The County of Trinity, Department of Transportation (DOT), Administrative Division is soliciting Statements of Qualifications (SOQ) from qualified firms to provide comprehensive Environmental, Architectural, and Engineering (A/E) Services for the new Sheriff’s Detention Facility (TCSDF)
The TCSDF will be located at 701 Tom Bell Road, Weaverville, CA 96093. The resulting contract from this solicitation will be administered by the Trinity County Department of Transportation, Engineering Division, which is responsible for delivery of capital improvement projects on behalf of Trinity County.
After evaluating all SOQ's submitted, the County will establish a short list of two to three qualified firms and interview those firms. The short listed firms will be requested to submit a proposal that will consist of the approach to design, scope of work, and sealed cost proposal. The Project Selection Team (PST) will review the proposals and hold an interview of the short listed firms. The firm deemed most qualified at the conclusion of the interviews will be asked to commence negotiation with the County of Trinity regarding the contract terms. If a fee cannot be negotiated with the first ranked firm, then the second ranked firm will be selected to negotiate a fee. The firm with a successfully negotiated fee will be recommended to the County of Trinity Board of Supervisors for approval.
This project will be funded by the Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC), SB 863 Adult Local Criminal Justice Facilities Construction Program.
Award of the A/E contract is contingent upon continued receipt of awarded BSCC program funds. Trinity County reserves the right to reject all proposals.
Statements of Qualifications are due: 4:00p.m., Pacific Daylight Time, April 18, 2016
SOQ's may not be delivered by facsimile transmission or by other telecommunication or electronic means.
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
Q1. Within Section I Background, Item F of the RFQ, it is noted that the CM will provide construction inspection. Please note that a Construction Management firm does not do inspections or are typically certified to perform theses. They would help manage the construction process but the county would need to contract daily inspections and special inspections with a certified/licensed individual or firm. An example would be full time masonry or steel. Please clarify intent.
A1. Approximately six months prior to the project entering the construction phase, the County intends to hire a CM firm to help manage the construction process. It is intended that this firm will employ the right people to oversee the project, and the hire or sub with others to provide construction services as requested. Further, the CM firm will be responsible for providing a constructability review prior to the plans being deemed bid ready.
Q2. Within Section I Background, Item G of the RFQ, it is noted that the selected A/E will provide limited services during construction. As noted above, the selected CM is to help manage the construction process but will not take liability or responsibility for the construction documents, typically does not take responsibility for substitutions, RFI’s, etc. The A/E needs to be involved during construction to administer the construction phase for liability, insurance requirements, continuity of design intent, operational requirements, material/systems adherence, etc. In addition, by code the structural engineer of record needs to observe construction. Please clarify intent.
A2. A/E will remain as the “A/E in responsible charge.” The CM firm will be responsible for the overall planning, coordination, and control of a project during the construction phase with the intent of representing the County to ensure quality, process, and cost control. The relationship between the A/E and CM will be critical and will continue through to the end.
Q3. For Section II Minimum Qualifications; Please note that very few AB900 projects are actually completed and SB1022 are still in design or just starting construction. We are aware of only one small or medium sized county project actually completed. In addition, only three SB81 projects are actually completed and these are Juvenile. If this requirement is a minimum, requiring adult completed projects will extremely limit the number of firms that can actually submit/qualify. Will the county consider changing this requirement to adult State Lease Revenue Bond Funded (BSCC) projects in design or construction?
A3. BSCC reference was only intended to give an indication of the size of facility we wanted to see submitted with the SOQ.
Q4. Within Scope, Item D of the RFQ basic services; firms are to include a roofing consultant? For a new project of this size it is not customary for a roofing consultant to be a part of the consultant team. Typically you will find roofing consultants brought on board for renovation and roof replacement projects. Please clarify intent.
A4. Scope, Item D shall read: The Basic Services could include, but are not limited to:
Q5. Please clarify if Trinity County will be directly hiring the services of surveying and geotechnical engineering?
A5. No, this will be a function of the A/E Firm selected.
Q6. Is it the county’s intent to have the A/E team hire a biologist and other appropriate professionals to conduct botanical surveys, bat acoustical surveys, etc.? These are specialty services that are typically hired directly by the county and not under the A/E insurance provider. Can these services be potentially negotiated after award considering the County is requesting fees as part of the final interview?
A6. This would be considered a part of the permitting/environmental work performed by the A/E’s environmental specialist. County’s current On Call Environmental Firms are Enplan and North State Resources both out of Redding, but the County desires the A/E firm to incorporate this service into the A/E team.
Q7. Please confirm that the construction of a northbound left-turn lane on State Route 3 at the intersection of Tom Bell Road will not occur as a part of this project? It is highly unlikely these off-site improvements would be allowed to be funded within the State Lease Revenue Bond financing anyways. In addition, this road improvement would dramatically impact the limited project funding.
A7. It is not part of this proposal, but it will continue to be a mitigating measure for the jail. Design will be coordinated independently.
Q8. Please confirm that the construction of an offsite emergency access road, as described in the Project Description of the Curt Babcock (Department of Fish and Wildlife) authored letter dated April 15, 2015, will not be a part of this project?
A8. It will be part of the onsite work for the project, and a responsibility of the Engineer preparing the Engineering Site Plans.
Q9. Item 1-4 of the Curt Babcock (Department of Fish and Wildlife) authored letter dated April 15, 2015 notes the black tailed deer winter range, but this is not noted as a mitigation measure.
A9. This would be considered a part of the permitting/environmental work.
Q10. Please clarify the duration of construction. A project of this size should not require 30 months of construction but rather a duration similar to 17-18 months with another 30 days for transition period.
A10. It is an estimate, considering potential weather or wildlife considerations. It is to represent that the County seeks a quality project, and while there is a desire to complete this expeditiously, it is not necessarily seeking to accelerate construction through additional incentives.
Q11. I was just looking over the RFQ for A/E services for the Sheriff’s Detention Facility and it mentioned a potential RFQ/P for construction management services and I was hoping to get a ballpark estimate (Q1;Q21-2017) on when the CM RFQ/P may be released.
A11. See Answer 1.
Q12. It looks like it may still be a ways out. I am not looking for a RFO so much at this point as much as just trying to get a sense of the potential timing on the CM RFP. Oftentimes it is just prior to the commencement of construction but I have also seen where the CM team is brought in a bit earlier to assist in the design and constructability aspects of the project. I just didn’t know where you anticipate the CM would enter the process.
A12. See Answer 1.