Loading...
01-04-2007 APPROVED 2-1-2007 SELECTION ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING OF THE CITY OF LAS CRUCES REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 4,2007 1:30 P.M. JOINT UTILITIES,CONFERENCE ROOM 213 A Regular Selection Advisory Committee Meeting was held on Thursday, January 4, 2007, at Joint Utilities, Conference Room 213, 680 Motel Blvd., Las Cruces,NM. MEMBERS PRESENT: Dr. Mark Sutter, Financial Services, Chairperson Brian Denmark, Facilities Mike Johnson, Public Works David Weir, Community Development Dr. Jorge Garcia, Utilities OTHERS PRESENT: John Tortelli, Purchasing Eric Martin, Facilities Tomas Mendez, Facilities Cathy Mathews, Facilities David Dollahon, Community Development Jerold Nachison, Community Development Pat Dominguez, Utilities Shelley Modell, Public Services Bill Strouse, Public Services Lori Grumet,Public Services STAFF ABSENT: Nora Jones, Purchasing 1. Call Meeting to Order. Dr. Sutter called the meeting to order at 8:33 a.m. 2. Review 06-07-187, Site Selection and Design for Meals on Wheels Central Kitchen. Mr. Martin,Mr. Dollahon,Ms. Modell, Mr. Strouse, and Mr.Nachison joined the committee as the user group. Mr. Dollahon gave a general overview, and then the committee gave general comments and suggestions before proceeding through the proposal page by page. Mr. Denmark had an issue on the site evaluation as stated on Page 2 in Paragraph C. Unless these facilities have something to do with the site selection of the central kitchen,they need to be deleted. After getting this issue clarified by Ms. Modell, Mr. Johnson recommended having a generic statement in that particular paragraph to say something like, "Consideration shall be given to existing city property." This way, you don't have to call out each of the sites. Another issue of concern that Mr. Denmark had was that we have had problems with the overuse of our facilities being heating and cooling and electrical service. We want to make sure service is increased or be"at capacity"for your facility. This is a functionality point of view. Language should be added to the proposal to reflect these concerns to say something • SELECTION ADVISORY COTEE MEETING APPROVED 2-1-2007 OF THE CITY OF LAS CRUCES JANUARY 4,2007 like, "...including design for future expansion." This will be added in Paragraph H in the Project Background section. PAGE 1 Paragraphs F and H will be combined. The words, "unless otherwise specified elsewhere in this document"at the end of Paragraph H will be deleted. Mr. Tortelli suggested changing the second sentence in Paragraph H to read, "For design purposes, do not assume all utilities including water, gas, sewer, electric, and communications are available at or are immediately adjacent to the site." PAGE 2 Mr. Denmark asked the user group to clarify site consideration. It needs to be made clear on what you want them to do. Dr. Sutter recommended changing the end of the first sentence in the second paragraph in Paragraph A to read,"...design of this project; such as site selection and design." The third sentence, Paragraph A, "Cost of construction is not a consideration for this RFP..." will be deleted. Mr. Denmark suggested to get into more detail as to what is meant as a central kitchen. It (, should indicate prep, assembly, storage, and delivery areas. There needs to be more detail in the second paragraph of Paragraph A so there is an understanding of what is trying to be accomplished. Mr. Dollahon suggested adding another paragraph in Paragraph A to explain how the Meals on Wheels program works, because for every person that we serve,they are getting two meals. In Paragraph B, in the second sentence,the words, "one at each proposed site"will be deleted. Mr. Tortelli suggested indicating in the cost proposal the number of meetings you want them to cost out in the basic proposal,and then you can have a supplemental cost that they can send you for any meeting after that that will be a pre-determined cost. This can be indicated in the cost proposal. We are not using it to evaluate the proposal, but we want to have that cost upfront so when we negotiate the contract,this will be on the base proposal. For other meetings above the four, give a cost per meeting. In Paragraph D,the first sentence was changed to read, "A report recommending a ranking of all sites evaluated shall be submitted." In the fourth sentence, Paragraph D, "staff'was changed to"City staff." Paragraph E will become part of Paragraph D, and all other paragraph letters will have to be changed. In Paragraph H,the second and third sentences will be deleted. 2 SELECTION ADVISORY COTTEE MEETING APPROVED 2-1-2007 OF THE CITY OF LAS CRUCES JANUARY 4,2007 Mr. Denmark suggested deleting all of the sites identified in Paragraph C and schedule a meeting with whomever you think would be appropriate to talk about a potential list of sites that you want them to look at once you get the contract awarded. This list will be provided to the proposer. PAGE 3 Paragraph J states that there will be one public hearing, so this brings the total number of public hearings to five public hearings. In the General Instructions, Paragraph B, Errors and Omissions, Dr. Sutter suggested having the proposer submit the certificate of insurance at the date that the proposal is submitted. We can change it to"will be in effect one week after the contract is signed." This way,they can add the cost into the proposal. If the proposer gets the contract,then they can go ahead and get the insurance. In Paragraph K, Paragraph 6,the"(100) sets"will be changed to"(25) sets." Mr. Denmark explained that you are not going to let them proceed with the design until you have the site nailed down, so this is Phase 1. Phase 11 will be the design itself. Phase III is going to be the construction. Paragraphs 5 and 6 under Paragraph K are based on Phase III of the project. This language needs to be clarified to the proposer that they will need to get clearance on the design before proceeding with items relating to Phase 11I. Mr. Tortelli will work with the user group regarding the phasing issues. If you want them to go to preliminary design all the way through construction and not include construction management, verbiage needs to be added in the proposal to clarify this issue. Mr. Tortelli said that you will be responsible all the way up until...so we don't have to answer that in the pre-bid meeting. The language in Paragraph L needs to be changed to reflect that this is part of Phase 1I1. PAGE 4 The sentence on top of Page 4 was changed to read, "...effect the date of the contract award." The last sentence in that paragraph will be deleted. Another sentence will be added to Paragraph C in the General Instructions section referring to Section 24, CFR 85-36. In Paragraph 3, language stating"in the last five years"will be added to the end of that paragraph. In Paragraph 4,the beginning of the first sentence will have verbiage added to say, "...completed by the firm in the last five years of a similar project type ..." In the Proposal Content, Paragraph B, a Paragraph 4 was added listing a public meeting number five. We will have a matrix for extra services for the cost proposal. Dr. Sutter had to leave for another meeting, so he turned the meeting over to the Vice-chairperson, Mr. Denmark, at 9:45 a.m. 3 • SELECTION ADVISORY COI'TEE MEETING APPROVED 2-1-2007 OF THE CITY OF LAS CRUCES JANUARY 4,2007 Dr. Garcia had another meeting to attend, so he left at 9:50 a.m. Ms. Dominguez replaced him for the remainder of the meeting. PAGE 5 No changes. PAGE 6 No changes. The proposal will not be coming back to the SAC. The committee went over all of the voting issues. MOTION: Mr.Johnson moved and Mr.Weir seconded to waive the deductions for equitable distribution of business and to waive the local preference. All ayes. Motion passed unanimously. The proposal will be advertised for four weeks. Interviews will be held. MOTION: Mr.Johnson moved and Mr.Martin seconded to waive cost as an evaluation factor. All ayes. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Dollahon, Ms. Modell,Mr. Strouse, and Mr.Nachison left the committee at this time. Mr. Martin stayed for the next agenda item as part of that user group. 3. Review RFP 06-07-189, City Center. Ms. Grumet,Mr. Mendez, and Ms. Mathews joined the committee as the user group. Mr. Johnson gave a brief overview, and then the committee went through the proposal nage by page. PAGE 1 The title of the proposal was changed to"Site Analysis and Design—Las Cruces Center". In the Project Overview, Paragraph B, "180 calendar days"was changed to "365 calendar days". In Paragraph C,the first three studies were deleted and only the latest study, KPMG Financial Analysis will be available. Mr. Johnson said this study is on the City website. In the Project Background,the sixth sentence was changed to read, "Rich in culture and history, Las Cruces is a blend of Hispanic,Native American and American cultures." The rest of that sentence was deleted. In Paragraph B,the beginning of the sentence was changed to read, "For the past several years..." 4 SELECTION ADVISORY COTTEE MEETING APPROVED 2-1-2007 OF THE CITY OF LAS CRUCES JANUARY 4,2007 PAGE 2 In the Project Detail section, second paragraph,the first sentence was deleted. Mr. Johnson will include additional verbiage regarding an analysis on available surface water rights associated with that property, including flood zoning and traffic. All the"City Center"references in the proposal will be changed to"Las Cruces Center". PAGE 3 The sentence before Paragraph E was changed to read, "Phase II will consist of the site and building design services."Mr. Denmark suggested clarifying the issue of notice to proceed with construction documentation as the third phase. On top of Page 3, the second bullet, second sentence, Mr. Denmark suggested adding language that speaks about consistency, compatibility, and urban design as it relates to the university campus setting,the City, and the neighborhood. In the Scope of Services, Paragraph B,the end of the second sentence was changed to read, "...minimum number of public hearings and/or presentations necessary for this component of the overall project is four(4)." Mr. Mendez suggested clarifying all of the different phases of the project. PAGE 4 On top of Page 4,the end of the second to the last sentence was changed to read, "It is anticipated that the minimum number of public hearings and/or presentations necessary for this component of the overall project is four(4)." An excess of eight meetings will be needed. The hourly rate or cost of each meeting beyond the initial eight will need to be added to the cost. Mr. Martin will redo the cost entry. Before the second to the last sentence in Paragraph B on top of Page 4, another sentence will be added with language to say that the City will coordinate all of the meetings. In Paragraph F, a Number 4 will be added as"Construction Management." Mr. Martin and Mr. Mendez will work with Mr. Tortelli regarding the phasing aspect of the project. Paragraph H will be inserted after Paragraph E. The rest of the paragraphs will need to be formatted with the appropriate lettering. In Paragraph H, Mr. Johnson recommended verbiage to say, "...to include both the Las Cruces Center and the New Mexico State University hotel"at the end of the last sentence in that paragraph. PAGE 5 Paragraph 6 will be deleted. PAGE 6 In Paragraph B regarding the errors and omissions, language will be clarified to specify that at the time of the contract,there will be specific instructions. 5 SELECTION ADVISORY COTTEE MEETING APPROVED 2-1-2007 OF THE CITY OF LAS CRUCES JANUARY 4,2007 In the Proposal Content, Paragraph 4, we want specific, direct experience relating to convention center type of facilities. After discussing the amount of money for each phase, Mr. Mendez stated for establishment of fees,at least negotiate a contract that is based on the square footage of the building. Mr. Tortelli said that we can put in the RFP that Phase II and Phase III are contingent on passing the general obligation bond issue. Mr. Martin said on a$22 to$26 million building, we will expect to run $1.4 to $2 million for the whole design and construction contract. Mr. Tortelli reiterated the discussion by saying that we are looking at phasing all of Section IV, Scope of Services. Once Phase I is completed,the City will give a notice to proceed to Phase II. Phase III will be the construction part of it based on the revenue bonds. The different phases need to be spelled out in the cost proposal. PAGE 7 In the Proposal Content, Paragraph B on top of Page 7, Paragraph 1,the first sentence was changed to read, "The Cost Proposal will not be used..." Mr. Martin, Ms. Grumet,Mr. Mendez, and Mr. Mompellier, Convention and Visitors Bureau Director,will be the internal evaluation staff, and then we will have one university staff as an evaluator. This information needs to be forwarded to Mr. Moore, City Manager, for his (, information. He needs to approve at least two staff. The committee finished reviewing all of the pages, and then went over the voting issues. Deductions for equitable distribution of business and local preference will be conducted. MOTION: Mr.Johnson moved and Mr.Martin seconded to waive cost as a factor. All ayes. Motion passed unanimously. Interviews will be held. MOTION: Mr.Martin moved and Mr.Johnson seconded to recommend that interviews will be conducted for the top three rated firms. All ayes. Motion passed unanimously. The verbiage indicating interviewing the top three rated firms will be added under the Proposal Evaluation and Selection section in Paragraph B on Page 7. The language 'let-ds to clarify that we do not want more than three firms. Mr. Denmark said that the first phase is the site analysis and the second phase is the conceptual design. The proposal does not need to come back to the SAC. Ms. Grumet left the committee at this time. Mr. Martin, Mr. Mendez, and Ms. Mathews stayed for the next agenda item. 6 SELECTION ADVISORY COUTTEE MEETING APPROVED 2-1-2007 OF THE CITY OF LAS CRUCES JANUARY 4,2007 4. Review RFP 06-07-197, Term Contract for Architectural/Engineering Services. Mr. Mendez gave an overview of the proposal, and then the committee went through the proposal page by page. Mr. Mendez suggested including, in the proposal, how much we generated in fees prior to the term agreement to show that it is worth pursuing. Mr. Tortelli will add verbiage to reflect the suggestion given by Mr. Mendez, and he will include this in the Scope of Work section in Paragraph B. The sentence that read, "The maximum authorization for fees will be $300,000 per individual term contract per annum" was deleted. PAGE 1 In the General Background section,the term of the contract will be for one year with three additional one-year terms. Mr. Tortelli will attach the information stated in the footnote as a PDF for those individuals that don't have the information mentioned. Mr. Denmark asked that the words"limited scopes of work"be deleted in the first sentence in the General Background section. PAGE 2 Mr. Mendez suggested having a sentence in Paragraph B in the Scope of Work section to say something like, "In prior years the consultants have been asked to attend or participate in public hearings." Information will need to be provided at the contract signing for the Requirements for Submittal section, Paragraph B, Errors and Omissions. Mr. Mendez suggested adding another paragraph as Paragraph E under the Scope of Work to say something like, "Provide the services of specific sub-consultants including landscape architects." PAGE 3 Mr. Denmark suggested adding language to Paragraph 3 in the Proposal Contents section that we want a registered landscape architect. If the proposer qualifies as a team, they will have someone on board to do it, so if we need that service,we can use it. PAGE 4 In the Proposal Evaluation and Selection section,the standard SAC evaluation criteria were used, but the weights were changed as follows: 1. Technical approach to the contract... 20% 2. Qualifications and competence... 25% 3. Capacity and capability of the firm... 25% 4. Management structure... 10% 5. Performance of the firm... 10% 6. Clarity... 10% 7 R �}�} SELECTION ADVISORY CANE TEE MEETING APPROVED 2-1-2007 OF THE CITY OF LAS CRUCES JANUARY 4,2007 Mr. Denmark suggested the users and evaluators for this proposal are Mr. Martin, Mr. Mendez, and Ms. Mathews. The committee went over the voting issues. MOTION: Mr.Johnson moved and Mr. Martin seconded to waive the deductions for equitable distribution of business. All ayes. Motion passed unanimously. Local preference will be used. Cost will not be used as a factor. MOTION: Mr.Johnson moved and Mr.Martin seconded to waive cost as a factor. All ayes. Motion passed unanimously. The proposal will be advertised for four weeks. Interviews will not be held. MOTION: Mr.Johnson moved and Mr.Martin seconded to waive interviews. All ayes. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Mendez and Ms. Mathews left the committee at this time. S. Other Items of Interest. The next SAC meeting will be held on January 18, 2007 at 1:30 p.m. at the City Office Center, Conference Room 214, 575 S. Alameda Blvd. 6. Adjourn. MOTION: Mr.Johnson moved and Mr. Martin seconded to adjourn. All ayes. Motion passed unanimously. Meeting ended at 10:52 a.m. Dr. Mark Sutter, Chairperson 8