Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSynopsis of Evaluation Committee MeetingTOPOGRAPHICAL SURVEY SERVICES -MIAMI STREETCAR CORRIDOR PROJECT NO. B-71215G RFQ NO. 05-06-038 SYNOPSIS OF EVALUATION COMMITTEE MEETING The following is a synopsis of the findings of the Evaluation Committee: Manuel G. Vera & Associates Overall, Vera presented the best oral presentation and was most prepared to respond to the committee's questions. Vera clearly showed the highest familiarity with the project area and constraints and issues that may arise. Their approach showed a thorough understanding of the City's survey requirements. Vera commented that their firm has the resources to perform the majority of the work in-house and that the Project Manager had extensive experience in the city. A sub -consultant will perform the utility investigation under their leadership. Their workload will not impact the on -time delivery of the project. The firm's principal and Project Manager indicated that their firm has never asked for supplemental funding to complete a job. Marlin Engineering, Inc. Marlin submitted a well written proposal. The committee members stated that Marlin was a close second to Vera, the highest ranked proposer. The team members are highly knowledgeable of the City's survey requirements. Marlin was the only firm that indicated that they would conduct the survey during day time rather than evening hours and did not recommend the use of the 3-D scanning technology. Upon further questioning, the team stated that, if needed, they would be able to perform the survey in the evening. Marlin was the only team that proposed a separate survey firm as a sub consultant. Craig A. Smith & Associates (CAS) CAS emphasized their capability to use the most cutting edge technology, 3-D scanning for the topographical survey and radar tomography for the utility investigation. However, in response to identifying the Project Manager, the committee was still of the opinion that the point of contact would not be local and would not be as readily accessible as required for the complex survey. ConsulTech, Surveying & Mapping, Inc. The team of ConsulTech was not prepared for the oral presentation. ConsulTech did not have a clear and systematic approach to the project nor knowledge of the project issues and constraints. When asked comparable project experience, the team provided few examples and a current job for a parking facility that may not be relevant to the Streetcar Topographical Survey. The team did not address the project component of utility location and mentioned a sub -consultant only after follow-up questions by the committee. The identified Project Manager was not familiar with the organizational chart in the submitted proposal and project schedule, and was incorrect in the response to utility coordination. In response to the committee's request for consistency on the survey field crews, the Project Manager did not provide a commitment for consistency. The field crew would be run out of Miramar. The firm offered to perform the survey work in the evenings and weekend in order to avoid traffic congestion and increase safety.