Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutExhibit 3ADDENDUM NO. 1 VIA: Electronic Notification RFQ #03-04-031 June 17, 2004 MASTER PLAN FOR COCONUT. GROVE WATERFRONT AND SPOIL ISLANDS PIease refer to the attachment for the Questions from prospective Proposers and the City's Answers to those Questions received before the stipulated due date. ALL OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE RFQ REMAIN THE SAME. SINCERELY, GLENN MARCOS, CPPB, DIRECTOR CHIEF PROCUREMENT OFFICER THIS ADDENDUM IS TO BE SIGNED AND DATED BY PROPOSERS AND SHOULD BE SUBMITTED AS PROOF OF RECEIPT WITH THE SUBMISSION OF RESPONSES. SIGNATURE: DATE: NAME OF FIRM: 6/29/2005 .yuuerWum Master Plan Coconut Grove Waterfront c Q #03-04-031 ADDENDUM # 1 MASTER PLAN FOR COCONUT GROVE WATERFRONT AND SPOIL ISLANDS RFQ #03-04-031 Please be advised the following questions were received pursuant to the RFQ. QI: Would you please clarify the area to be covered by the Successful Proposer? I heard a that it would cover the area from Peacock Park to Kennedy Park, including the Mooring Fields and Spoil Islands. Al: In addition to the scope of work reflected within the RFQ, please be advised the feasibility of a continuous bay walk from Kennedy Park south to Peacock Park is to be included and considered in scope of services to be performed by the Successful Proposer. Q2: What is the anticipated budget for this master planning exercise? While an exact budget may not be available, a general estimate would provide the proposing teams with a better understanding of the consultants that might be needed and the level of effort anticipated by the City. A2: There is no anticipated budget. Design fees will be negotiated with the highest ranking team. Q3: According to the RFQ, the above referenced project is a M/WBE set -aside. Our firm is MBE certified with the State of Florida. Will we be eligible for this project? A3: You are mistaken as to your interpretation of the requirements of this RFQ. The RFQ does not specify it to be a set -aside, nor does the Successful Proposer have to be MWBE certified. The RFQ speaks of consideration during the evaluation phase should the Proposer be certified as MWBE. All firms are welcome to submit a Response to the RFQ. Q4: We plan to submit as a prime proposer, however, can you confirm for me whether or not our consultants are also required to fill out the Respondent Forms in Section 7? Also, are the sub -consultants required to submit a 254 or just a 255 form? The last paragraph of page 32 states: "Proposer must clearly reflect in its Proposal any Sub -Consultants proposed to be utilized, and provide for the Sub -Consultant the same information required of the Consultant." Please clarify — does this include M/WBE certification, occupational license requirement, and forms such as the local office location affidavit? A4: Forms 254 and 255 are to be completed by both the primary Proposer and all sub - consultants. As to Respondent Forms listed in Section 7, they should be completed only by the actual "Proposer," which is the primary Proposer. Occupational licenses, if 2 Addendum Master Plan Coconut Grove Waterfront RFQ #03-04-031 applicable and available, should also be provided. Please also refer to Questions 12 and 13 regarding MWBE and local preference issues. Q5: Will you make available copies of the Sign -In Sheets of the Mandatory Pre -Proposal Meeting? A5: Yes. The Sign -In Sheets for those who attended the Mandatory Pre -Proposal Conference held June 14, 2004 are attached as part of this Addendum. Q6: Will each of our sub -consultants be required to be included in the City's vendor database and represent each of the commodity codes listed on the cover of the RFQ? A6: No. Q7: Will the estimated number of hours to be undertaken by each proposed Project Manager and/or Team member be evaluated based on the number of "man hours" proposed for each, i.e., the more the man-hours proposed, the higher the evaluation? A7: No, not in and of itself. The City will consider each Response in its entirety, and is seeking to ensure that each of the evaluation factors are considered. The City further seeks assurances that those individuals included in a Proposal will, in fact, participate in the work to be performed if awarded a contract. During contract negotiations with the Successful Proposer, the proposed number of hours for the Project Manager and/or Project Team member will be a relevant factor in this engagement. Q8: Will the public have input into the Master Plan once a Successful Proposer is selected? AS: Yes. The RFQ requires the Successful Proposer conduct a number of meetings with members of the community, including on the weekend. Q9: Please refer to Section II Scope of Services, subsections 3.03, 3.04 and 3.06. Are the headings for each of these correct? A9: No. Instead, the headings for these paragraphs of the scope of services should be modified to reflect the following: Omit/delete section 3.03, as it is the same text body as section 3.04. Under Task III, retain and consider the work to be performed pursuant to subsections 3.01, 3.02, 3.04, 3,05, and 3.06 as that information is correct. Q10: The RFQ does not specifically state what categories of sub -consultants are needed other than what can be derived from the Scope of Services. What sub -consultants are required? A10: It will be the prime consultant's responsibility to select and assemble the Provider Team of consultants as necessary pursuant to the scope of services. 3 Addendum Master Plan Coconut Grove Waterfront RFQ #03-04-031 Q11: Did the "prime" consultant who will lead the team have to attend the pre -proposal meeting if one of the Prime's key consultants / team members did attend the meeting? Or did the Prime consultant necessarily have to attend the pre -proposal meeting in order to be considered for this project? Al 1: The prime consultant must have attended the Mandatory Pre -Proposal meeting. Q12: If the Proposer's lead firm is not an M/WBE, is there a threshold of M/WBE participation by an eligible sub -consultant that will permit the Proposer to earn the 2.5 points available for satisfying the " M/WBE " clause? Al2: No. For Proposers seeking M/WBE consideration in the evaluation process, the Prime Consultant (Proposer) must be certified and submit proof of certification by the City of Miami, State of Florida, Miami -Dade County School Board or Miami -Dade County as an M/WBE with the Proposal submission. Q13: If the Proposer's lead firm is not local, is there a threshold of local participation by an eligible sub -consultant that will permit the Proposer to earn the 2.5 points available for satisfying the "local preference" clause? A13: No. For Proposers seeking local consideration in the evaluation process, the Prime Consultant (Proposer) must maintain a business location within the corporate limits of the City of Miami and shall submit as proof a City of Miami Occupational License and the Local Office Location Affidavit Form 7.4. Q14: The City's MBE goal appears to be 51°/0 .. , is it the City's intent to somehow meet this goal on a master planning project? If not, what is the City's official position on MBE and how will the MBE issue be weighted in the Selection Process? These MBE goals suggest that if the Prime Consultant is not an MBE firm, then that prime firm is limited to 49% of the fee with 51% of the work going to MBE firms. This translates into the Prime being paid 49% of the fee and yet being responsible for 100% of the work performed. Please clarify. A14: It is the goal of the City to award at least 51% of the City's total annual dollar volume of all expenditures for all goods and services, to Black, Hispanic and Women minority business enterprises. The goal of achieving 51% M/WBE participation is a fixed amount. As this is a goal, the City expects the Consultant(s) to make their best effort to achieve this goal. In an effort to meet this goal, the City will provide 2.5 points in the evaluation process to Certified M/WBE Prime Consultants (Proposers) who submit proposals in response to the RFQ. Q15: I would like to know if the City has a web -site showing the companies that have the Commodity Code mentioned in the RFQ? 4 Addendum Master Plan Coconut Grove Waterfront RFQ #03-04-03I A15: Please be advised the use of a number of commodity codes was an attempt by the City to notify as many firms as possible via the commodity code vehicle. However, there is no mandate by the City to use City -registered firms, or only firms who have utilized these commodity codes for the provision of services. The City, for its internal use, has an internal database of firms not accessible outside the City network. However, any firm or individual can go to http://www.ci.miami.fl.us/Procurement/, view those outstanding solicitations and those firms who have each downloaded the RFQ document by going to "Current Bid Holders" on a per solicitation basis. Q16: Who is going to be the Prime? A16: The prime is the primary Proposer submitting a Response, the Proposer who is responsible for its Team and Project Manager, and the entity with whom the City will contract. Q17: Under Tab 3, Page 29, "Qualifications and Experience of Proposer", proposers are requested to submit their qualifications and experience related specifically to waterfront urban design, landscape architecture, and planning, including an emphasis on open space and conceptualization of a Master Plan that integrates the waterfront. Under Tab 4, page 30, "Qualifications and Experience of the Project Team", proposers are requested again to demonstrate their experience in waterfront landscape architecture, urban design, marine/coastal environmental analysis, economic expertise, and creation of a Master Plan. Under Tab 5, page 31, Previous Similar Projects", proposers are requested to submit information regarding similar project experience as well. Are proposers required to submit the similar project information in each section as outlined in the RFP? A17: Yes. The RFQ is seeking qualifications and experience of the Proposer, each of the Project Team members, and the Project Manager. The information may be similar or it may be different, depending upon the project and the composition of that project's team per past project. Q18: Do proposers need to submit just a SF-254 under Tab 3 or submit a SF-254 in addition to all the listed information in the section? A18: Tab 3 asks for qualifications and experience of the Proposer itself. Proposers should respond and provide all requested information for evaluation purposes, in addition to the completed SF-254. Proposers will be evaluated based upon the information provided in response to the information requested, in addition to the completed SF-254. Q19: Is Tab 4 asking for just the SF-255 or do proposers have to submit additional information along with a completed SF-255? A19: Tab 4 asks for qualifications and experience of the Project Team members and/or Project Manager. Proposers should respond and provide all requested information for evaluation 5 Addendum Master Plan Coconut Grove Waterfront RFQ #03-04-031 purposes, in addition to the completed SF-255. Proposers will be evaluated based upon the information provided in response to the information requested, in addition to the completed SF-255. Q20: Do proposers have to submit their responses to this RFQ as tabbed under the "Contents of Qualification Statement" section? A20: Proposers should respond and provide its qualifications and experience as requested in Section V and in the order requested. 6