ADDENDUM NUMBER ONE Clarifications

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "ADDENDUM NUMBER ONE Clarifications"

Trevor Stephens
6 years ago
Views:

1 August 25, 2017 ADDENDUM NUMBER ONE Clarifications RE: Interdisciplinary Science and Technology Building VII (ISTB 7) Request for Qualifications No. CMAR Total pages in this addendum: Five (5) The Pre-Submittal Conference Presentation power point is incorporated into the RFQ Scope (separate attachment on bid board). Please note the following questions were submitted prior to the deadline for inquiries date of 08/21/17 at 5:00 P.M., MST. 1. Q. This project requires some additional forms (supplemental forms) that I have not completed before. Can you verify that this is correct? A. Supplemental Requirements will be required from the awarded firm. The supplemental forms do not need to be included in your RFQ submittal package. 2. Q. Following a submission of the RFQ, what will be the next stage of the procurement process (e.g., financial tender, design competition, etc)? A. Selection Process is outlined in General Information & Instructions on the forms board following DP(CM@RISK) Single Agreement, Forms and RFQ Information 3. Q. Should we include a local executive architect on our team, or can this be added at a later date? A. Your RFQ submittal must include this information. Reference General Information & Instructions located at this link following DP(CM@RISK) Single Agreement, Forms and RFQ Information Part V: General Instructions, License in Arizona. 4. Q. I note the requirement in Section 4 for a number of attached forms. I have checked the specified website and I can only find some of the forms. A. All forms are under the heading: DP(CM@RISK) Single Agreement, Forms and RFQ Information at this link 1

2 5. Q. Could the University provide a list of the pre-submittal conference attendees? A. The pre-submittal conference attendee list and all information for this RFQ are posted on the ASU bid board: 6. Q. Is it acceptable for a firm to submit a proposal with the intention of choosing a local architectural firm to partner with, in collaboration with the University, should we be successful? A. Your RFQ submittal must include this information, per General Information & Instructions located at this link following DP(CM@RISK) Single Agreement, Forms and RFQ Information 7. Q. Does the cover letter count towards the 20 page limit? 8. Q. Would imagery and a small amount of text on tabs be considered a page? 9. Q. Will commissioning services be procured as a separate RFQ or will that be included as part of the design team? A. ASU s preference is to have a third party commissioning agent. 10. Q. (Pre-Submittal Conference): During the pre-proposal conference, it was stated that the presentation slides would be posted online for further viewing. Can you please confirm when this information will be made available? A. The pre-submittal presentation and all information for this RFQ will be posted on the ASU bid board: Q. (Part II section 2): Does ASU currently have a more detailed program or project brief other than that stated on the RFQ (page 6 of 13)? If so, will this information be shared with the DP bidders prior to award? A. All information available is in the RFQ and addenda. There is no additional programmatic information available at this point. 12. Q. (Part II section6): On the Project Schedule (page 8 of 13), it appears the date stated for 100% Design Development and GMP is out of sequence or a typo. Can you please confirm the correct date? A. 100% Design Development and GMP 02/16/18 is revised to: Q. (Part III section 4): In section 4 (page13 of 13), it states that by submitting a response to the RFQ, DP acknowledge and agree to all terms and conditions of the Standard Form Agreement, however in Part IV Selection Process it states that negotiation of the contract will take place. Can you confirm that the selected Design Professional will have an opportunity to negotiate specific terms, such as cap on liability, copyright, etc? A. Negotiation of the contract would occur with selected design professional and address defining the scope of work, timeframe of the work, and pricing. 2

3 14. Q. During the Pre-Submittal Conference on August 15th, Ed Soltero mentioned that the presentation given during the conference would be posted on the Construction / Facilities Bid Board. Can you please confirm when this will be posted? A. The pre-submittal presentation and all information for this RFQ will be posted on the ASU bid board: Q. Can you please clarify the Estimated Project Schedule dates provided in the RFQ? For example, the 100% Design Development and GMP completion date is in February 2018, while the Schematic Design completion date is in April 2018)? A. See answer to question no. 12. Please refer to revised scheduled posted as part of the presubmittal presentation on the ASU bid board: Q. Part 3, Section 1, Point 3: Client References Client references are noted as a submission requirement within Section 1, which would be within the 20-page limit. Client references are then listed again in Section 4, Attachment 3. Is it acceptable to only include the full client references within Section 4, Attachment 3 and not within Section 1? A. Yes. 17. Q. Part 3, Section 2, Point 5: Sub-consultants In assembling our team, we have assumed ASU will retain a surveyor, geotechnical engineer and commissioning agent directly. Are there other consultants that ASU will retain directly? 18. Q. Per the DP (CM@RISK) RFQ General Information & Instructions under page 6 of 13, Arizona Office, please elaborate on any specific requirements about the nature of a relationship between Architects, including: may either party act as Architect of Record? Must certain scopes of service be performed by one or the other party? Must professional design fees be split in any prescribed manner? A. There are no specific requirements for the nature of the relationship other than what is outlined in the General Information & Instructions located at this link following DP(CM@RISK) Single Agreement, Forms and RFQ Information 19. Q. Please confirm that a letter-sized, double-sided portrait format submission is the preferred format and orientation. A. Reference Part III: Proposal Format and Contents, Page 9 of the RFQ. 20. Q. Per RFQ page 7, Items 3, 4: Item 3 states that the Historical Preservation review will be over the counter. However, Item 4 states no Historic Preservation issues are anticipated. Please clarify, particularly given that in the Pre-Proposal meeting, mention was made of the waterway on site having potential historic value to indigenous populations. A. ASU Historic Preservation/Archaeological staff will address any issues pertaining to the historic waterway on the site. 3

4 21. Q. Per RFQ Page 7, Item 5, please clarify what specific project costs are included and/or excluded in the Estimated Project Budget target of $175M. This items include design team fees; permitting and approval costs; all regulatory and outreach costs associated with the light rail and pedestrian bridge, other site improvements and/or enabling projects; FF&E, etc. What is the anticipated Construction Cost (aka hard cost ) for the 258K GSF? A. ASU typically commences project design with a 70% hard cost to 30% cost ratio. At this point, the construction cost is slated at approximately $122.5M. 22. Q. Please elaborate on the work completed by ASU liaising with regulatory authorities with regards to, individually, the pedestrian bridge spanning University Avenue and ISTB-7 spanning the light rail right-of-way. Please elaborate on what role(s) is/are anticipated for the Design Professional vis-à-vis public outreach and regulatory approval? Please elaborate on to what extent these efforts are already accommodated in the Estimated Project Schedule. A. ASU has begun discussions with all regulatory authorities on issues pertaining to air rights, right-of-way intergovernmental agreements with Valley Metro and others. The selected design team will support ASU internal staff with design and construction documentation necessary to secure the appropriate agreements. The aforementioned support documentation will begin during the Project Definition phase and be completed by the end of the Schematic Design phase. 23. Q. Please elaborate on the qualitative allocations anticipated to be for assigned to this project and/or additional information on the program elements described in item 2 Project Description. A. A complete program addresses both the quantitative and qualitative aspects in support of a project design. We are expecting the proposing teams to determine and respond as to how they expect to address these. The Selection Committee will scrutinize this closely and determine which team best addressed such. 24. Q. Please elaborate on the anticipated funding source(s) for ISTB-7. A. ASU will provide funding for the project from different funding sources that will be finalized by the time it is presented to ABOR. 25. Q. Will ASU make publicly available, prior to the RFQ submission date, the excerpts of the planning study shown as part of the 8/15 Pre-Proposal meeting? A. There is no planning documentation other than that which was presented during the presubmittal session. 26. Q. Shall submissions list only the firm names of proposed subconsultants, or shall key personnel be listed individually? If the latter, shall the submission include brief biographies/resumes of those individuals? A. Both; key personnel with relevant experience will be scrutinized closely. While CVs are important, the Selection Committee is looking for relevant experience on project type. 27. Q. If a general contractor is submitted as a consultant to the design team, would that exclude the general contractor from being considered for the ISTB-7 CMAR contract? A. Yes. There is a vehicle for General Contractor selection as part of the CMAR selection 4

5 protocol. This RFQ is limited to design professionals. 28. Q. It is our understanding that the 20-page (single-sided) limitation applies to Sections 1 3, and that the cover letter falls outside of these sections and is therefore excluded from this limit. Please confirm. A. Yes. 29. Q. Was it intentional to ask us to include lab consultants (plural)? Would you like us to propose multiple lab consultants so that we can discuss preference at a later stage, and ultimately choose one together? A. Please include a lab consultant as deemed necessary for the project type. The Selection Committee will base its selection decision partly on the lab consultant included within the RFQ. 30. Q. Can you clarify that the workload chart should depict the percentage of time each individual will be devoted to this project compared to time the individual will devote when considering other projects/tasks in their workload? A. The Selection Committee wants to determine the amount devoted by each individual on the project milestones as illustrated on the table. The Planning Committee will require direct interface with the nominated individual throughout the specific milestone. 31. Q. It is our understanding that we should address the experience of each subconsultant, but do not need to list individual members of each of these firms. Please confirm. A. Please see response to Question Q. Do we need to show an experience matrix for our subconsultant team? A. This is up to the responding team. Please be advised that the Selection Committee will look closely at relevant experience. 33. Q. Is it ASU s intent to sign a contract for Phase 1 work only, and then, if the university is satisfied with the results of the DP s Phase 1 work, re-enter into negotiations for the Phase 2 design through construction work? ASU will sign a contract for the entire scope of the project, albeit with the right to terminate the consulting agreement upon review of the completeness and quality of the Project Definition phase. All other specifications, terms and conditions of the solicitation shall remain unchanged. NOTE: Please acknowledge your firms' receipt of this addendum in your bid on the Addendum Acknowledgement form. Gail Horney Gail Horney, Sr. Buyer Purchasing and Business Services Construction Group gail.horney@asu.edu 5

Page 1 of 2 AMENDMENT - REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ)

Page 1 of 2 Page 1 of 2 AMENDMENT - REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ) Amendment No. 2 RFQ No. 4018000166 COMPANY NAME AND ADDRESS (To be completed by Bidder) Project Name Construction Management Services