Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRFP - 8073 ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR WATER, WASTEWATER & STORMWATER FACILITIES CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECTS (3)Addendum 3 8073 Engineering Services for Water, Wastewater & Stormwater Facilities Capital Improvements Page 1 of 4 ADDENDUM NO. 3 SPECIFICATIONS AND CONTRACT DOCUMENTS Description of RFP 8073: Engineering Services for Water, Wastewater & Stormwater Facilities Capital Improvements OPENING DATE: 3:00 PM (Our Clock) March 9, 2015 To all prospective bidders under the specifications and contract documents described above, the following changes/additions are hereby made and detailed in the following sections of this addendum: Exhibit 1 – Questions & Answers Please contact Pat Johnson, CPPB, Senior Buyer at (970) 221-6816 with any questions regarding this addendum. RECEIPT OF THIS ADDENDUM MUST BE ACKNOWLEDGED BY A WRITTEN STATEMENT ENCLOSED WITH THE BID/QUOTE STATING THAT THIS ADDENDUM HAS BEEN RECEIVED. Financial Services Purchasing Division 215 N. Mason St. 2nd Floor PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6775 970.221.6707 fcgov.com/purchasing Addendum 3 8073 Engineering Services for Water, Wastewater & Stormwater Facilities Capital Improvements Page 2 of 4 EXHIBIT 1 – QUESTIONS & ANSWERS Q1. The RFP states the use 8.5 x 11 pages only in the proposal. However, proposers may have a need to include figures in the proposal submittal similar to those in the RFP or potentially reproducing those RFP figures in the proposal. Would it be acceptable to allow for two 11x17 pages for figures in the submittal? A1. Five (5) 11x17 pages will be allowed in the proposal response. Q2. Many of the items to be addressed in our proposal were previously addressed in our response to the Request for Information (RFI) submitted last month. We assume that you want the Proposal to be a stand-alone document and not reference the previously submitted response. Correct? Will our responses to the RFI factor into the selection process? A2. Responses to the RFP should be independent of responses to the RFI, these are two separate processes. The responses to the RFI were not evaluated and therefore will not factor in to the evaluation of the RFP. Q3. Regarding the items to be included in the Submittal Response, items B. 7 and G. 1. are very similar and both are related to references. Is it your intent that we should submit two sets of references, one for projects completed by the consulting firm and one for individuals if their experience is not with their current employer? A3. B.7. is for reference checks and would include the same information as B.6., plus the reference contact information – for 3 projects only, completed in the past 5 years. These projects would be similar in scope and using similar staff as those proposed in response to the Scope of Work in this RFP. We are looking for individual references in G.1. Firms may have personnel that would bring experience to this Agreement based on their work at a previous company or they may have worked solely with a client under an agreement with the current firm. Q4. Our approach and fees for any project are somewhat influenced by the anticipated schedule (primarily true, if an accelerated schedule is needed to meet construction or funding constraints). What general timeframe should we assume for the two sample projects? A4. For purposes of this RFP, you do not need to assume an accelerated schedule. Use the information provided to develop your fee schedule and timeline. State your assumptions. Q5. Regarding the two sample projects, should we assume that you would like to see our fees from the project conception through submittal of Record Drawings after completion of construction, or are you looking for just the design phase? A5. For purposes of this RFP, your fee schedule should reflect your services from conceptual design through the completion of construction. Q6. Are there records available for review demonstrating the condition of the existing waterlines on Howes and the existing stormsewer on Myrtle? Addendum 3 8073 Engineering Services for Water, Wastewater & Stormwater Facilities Capital Improvements Page 3 of 4 A6. For purposes of the RFP, no additional information will be available. Use the information provided to develop your fee and approach. State your assumptions Q7. Regarding the Mulberry Riverside Storm Sewer, paragraph C.7.b. on page 6 describes a proposed outfall pipe into the Locust Street Water Quality Pond. Could you make the plans available for that pond? A7. Plans will not be made available for the RFP. Q8. The RFP notes, “The selected Service Provider shall be expected to sign the City’s standard Agreement without revision prior to commencing Services (see sample attached to this Proposal).” Is the City willing to entertain minor modifications to the Agreement? If so, should this be enclosed with the proposal or postponed during negotiations should the consultant be selected? A9. Minor modifications may be identified in your proposal response as exemptions to the Agreement. The City will consider them, however it is preferred that the Agreement be signed without revision. Q9. On page 6, Item C.7.a., the RFP states, “The existing water system in Howes St. contains 3300 lineal feet of 4” CI and 4000 lineal feet of 6” CI waterline that is approaching a century old. (See attached Figure 1).” Per our review of the GIS maps provided, it appears that the 4” line is 4,000 and the 6” line is 3,300. Is this discrepancy correct? A9. Approximately 4,000 LF of 4” and 3,300 LF of 6” is correct. Q10. Under Section III, A (Executive Summary) can you please clarify your definition of “the program”. A10. The “program” would be how your firm intends to respond to the Scope of Work in the RFP. Q11. Under Section III, can you please clarify the difference in information that you’re requesting for items B.6 and B.7? A11. In B.6., we are requesting a general list of all projects completed by your firm over the past 5 years. Should this be a larger number of projects for your firm and many pages please provide all projects completed in the past 3 years. B.7. is for reference checks and would include the same information as B.6., plus the reference contact information – for 3 projects only, completed in the past 5 years. These projects would be similar in scope and using similar staff as those proposed in response to the Scope of Work in this RFP. Q12. Under Section III, G.1 can you please clarify what information you’re requesting pertaining to individual references for key personnel and if this applies to all key personnel, including subs, listed in the response to the RFP? A12. We are looking for individual references in G.1. Firms may have personnel that would bring experience to this Agreement based on their work at a previous company or they may have worked solely with a client under an agreement with the current firm. The projects could be in the list from B.6. Q13. On item 4 are paper drawings acceptable in place of Mylar? Addendum 3 8073 Engineering Services for Water, Wastewater & Stormwater Facilities Capital Improvements Page 4 of 4 A13. Stamped mylar’s are expected at the completion of construction Q14. For item 7, will the resident engineer need to be in your office 5 days a week or can they work part of the time from our office? A14. Resident engineering service will vary for each project. It could be expected that the resident engineer will need to be on-site for a couple of hours a week, part- time, or full-time. Q15. III.G.1. Individual references are required for prime consultant and sub-consultant’s ‘key personnel’. How far into the team are you expecting this level of staff information? For instance, is it sufficient to supply the requested key personnel information for the project manager, task leaders, Sr. project engineers, and special experts; or should we take this to staff engineers and CADD technicians? Q15. It is sufficient to provide resumes for the project manager, task leaders, Sr. project engineers, and special experts. Q16. III.B.6 – Is it the intent with the beginning price and ending price to be total project cost or engineering consultant cost? A16. Engineering consultant cost