1. Request for Qualifications - GC/CM Services 2. Project Description and Background Information

Transcription

1 GC/CM Services for Lynnwood Elementary & Mountlake Terrace Elementary Schools Modernization/Replacement Projects Request for Qualifications Edmonds School District November 6, Request for Qualifications - GC/CM Services The Edmonds School District is requesting Statements of Qualifications to provide General Contractor/Construction Manager services for its modernization/replacement of Lynnwood Elementary & Mountlake Terrace Elementary Schools. Statements of Qualifications for interested GC/CMs are due 2:00 PM on November 23, There will be an optional project information meeting on November 12, 2015, at 3:45 PM. The District intends to complete the entire GC/CM selection process by January 12, 2015 (see selection schedule in Request for Qualifications). You can see the RFQ on the District website ( or call Devone Miles, CPO Support Technician, (425) If she is unavailable, contact Matt Finch, CPO Design and Construction Manager, (425) Please check the District website frequently for Addenda to the RFQ; Addenda will be published only on this website, and you may not receive direct notification that Addenda have been posted. 2. Project Description and Background Information Bassetti Architects is currently preparing pre-design and conceptual documents to modernize or replace the existing 1963 Lynnwood Elementary School and the 1959 Mountlake Terrace Elementary School with modernized or new facilities of approximately 65,000 square feet or larger per school on the existing sites. The modernized or new buildings will reflect current School District elementary educational specifications and site conditions. It is important that the new schools open prior to September, 2018 for the school year. The project also may create parking and bus/auto circulation, significant new storm water management facilities and new fields and play areas. Some or all of the existing schools may be demolished. Total Project Cost for Lynnwood Elementary school is approximately $35.7M, and the estimated Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) is approximately $25M. Total Project Cost for Mountlake Terrace Elementary school is approximately $33.7M and the estimated Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) is approximately $23.7M. The District is considering bundling both schools into a single project to be executed by one GC/CM. However, the District reserves its ability to select separate GC/CMs for each school. The District expects to work with the selected GC/CM to evaluate the use of Mechanical and Electrical Contractor Construction Management (MC-EC/CM). The District continually seeks to improve its approach to GC/CM based on lesson learned and looks to the GC/CM to work collaboratively to suggest and implement process improvements. Bassetti is designing the project using Revit, a Building Information Management (BIM) system that includes three-dimensional modeling of the building as well as database information for some quantities and qualities of the materials represented in the building model. The District has retained Rider Levett Bucknall to develop an initial cost model, in collaboration with Bassetti. The District will provide Builders Risk Insurance for the projects. The projects will comply with all requirements for Office of the Superintendent of 1

2 Public Instruction for State construction matching funds, including compliance with the Washington Sustainable Schools Protocol (WSSP). The District intends to collaborate with Snohomish Public Utility District #1 and others to enhance the energy efficiency of the projects. There will be an optional project information meeting and site walk through on November 12, 2015, at 3:45 PM. The meeting will begin at the front door of Mountlake Terrace Elementary School, nd Ave. W., Mountlake Terrace. The tour will continue at Lynnwood Elementary, th Ave. W., Lynnwood. NOTE: Mountlake Terrace Elementary dismisses at 3:10PM, and there is considerable traffic and a lack of parking in the vicinity for about 20 minutes afterwards. Lynnwood Elementary dismisses at 3:50 PM and experiences similar conditions. Do NOT send SOQs or other selection materials to these addresses. The attached graphics illustrate current conditions (figures 1 & 2) and preliminary concepts (figures 3 & 4). The Design Team is: Architect Bassetti Structural Engineer Coughlin Porter Lundeen Civil Engineer AHBL Mechanical Wood Harbinger Electrical Engineer Hargis Engineers Landscape Architect Site Workshop Food Service Halliday & Associates Acoustical Consultant TBD The School District also has engaged the following consultants: Cost Estimator- Rider Levett Bucknall Geotechnical Engineer & Associated Earth Sciences Hazardous Materials Argus Pacific Surveyor AHBL Transportation Gibson Traffic Wetlands Delineation - TBD 3. Project Schedule and Selected GC/CM Service Milestone The following are tentative targets to be further developed in collaboration with GC/CM. Selected GC/CM Service Milestones January 13, Issue Notice to Proceed with Pre-construction Services Week of January 18, Target Value Analysis Charrette February 29, Complete Schematic Design Phase January, Complete construction package and Owner approval; Finalize GMP April, Issue Construction NTP June, Substantial Completion September, First day of School 2

3 4. GC/CM Services and Issues 4.1 Introduction The School District has conducted four GC/CM projects, has initiated a fifth, and intends to use this experience to make incremental improvements to its approach for Lynnwood & Mountlake Terrace Elementaries, as well as future projects. All the District s GC/CM projects have been successful, and the School District believes it is possible to create even more value from the GC/CM method. The issues and approach described below reflect lessons learned from these previous projects. The School District also is seeking suggestions from prospective GC/CMs about how to improve the process. Although Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) is not directly applicable to this project (or any other District projects), it offers concepts and techniques the School District is interested in pursuing. The following four items are particularly relevant: Emphasis on trust, collaboration, and shared goals, Explicit, open balance of risk/reward for all parties, Replacing value engineering with target value design analysis. Definitive design and construction scheduling to provide ample time for School District review and comment of planning, cost, schedule and procurement information. Submitters to this RFQ are encouraged to read the AIA Guide to Integrated Project Delivery: A key element in the School District s approach is the value received through improved communication between the Owner, A/E team, and GC/CM given that their relationship begins early in the life of the project. The GC/CM s contributions can be best achieved by its commitment of expertise via their staffing plan. The School District expects that the overall constructability and permanency of the facility will be improved when the GC/CM s staffing plan contains highly qualified staff who are also allowed to participate early and often with top-level people in the Owner s organization and to weigh in on constructability issues, alternative system proposals and value analysis issues as they arise. Additionally, the District anticipates that the use of a GC/CM affords this project the opportunity for the GC/CM to secure the interest and availability of multiple highly qualified subcontractors. 4.2 Project Issues The Lynnwood & Mountlake Terrace Elementary projects present a number of special challenges: Scope Uncertainties - The Lynnwood & Mountlake Terrace Elementary programs are currently housed in a 50+ year-old facilities designed for different enrollment capacities, programs and delivery methods. The District has a current Educational Specification for Elementary schools. There is some basis for estimating total space needs, but the precise quantity and arrangement of spaces will depend upon District enrollment targets as well as visioning, programming, and conceptual/schematic design activities. Also, in the case of Lynnwood Elementary, the default concept assumes constructing entirely new facilities, while the program operates in the existing buildings. The default for Mountlake Terrace assumes that the program will move off-site during construction. Other approaches, including constructing at the location of the existing buildings or reusing portions of them, will be evaluated for both schools. 3

4 Volatile Market - In common with other owners, the School District is experiencing cost impacts due to the current construction climate. The difficulty in predicting these impacts is as significant as their magnitude. Budget Interrelationship with Other Bond Program Projects These two projects are funded from a multi-year bond program that also must fund numerous other commitments. The District wants to maximize the project scope for both schools while preserving as much funding as possible for other projects. Both schools were listed in the bond measure as modernizations, but the District would prefer to replace as much as possible. Getting money back at the end of project does NOT serve the District s purposes because it needs to make decisions about multiple projects, including these two, at the same time. Of course, cost increases also complicate District planning processes. In addition, both elementary projects present an array of conventional but significant challenges, such as access and safety for an occupied site, unexpected impacts of new technologies, land use entitlements, permitting, and High-Performance School Buildings Program. The School District is seeking a GC/CM who can work collaboratively with the District and the Design Team to engage these issues. 4.3 Changes in GC/CM Approach The School District is implementing a number of modifications to its GC/CM approach, which are expressed in the selection process, scope of work, and contract documents. The following are some key differences from the District s previous GC/CM process: Early Involvement of GC/CM - The Edmonds School District has agency status, which allows it to bring the GC/CM into these project earlier in schematic design. This early involvement will allow the GC/CM to better understand the project goals and developing design, as well as contribute cost and constructability ideas early in the design. In particular, the GC/CM will be asked to provide early site development cost and constructability analyses. Cost Model of Baseline Design Rider Levett Bucknall (RLB) and Bassetti are collaborating to create a detailed cost model prior to any design, based on a default, baseline design solution for the site and building. The initial model will use a simplified BIM massing representation to provide quantities for major elements and systems, e.g., skin, glazing, and flooring. RLB will mine recent relevant project cost and quantity information to understand potential costs by construction element. This information will allow appropriate costs to be applied to these elements as they are modeled by Bassetti in their conceptual designs for these two school projects. In this way, RLB will be able to assist in determining more reliable and project-specific construction costs for each version of the facility as it is manipulated through the conceptual design process. The GC/CM will be expected to participate on a continuous basis and provide input during these processes and to establish its own cost estimating process in a way that can coordinate and reconcile with the RLB process. Although the actual selected design may vary radically from the initial baseline solution, the model will provide a basis for quantifying changes in specific design elements. The model also will reflect the District s Uniform Design Standards and current practices for selection of materials, equipment and systems. 4

5 Target Value Design Analysis In keeping with IPD principles, the District wants to use a cost control process that, uses immediate feedback on budget, schedule and quality to inform the development of the design. It promotes designing to a detailed estimate, rather than estimating a detailed design. For this to be accomplished, information needs to be communicated effectively to all interested parties, feedback received, and decisions made on an open and rational basis. If this is properly done, conventional value engineering vanishes. - AIA, Integrated Project Delivery: A Guide, 2007 This approach also requires re-structuring the cost reconciliation process to one using continuous cost analysis and feedback. The District seeks to avoid any disconnect between the GC/CM s cost analysis and the current state of the design. Collaborative review of bid packaging & related strategies One feature of the current construction market is that the availability of qualified subcontractors and their willingness to bid competitively may have significant impacts on project cost. This reality needs to inform design decisions as early in the process as is feasible, and to guide bid package formulation to enhance subcontractor competition. The entire team needs open communication on this approach. The School District expects the subcontract bid package plan to be a collaborative process. Validate GMP cost feasibility before any construction - It is essential to the School District that all parties agree on the feasibility of the entire GMP before any construction commences. Early/multiple GMP amendments may be considered as a schedule or bid strategy if all aspects of the first sentence are met. The School District is looking to the GC/CM and Design Team to suggest additional approaches, techniques and strategies to improve the process. 4.4 Construction Phase Risk Beyond the obvious benefit of obtaining a contractor s opinion of cost early, the District believes that there is value in focusing on minimizing design and construction phase risks for all parties. The School District anticipates that the GC/CM method, through dialogue and shared information, can produce a better understanding of each parties risk and both a real and perceived reduction of that risk, and, thus, a fiscal benefit. Real reduction in risk on this project should result from the GC/CM s collaborative efforts in defining and packaging subcontract work, traffic and safety management, utilities and related features, and preparation of a workable staging plan and schedule. Prior to bidding the various subcontracts, the GC/CM will be expected to suggest approaches to handling perceived risks. During construction, the GC/CM will be expected to actively manage subcontractors, coordinate their activities, and review and analyze any issues they present. 4.5 Technical environment It is the intent of the District that the selected GC/CM will be able to make beneficial use of the design team s building information model during the preconstruction process. While specific uses have not yet been defined, the GC/CM will be expected to suggest beneficial uses of the model. Some uses may include real time cost modeling, quality assurance coordination, materials quantities verification, and expedited shop drawing and early fabrication/delivery packages. The District is also interested in how 5

6 the GC/CM s use of technology during the design and construction phases will enhance the processes and contribute to its efficiency. This project will comply with the Washington Sustainable Schools Protocol (WSSP) and will continue the District s commitment to improving instructional technology and energy efficiency. Our experience with prior projects is that these commitments require the use of new technologies that may have unexpected impacts on the design and construction. Having the GC/CM s and potentially MCCM s perspective on these products and systems prior to the construction phase will help mitigate these impacts during construction by allowing better coordination and detailing during design. The School District is interested in bid packaging and other techniques to improve the quality of construction, especially for high performance elements such as the building envelope, HVAC systems and storm water systems. 4.6 Bidding and Construction Phase Responsibilities The GC/CM s responsibilities will be described in the Agreement and related Division 00 and 01 contract documents, which will be provided to shortlisted firms with the Request for Proposals (RFP). These documents will include the AIA s standard forms A-133 (2009), A-201 (2007), revised to comply with Washington State law and School District policies and procedures. The following are some of the key bidding and construction phase service issues for this project: Bid packaging/subcontracting plan Subcontractor pre-qualification and bidding Attracting sub-bid competition Possible use of Mechanical and Electrical Contractor Construction Management (MC-EC/CM) Use of allowances / contingencies in sub-bid packages Ability to meet GMP and GMP Cost Control Development and Control of Schedules Compliance with Apprenticeship requirements Safety Quality Control and Testing Management of subcontractors 1/2 percent for art 5. SOQ Submittal Process Statements of Qualifications are due no later than 2:00pm, Monday, November 23, 2015 to Edward J. Peters, Capital Projects Director, at the Edmonds School District Educational Services Center, th Avenue West, Lynnwood, WA, FAX or electronic submittals are not allowed. Firms must submit eight copies of their SOQ. 6. SOQ Contents & Selection Criteria Statements of Qualifications must be limited to no more than 30 typed pages 8 ½ by 11 inch (no less than 11 point type), excluding resumes and project data sheets. SOQs must respond directly to each of the following criteria in the order presented below. 6

7 Firm s Qualifications, Experience and Past Performance 30% 1. Qualifications (Weighting: 5%) Provide a brief description of the history and capabilities of the firm. Describe the types of projects or services the firm normally performs and the relative dollar value of each. Specify the firm s proximity to the project location. If the firm is a joint venture, describe its members and structure and indicate the projects and services that reflect the efforts of individual members and other projects successfully completed by the members. 2. Quality of Past Performance in Negotiated and Complex Projects (Weighting: 10%) - List the experience that the firm has had in completing GC/CM or similar projects, e.g., negotiated, Integrated Project Delivery or Guaranteed Maximum Price projects. Provide a list of at least five (5) similar and completed projects in Washington State. For each project, provide 1) a project description, 2) the duration of construction, including original and actual dates of substantial and final completion, 3) the owner s original budget estimate, original total contract cost (GMP) and the final actual cost, 4) a description of the Design Phase (a.k.a. Preconstruction Phase) Services performed, 5) an owner reference (with telephone number) who is familiar with your firm s performance in completing the project, 6) note the individuals named in your proposed Project team who participated on the project team for the listed project, and 7) indicate if any claims or major disputes were filed on the project, and if so, describe. If your firm has not completed five (5) GC/CM projects in Washington, then list projects you believe were successfully completed using a similar GC/CM, negotiated, or guaranteed maximum price ( GMP ) format. Other alternative delivery methods, such as, design build, or integrated project delivery could also be listed. 3. Recent, current and projected workload (Weighting: 5%) - Specify your firm s annual volume (in dollars) of construction for the past five (5) years, the anticipated volume for the current year and the planned volume for the next two (2) years. Discuss how your firm s participation in this project would affect that plan. Provide the firm s bonding capacity and address the ability of the firm to bond this project. List the name, contact person and telephone number the firm s bonding agent. Note: Short-listed firms may be required to supply commitment statements from their bonding agent and/or financial statements as part of the RFP process. 4. Accident Prevention Program (Weighting: 5%) - Describe your firm s approach to project safety and worker health. Provide information for a period of the past three (3) years indicating 1) the number of deaths, 2) the number of lost worker days due to accidents, and 3) the number of recorded OSHA incidents. 5. Additional Qualifications (Weighting: 5%) Discuss any additional qualifications, capabilities, or other aspects of your team and proposal that are important for the success of this project. Proposed Team (35%) 6. Organization, Capability, Commitment and Continuity of Proposed Team (Weighting: 10%) Discuss the roles within the overall team structure of each key team member. Discuss any assignments that will be made later and the capability of the firm to cover those positions. Provide an organization chart showing role and percent commitment during each phase for each team member. Discuss your firm s 7

8 commitment to maintaining the proposed team on this project. Discuss your team s ability to comply with the proposed schedule through all phases of the project, including design, and how you plan to do so. 7. Team Experience and Qualifications (Weighting: 25%) Provide resumes of qualifications and related experience of each committed staff member, including role and approximate duration. Provide at least three (3) owner or architect references for each committed team member, including the last project on which the committed team member worked. Related experience should include K-12 educational facilities or related project types, experience with phased school or similar projects, experience on occupied school sites, experience with other publicly bid projects, experience with GC/CM, IPD, negotiated Bid or GMP work; experience related to other issues specific to this project. You may wish to use a matrix to summarize team experience. Approach (35%) 8. Understanding of Project Issues and Concept of GC/CM Services (Weighting: 5%) Discuss the process, strategies and tactics the firm will implement to address the issues and approaches presented in Section 4above and any other issues that will be critical to the success of the project. Provide examples from recent projects. 9. Ability and Approach to Providing Design Phase (Pre-construction) Services (Weighting: 15%) Describe your firm s approach and value added to collaborative and cooperative participation in the Design Phase. Discuss and provide evidence of the proposed team s expertise and record of success providing the following preconstruction phase services. Describe how your firm would monitor and ensure that Owner s program scope is maximized and the Owner s construction budget and project schedule are met at every phase of Design and Construction Documents development. Goal-setting and Analysis Cost-estimating and Analysis conducting Target Value Cost Analysis, collaborating with architects and owners to provide real-time design analysis and feedback, proposing ideas and assessing alternative construction options, products and engineering systems for cost savings and life cycle cost design considerations, providing for escalation and market factors, use of allowances in contracting, providing definition and budgeting of Negotiated Support Services, methods of providing detailed summary and bid package estimates, and formats for preliminary and final GMP estimate documentation. Discuss your firm s experience with, ideas concerning, and commitment to working closely with an owner-engaged cost estimator such as Rider Levett Bucknall. Scheduling Analyzing schedule options and trade-offs, recommending changes, advising on long-lead procurement packages to ensure the project schedule. Recommending phasing and sequencing of work to minimize impacts to school operations. Understanding of permit and design review processes as related to the overall schedule. Examples of phasing and sequencing, and other related project scheduling issues. 8

9 Site-Investigations and logistics - Investigation of existing conditions to ensure the construction documents will reflect the actual site conditions. Assessing and recommending site logistics requirements. Protection of wetlands and wildlife habitat. Design Document Review - Providing Design and Construction Document coordination comments, tracking and verifying their implementation. Constructability - Relevant examples of constructability proposals that reduced changes to the Cost of the Work. Collaborative Subcontract Plan Analysis and discussion of subcontractor scope and packaging options, Subcontract Plan preparation and procurement planning. Collaborative Participation Examples of successful cooperation with Owners and Architects, continuity of staff through the course of a similar project. 10. Ability and Approach to Providing Collaborative Bidding and Construction Phase Services (Weighting: 15%) - Discuss and provide evidence of the proposed team s expertise and record of success providing the following construction phase services. Describe how your firm would monitor and ensure that Owner s program scope is maximized and the Owner s construction budget and project schedule are met during construction. Public Works Subcontractor Bidding strategy, process, timing and contents. Scope of work your firm proposes to self-perform and ability to perform that work. How bid packaging decisions affect competitive bidding Use of allowances in sub-contract packages Assignment of negotiated support services to sub-bid packages Ability to meet GMP and cost control during construction. Ability to develop, communicate and control schedule. Subcontractor management techniques. Safety. Coordination and quality control results. Use of technology during construction Ability to address and resolve unexpected challenges. 7. Selection Schedule and process The following are tentative targets. Date November 6, 2015 November 12, 2015 November 23, 2015 GC/CM Selection Process Activity Advertise and Issue Request for Qualifications Optional Informational Meeting and Site Tour, 3:45 Mountlake Terrace Elementary (Tour of Lynnwood Elementary will follow immediately after) Receive Qualifications statements 9

10 November 25, 2015 Week of December 7-11, 2015 Week of December 14-18, 2015 December 29, 2015 December 30, 2015 January 12, 2016 January 13, 2016 Week of January 18, 2016 Announce shortlist and Issue Request For Proposals, including Agreement and General Conditions Conduct Face-to-Face Project Discussions with shortlisted firms (AKA Interviews ) Receive cost proposals; Evaluate and identify highest rated firm Receive pre-construction services fee proposal from recommended firm Submit recommendation for award to School Board School Board decides on recommendation District issues NTP for Conceptual Design Phase Services Target Value Analysis Charrette The District selection panel for this project is expected to include the following members: District Staff Stewart Mhyre, Executive Director for Business and Operations Edward Peters, Capital Projects Office Director Matt Finch, Capital Projects Office Project Manager Consultants (TBD), Architect s Principal in Charge (Bassetti) Dana Amore, Architect s Project Manager (Bassetti) Richard Prentke, District Legal Counsel (Perkins Coie) Chuck Hartung, Project Management Support Services Consultant Representative (Hainline), Steve Kelley, Cost Consultant, (Rider Levett Bucknall) Members of the selection panel will review properly submitted Statements of Qualifications (SOQs) and rate them using the criteria and weighting listed above. The District will create and announce a short list of firms to be evaluated for further consideration. Shortlisted firms will be provided with a Request for Proposal (RFP) including Interview instructions, and Instructions for submitting a cost proposal, along with other written materials (e.g. preconstruction work plan and schedule), and the AIA standard forms A-133 and A-201, as revised for this project, and related Division 00 and 01 documents. Sealed cost proposals will be due from all parties after the interviews, and will be opened in public after the interviews. The District selection panel will conduct interviews in accordance with the instructions provided. After the interviews, the selection panel will rate the firms using the selection criteria and weighting listed in the RFQ for 80% of the selection, based on all the information presented. Soon after, sealed cost proposals will be received and reviewed for the remaining 20% of the calculation. Members of the selection panel will meet with the firm to be recommended for selection and finalize the Design Phase (pre-construction) services fee. District staff expects to recommend selection and award of the Design Phase (pre- construction) agreement at a regular school district Board of Directors business meeting. Upon receiving School Board 10

11 approval, District staff will issue a notice of award and upon receipt of a properly executed agreement issue a notice to proceed with pre-construction services. Attachments(4): Figure 1: Lynnwood Elementary Site Aerial showing current conditions Figure 2: Mountlake Terrace Elementary Site Aerial showing current conditions Figure 3: Lynnwood Elementary Preliminary Baseline Site Concept Figure 4: Mountlake Terrace Elementary Preliminary Baseline Site Concept 11

12

13

14 Edmonds School District Master Plan Report MASTER SITE PLAN - OPTION 3 LYNNWOOD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL OPTION 3 Replacement Concept KEYNOTES 1 New 28 classroom replacement school 2 New portable (2) 3 Existing portable to be relocated 4 Existing building to remain 5 Existing parking to remain 6 New parking 7 New auto loop New bus loop New fire lane TH AVE W New covered play shed New play equipment Existing play equipment TH AVE W 46TH AVE W LEGEND Existing Building Upgrade Finishes Remodel (within existing shell) New construction Future construction NOTE: SCALE CHANGE Bassetti Architects December 2014

15 Edmonds School District Master Plan Report MASTER SITE PLAN MOUNTLAKE TERRACE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL OPTION 3 Replacement Concept 6 9 KEYNOTES 1 New 28 classroom replacement school Existing parking to remain New parking New auto loop New bus loop New fire lane New covered play shed 9 8 Existing play equipment New play equipment Future portable location (2) 52 ND A VE W LEGEND 2 Existing Building Upgrade Finishes Remodel (within existing shell) New construction Future construction Bassetti Architects - December 2014