HomeMy WebLinkAboutRFP - 8220 STATE OF THE RIVER REPORTAddendum 1 – 8220 State of the River Report Page 1 of 5
ADDENDUM NO. 1
SPECIFICATIONS AND CONTRACT DOCUMENTS
Description of BID RFP 8220: State of the River Report
OPENING DATE: 3:00 PM (Our Clock) February 9, 2016
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 Ed Bonnette, CPPB, CPM, Senior Buyer at (970) 416-2247 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 1 – 8220 State of the River Report Page 2 of 5
EXHIBIT 1 – QUESTIONS & ANSWERS
1) Which of the following indicators and metrics, as presented within the City of Fort Collins
River Health Assessment Framework (2015), will our team evaluate as a component of
Task 2 (Data Collection)?
Indicators Metrics
To Be Evaluated in
Task 2 (Y/N?)
Flow
regime
Peak flow N
Base flows N
Rate of change N
Sediment
Land erosion Y
Channel erosion Y
Transport Y
Water
quality
Temperature N
Nutrients N
pH N
Dissolved oxygen N
Floodplain
connectivity
Extent N
Saturation duration N
Riparian
condition
Vegetation structure and complexity Y
Habitat connectivity Y
Contributing area Y
Debris
Large wood Y
Detritus Y
River form
Planform Y
Dimension Y
Profile Y
Channel
resilience
Dynamic equilibrium Y
Channel recovery Y
Physical
structure
Coarse scale Y
Fine scale Y
Aquatic and
Riparian
Wildlife
Aquatic insects Y ( a few sample sites)
Native fish N
Trout N
Aquatic habitat connectivity N
Birds N
Addendum 1 – 8220 State of the River Report Page 3 of 5
Answer:
2) Will all remaining data not collected as a component of RFP 8220 be provided to our
team (selected contractor) for assimilation under Task 3 (Data Analysis) and/or Task 4
(Report Development)?
Answer:
3) Under Section 4.0 (Submittal Requirements) Subsection 3.0 (List of Project Personnel),
are the professional and technical staff resumes included within the 10-page submittal
limit?
Answer:
4) Does the City have a target cost estimate for the work? Or a budget ceiling? Given that
the scope is somewhat open-ended in terms of sampling intensity, it would be very
helpful to know a ballpark estimate or sense of scale for what the City is hoping to see
from potential contractors.
Answer:
5) The River Heath Assessment Framework divides the river into four segments: Canyon,
Transition, Urban, and Warm. It is not clear from the RFP whether data collection would focus
on the Urban segment or include all for segments of the river. Could you provide more detail
about the sampling intensity you expect for each of the four segments?
Addendum 1 – 8220 State of the River Report Page 4 of 5
Answer:
6) The RFP includes a few specifics on the amount of time expected. For Task 1, it is estimates that
the contractor should expect ~10 hours of meeting time. For Task 2, the expected field time is
~6-7 days. Should the meeting time listed under Task 1 be viewed as the time needed to meet
with the City? Or as the time needed for meetings in general to carry out all elements of Task 1?
In our reading of the RFP, the project team would need much more than 10 hours of meetings
to carry out that phase of the project in general, but perhaps 10 hours of meeting directly with
City staff. Should the field time listed under Task 2 be viewed as 6-7 person days all together, or
6-7 days for each discipline expert on the team (vegetation, hydro/geomorphology, aquatic
insects), which would equal more like 15-20 total field days?
Answer:
7) Is there an incumbent that has conducted similar work for the City other than EcoMetrics?
Answer:
8) The RFQ discusses “defined reaches” to conduct the ecological assessment for, but then does
not go into more detail. Please define these reaches. Do these reaches correspond to the eight
reaches in the ERM, or to the river sections in the RHAF?
Addendum 1 – 8220 State of the River Report Page 5 of 5
Answer:
9) The RFQ requests that proposals provide at least 3 references for similar projects in the
Qualifications and Experience section of the submittal (#2) as well as in the project personnel
section (#3) – personnel resumes. Are references needed both for companies presenting similar
projects and also as personnel references?
Answer:
No. We are primarily interested in seeing that the personnel that the vendor will have
working on our project have relevant experience on projects similar to ours. If they
are a relative newcomer to your organization who has not participated in three similar
projects while at your firm, then it is good if they can briefly tell us if they’ve done
similar work in their previous career stops.