Canadian or US stone?

[Topaz]

Public Works is going to be adding on the the former Bank of Montreal in Ottawa, which will be used for ceremonial events and large Parliament meeting. The problems seems to be which is the stone going to come from. Public Works has okayed it coming from Indiana but the original stone is from Queenston Ont. Experts say it should be done with the stone from Queesnston but PWs say the cost is too high and the owner of the quarry in Queenston says he never was asked about a bid??? What is going on with PW's, seems they can't get anything done without some kind of problem. There's avery good chance that the building will not look the same and d own the road another government may have to redo it it and like Mike Holmes says "Do it right" the first time. Thoughts? http://www.canada.com/news/ottawa/Public%2BWorks%2Bpicks%2Bcheaper%2BIndiana%2Blimestone%2Bformer%2BBank/8026003/story.html

[Signals.Cpl]

Public Works is going to be adding on the the former Bank of Montreal in Ottawa, which will be used for ceremonial events and large Parliament meeting. The problems seems to be which is the stone going to come from. Public Works has okayed it coming from Indiana but the original stone is from Queenston Ont. Experts say it should be done with the stone from Queesnston but PWs say the cost is too high and the owner of the quarry in Queenston says he never was asked about a bid??? What is going on with PW's, seems they can't get anything done without some kind of problem. There's avery good chance that the building will not look the same and d own the road another government may have to redo it it and like Mike Holmes says "Do it right" the first time. Thoughts? http://www.canada.com/news/ottawa/Public%2BWorks%2Bpicks%2Bcheaper%2BIndiana%2Blimestone%2Bformer%2BBank/8026003/story.html

And if they chose the more expensive source you would be complaining about them wasting money? If there is a significant price difference go with the cheaper source after all this does not involve questions about the safety of the structure rather it involves the appearance.

[Fletch 27]

US Stone.. Its cheaper.

[Wilber]

Depends on whether we want a proper historic restoration or a cosmetic restoration. In auto restorations, those done with proper OEM date coded parts are worth more than those done with reproduction stuff. I don't think building restorations are any different.

[shortlived]

Public Works is going to be adding on the the former Bank of Montreal in Ottawa, which will be used for ceremonial events and large Parliament meeting. The problems seems to be which is the stone going to come from. Public Works has okayed it coming from Indiana but the original stone is from Queenston Ont. Experts say it should be done with the stone from Queesnston but PWs say the cost is too high and the owner of the quarry in Queenston says he never was asked about a bid??? What is going on with PW's, seems they can't get anything done without some kind of problem. There's avery good chance that the building will not look the same and d own the road another government may have to redo it it and like Mike Holmes says "Do it right" the first time. Thoughts?

The goods from Canada should be adjusted to account for taxes that will be paid back for the tender prices. It is clearly problematic if stone costs less to ship from 5x the distance.

Fixing up all these old buildings seems issued, unless it costs less than building new long lasting ones. They should just build out onto the River. They are basically buying old buildings then paying inordinate amounts to upkeep them. These pomp expenditures are just irresponsible when the government is a trillion dollars in debt and Canadians are languishing under personal debts. These upper class well to dos just don't get it. Not everyone can afford to dump money down the toilet into luxury.

Why not make cement block locally for a fraction of the cost? It is not a time for splurging in a trillion dollar debt economy. Wake the hell up!

This new meeting of big wigs under a wall of plain concrete can remind them of austerity.

There seems to be a handful of cement companies right in Ottawa like Nepean Cement Works, Jamrock and Cement Finishing Co.

This ties in with that, yah they spent millions on g20 housing for security staff.. yet they could have reused that in Ottawa and removed MP and senator living expenses.. but only the best for yourself right?

Get the stooges out of office, they are irresponsible with your money.

Edited February 28, 2013 by shortlived

[Topaz]

The point is, the owner of the Queenston quarry said he wasn't asked, so how can they say it's cheaper from the US? If it were your house and you were adding on, would you used the cheapest stone and not care about the looks or would you do it the same stone?

[Signals.Cpl]

The point is, the owner of the Queenston quarry said he wasn't asked, so how can they say it's cheaper from the US? If it were your house and you were adding on, would you used the cheapest stone and not care about the looks or would you do it the same stone?

Well if it was my house I would ask myself wether I need it to look all pretty and spend more money or if I could spend the money somewhere else to better my life. If the answer is that I need to or can afford to make my house all nice and pretty I will go ahead and do so otherwise I would concentrate on things that touch the lives of everyday Canadians instead of making things look nice for the political leadership.

I don't see any negatives other than the not so authentic look to the addition I would go with the cheaper source. At some point people will have to make decisions pretty quick rather than spending millions on determining where we will buy from and negate any savings by throwing the money in to the selection process.

[Wilber]

It comes down to what value do you put on your history. Do you want the real deal or a Disneyland immitation? The historical value of these buildings will not all be equal to everyone but this is not just some ordinary house.

[Mighty AC]

There is some value to doing it right...depending on the cost. The problem is they didn't ever contact the Canadian quarry to learn what the cost was going to be.

[g_bambino]

Public Works is going to be adding on the the former Bank of Montreal in Ottawa, which will be used for ceremonial events and large Parliament meeting. The problems seems to be which is the stone going to come from. Public Works has okayed it coming from Indiana but the original stone is from Queenston Ont. Experts say it should be done with the stone from Queesnston but PWs say the cost is too high and the owner of the quarry in Queenston says he never was asked about a bid??? What is going on with PW's, seems they can't get anything done without some kind of problem. There's avery good chance that the building will not look the same and d own the road another government may have to redo it it and like Mike Holmes says "Do it right" the first time. Thoughts? http://www.canada.com/news/ottawa/Public%2BWorks%2Bpicks%2Bcheaper%2BIndiana%2Blimestone%2Bformer%2BBank/8026003/story.html

Where the stone is sourced from is not automatically tied to its durability; the stone from Indiana may be just as long-lasting as anything from Queenston. As for the new addition looking not the same as the original bank building: are people expecting an exact replica? I imagine it will be a contemporary design, which is what makes the input from a heritage consultant odd, to me. It's a new building being added onto an older one. I note the architects aren't even mentioned, let alone quoted.

I wonder: had the decision been made the other way, would the headline have read: 'Public Works splurges on more expensive stone'?

[Wilber]

Why on earth would one add a contemporary addition to a historic building? There is no way you could do that to a building designated heritage where I live. It just wouldn't get approved.

Who cares what the headline read, What will people think of it 50 years from now? I can't ever remember regretting doing something right. I sure can't say that about not doing it.

[PIK]

Keep throwing the mud, maybe some day it will stick.

[guyser]

Keep throwing the mud, maybe some day it will stick.

No no, they need stone, not mud, ergo this thread.

[g_bambino]

Why on earth would one add a contemporary addition to a historic building? There is no way you could do that to a building designated heritage where I live. It just wouldn't get approved.

Because any attempt to mimic the original will end up just being a pastiche, at worst, dishonest, at best. Contemporary additions are made to historic buildings all the time; they speak the fact that there was an original buiding and the a new piece was added later and when; it's actually one of my favourite types of projects to work on. They're all over Toronto; an example in Ottawa is the Canadian Museum of Nature.

Any addition to a hertiate building is an alteration to the original, regardless of how that addition looks.

[shortlived]

There is some value to doing it right...depending on the cost. The problem is they didn't ever contact the Canadian quarry to learn what the cost was going to be.

You don't get tenders do you...

you don't contact businesses, you put out a tender, and they contact you... you need to pay attention to the government tenders avenues.

ex. http://www.merx.com/English/nonmember.asp?WCE=Show&TAB=1&State=1&hcode=DSmmOnl5zU6FVjU16CWLSQ%3D%3D

None the less I think this is problematic that businesses aren't aware, and don't know how to do business with government.

I do think though that doing some shopping around should occur.

[Hydraboss]

This is my favorite part

Frank Racioppo, owner of the Queenston quarry, said he wasn’t even
contacted for a quote. “I think there might have been some debate as to
whether I had the supply and I absolutely do.”

Racioppo, a lawyer
and real estate developer, sought out the competing firms and offered a
price of $545,000. He estimates that the Indiana price was about
$250,000 — a difference of $295,000. Due to operational changes, he says
he can now reduce his price to $375,000.

In the end, the Queenston quarry supplied a bid. About twice the price. Then he suddenly drops it to only 150% of the US bid.

Typical Canadian bullshit. "It's the government??? What a perfect opportunity to screw the taxpayers!!!"

[guyser]

Typical Canadian bullshit. "It's the government???

Except it isnt the Govt .

[Signals.Cpl]

Except it isnt the Govt .

On whose behalf is Public Works doing this?

[shortlived]

If this were the |US capital we all know it would be coming from Indiana.

Edited March 3, 2013 by shortlived

[Mighty AC]

You don't get tenders do you...

you don't contact businesses, you put out a tender, and they contact you... you need to pay attention to the government tenders avenues.

I understand tenders. However, the PW department commented on the cost of a bid that did not exist. How did they know it was too expensive, at the time, if a bid was never put forth and the department didn't contact them to solicit a bid? Edited March 4, 2013 by Mighty AC

[guyser]

On whose behalf is Public Works doing this?

Tendered out and then tenders go out from the Genl Contr to the public.

[Signals.Cpl]

Tendered out and then tenders go out from the Genl Contr to the public.

But my question is who is footing the bill? Is it the tax payers or a private funding? If it is paid for by tax payers it is the government and they did the right thing going cheaper if it is a privately funded project it is none of our business where they purchased their building materials from.

[shortlived]

But my question is who is footing the bill? Is it the tax payers or a private funding? If it is paid for by tax payers it is the government and they did the right thing going cheaper if it is a privately funded project it is none of our business where they purchased their building materials from.

No if it is government, public interest should be in mind, public interest is not only money but the economy in general.

One must remember buy america. sending $250,000 to the us is stilll 250k less for Canadians to spend. The expansion is 150% unneeded, they are already paying 250million for parliament upgrades. Including two new chambers. It is just senseless spending.

What they need to do is get better use of the land they already have. They are just spending money to spend money, there are government buildings that arn't even being used.

Edited March 5, 2013 by shortlived

[Topaz]

My concern is the look of it. If it were my house and there's was going to be a difference in looks and cost a little more, I'd pay more because down the road when it comes time to sell, buyers may not like the looks of it and either reduce the asking price or not buy it at all. In the article it said it would probably have to be re-done, so do it now with the matching stone,prices always more expensive in the future.

[Fletch 27]

My concern is the look of it. If it were my house and there's was going to be a difference in looks and cost a little more, I'd pay more because down the road when it comes time to sell, buyers may not like the looks of it and either reduce the asking price or not buy it at all. In the article it said it would probably have to be re-done, so do it now with the matching stone,prices always more expensive in the future.

HAve a look at the original building.. and tell me your suggestion wouldnt cost miilions and incur cost overruns.. And When have we sold a heritage building?