIP", ,A- REPORT NO. PD-140-91 PAGE 2 Subsequently, on April 23, 1991, $50,000 .00 was granted by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs under the Community Planning Grants Program also for the Newcastle Waterfront Study. 1. 3 In the interim, Staff had requested and received "Expression of Interest" from five consulting consortiums . The firms were short listed to three and Staff issued a "Proposal Call" requesting the firms to bid on the project based on the approved Terms of Reference. Each detailed submission was reviewed by Staff and followed up by interview. The Director of Planning and Development, Director of Community Services, Manager of Strategic Planning, a Strategic Planner and a representative of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs participated as members of an interviewing panel. 2 BASIS FOR SELECTION 2 . 1 The members of the interview panel had lengthy discussions prior to coming to their decision to recommend Bird and Hale Ltd. and sub-consultants, Walker Wright Young Ltd, Read Voorhees and Associates Ltd. and Mar-land Engineering Ltd. to carry out the study. 2 .2 The firm of Bird and Hale Ltd. and sub-consultants were believed to be the best consulting team for this particular study due to the following reasons . i) The Team had a very strong environmental planning background, well suited to the ecosystem approach to planning as required in the Terms of Reference and conforming the recommendations made by Royal Commission on the Future of the Waterfront. ii) The team has a good understanding of the task involved, as setforth in the terms of reference. iii) The team members are all experts in their respective fields and have worked together on past projects. The team can offer a unified approach to the planning exercise. 599 12 REPORT NO. : PD-140-91 PAGE 3 iv) Staff have received very positive feed back from municipalities where they have been contracted. V) Bird and Hale Ltd. and Walker Wright Young Ltd. have considerable experience in Durham Region and some previous experience in the Town of Newcastle. The Team is knowledgable of local agencies and contacts . 2 . 3 The fee of $213,432 . 00 is considered satisfactory and competitive based on their expertise and the study process outlined in their detailed proposal. The shortlisted consulting firms and fee quoted for the Study are as follows: Hough, Stansbury Project Bird & Hale Woodland Planning Professional Fees $ 164,300 $ 213,000 $ 169,019 Disbursements 22,500 17,800 30,450 Study Cost 186,800 230,800 199,469 G.S.T. 13,076 16, 156 13,963 Total. . . $ 199,876 $ 246,956 $ 213,432 3 . FUNDING 3 . 1 As noted earlier $100,000 have been granted by two Provincial Ministries as well as $35,000 were allocated in the 1991 Budget. In order to complete the study a balance of $78,432 is required. Staff are requesting that the balance of the necessary funds be drawn from the O.H.A.P. Reserve Account. COMMITTED FUNDING a) Ministry of Tourism and Recreation $ 50,000 b) Ministry of Municipal Affairs $ 50,000 c) Town of Newcastle 1991 Current Budget $ 35,000 SUBTOTAL. . $ 135,000 UNCOMMITTED FUNDS OHAP Reserve Fund $ 78,432 TOTAL STUDY COST. . . . . $ 213,432 . I REPORT NO. : PD-140-91 PAGE 4 4 . SUMMARY 4 . 1 Staff are confident that the consultant firm Bird and Hale Ltd. and the sub-consultant have the ability and expertise to prepare a comprehensive study for the Newcastle Waterfront Study, Should the recommendations contained within this report be approved, the study will commence immediately with an anticipated completion date of January 1993 . It will form an important component on the preparation of a new Official Plan for the Town of Newcastle. Respectfully submitted, Recommended for presentation to the Committee d ANT Franklin Wu, M.C. I .P. Lawrence E Kotseff Director of Planning Chief A i istrative and Development Officer CS*DC*FW*df *Attach 10 June 1991 Interested parties to be notified of Council and Committee's decision: Ms . Carolyn Woodland Konzelman Ms . Ruth Melady Hough Stansbury Woodland Ministry of Municipal Affairs 916 The East Mall, Central Region Offices Suite B 47 Sheppard Avenue East Etobicoke, Ontario. Suite 207 M9B 6K1 Willowdale, Ontario. M2N 2Z8 Mr. Maarten Dake One Yonge Street Ms . Anne Fraser Suite 1100 Ministry of Tourism & Recreation Toronto, Ontario. 34 Simcoe Street M5E 1E5 Suite 302 Barrie, Ontario. Ms . Linda Hellas L4N 6T4 Bird and Hale Ltd. 1263 Bay Street Toronto, Ontario. M5R 2C1