South Campus Study Phase II

Transcription

1 UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON Request for Qualifications ACADEMIC FACILITIES PRECINCT PLANNING SERVICES FOR South Campus Study Phase II UW PROJECT NUMBER: Submittal Deadline for SOQ: April 29, 2014 at 3:00 PM OVERVIEW The University of Washington Office of the University Architect, in the Office of Planning and Budgeting, is soliciting qualifications from architectural and planning firms, to provide precinct planning services for the academic facilities in the South Campus (west of Montlake Bridge, south of NE Pacific Avenue, north of Portage Bay and east of Brooklyn Avenue NE). The purpose is to produce an academic facilities precinct plan that reflects options and analyses of future development scenarios that address such variables as phasing, program requirements, height and density, new construction and renovated space, open space, landscape features, shoreline and campus connectivity and circulation in all modes. The South Campus Study Phase II (SCS Phase II) is intended to provide a road map to guide phased growth and expansion for the next twenty years. Funded by the School of Public Health (SPH), it will incorporate and respond to the findings of a separate coordinated effort to develop vision, space and program for a new SPH building. The selected firm, under the direction of the Office of the University Architect (OUA), will work closely with a core group of staff from the Office of Planning and Budgeting (OPB), SPH, Health Sciences Administration and appropriate academic and administrative units. Each step of the building planning will involve the South Campus community extensively through interviews, focus groups, charrettes, and other means of collecting comment and feedback. An Advisory Group appointed by the Provost will include leadership from the schools on site: Dentistry, Medicine, Nursing, Pharmacy, Public Health, Social Work and the Colleges of the Environment, Engineering and Arts and Sciences. This project is anticipated to be conducted over approximately 6-8 months starting in late spring, Page 1 of 14

2 BACKGROUND The South Campus area is a complex and dense area of UW s Seattle campus serving primarily schools of Health Sciences as well as the UW Medical Center (UWMC). It is a complex of buildings built between 1948 and 1995 managed by the Health Sciences Administration and overseen by the Provost. The UWMC connects physically and functionally to the schools but its facilities are not a focus of this study other than in terms of adjacencies and impacts. Aerial view from south across Portage Bay looking north towards Central and upper campus A preliminary concept plan for South Campus was developed during 2012 with participation of the Health Science Board of Deans. The plan did not reflect the detailed analysis that would identify enabling and concurrent projects needed for building projects to move forward, nor did it provide cost estimates, nor phasing strategies all of which are to be provided by this study. The SCS Phase II will build on this past planning, exploring options for modernization and expansion to achieve the shared and individual goals of the Health Science schools and others in this vicinity. It will advance the recent planning to the next level of detail regarding phasing, shared facilities, site capacity, connectivity, internally and within the broader campus context, revealing and resolving other issues through the process. Page 2 of 14

3 This Request for Qualifications is one of three studies being conducted in concert with funding from the SPH and is intended to be the basis of design for a new School of Public Health building in or near this South Campus area. The South Campus Study Phase II will occur separately from and with some overlap with a SPH Visioning, Facilities and Space Program Study. Ultimately, findings from both of these studies will assist the UW in commissioning a Pre-Design that will finalize the site and describe the site development program, budget, funding and proposed schedule for the future SPH building. SCOPE OF SERVICES The University foresees the area south of NE Pacific Avenue fulfilling its mission as a national leader in academics, research and clinical medicine through the continual modernization and expansion of its existing facilities. The SCS Phase II will envision and define fundamental principles and multiple scenarios for guiding this growth and expansion over the next twenty years. It will describe the existing built environment, landscape character and connectivity of the area with the campus and community and propose ideas for improvement which are well coordinated with current and future UW capital projects and studies in and adjacent to its borders: Central Utility Plant (CUP), Life Sciences Building, T- Wing (Inter-professional Education building or IPE), Campus Landscape Framework (CLF) and West Campus Development Framework (WCDF). Information and updates on these projects and studies can be found on the OUA website UW Architectural Commission webpage the Capital Projects website and the Health Sciences Administration website The SCS Phase II will confirm programmatic needs and explore a range of growth-oriented phased development scenarios, evaluate their campus planning and development potential, and articulate principles for guiding South Campus growth and change. It will test future development scenarios by looking at height, density, massing, open space, transportation, energy/water infrastructure and other selected issues that contribute to place-making and connectivity between the Magnuson Health Sciences Center (MHSC), the UWMC, the campus as a whole and the community at large. The selected consultant and UW planning team will finalize a scope of work that addresses the items below: Page 3 of 14

4 SOUTH CAMPUS STUDY PHASE II The SCS Phase II will create a strategic, flexible, and implementable vision for expansion in South Campus that reflects best available knowledge, addresses topics essential to Health Sciences Schools, teaching and academic planning. Information and assumptions included in past precinct plans will be validated and challenged with regards to: phasing, enabling projects, expansion, connectivity, infrastructure, circulation and cost. Like higher education nationwide, UW Health Sciences Schools are concerned with pivotal questions about the roles, methods and means of providing education, conducting research, and serving their public roles in a world of great technological, economic and social change with implications for new delivery formats and relationships for higher education. Focused questions that will inform choices regarding the SCS Phase II and build on the 2012 Concept Plan include: How would phasing work in this dense area of campus allow for physical growth, new buildings and renovated space, and expansion of academic programs? Which programs and activities could/should remain in a renovated South Campus area, and which could/should move into new facilities? Which programs and activities could/should be mixed with what shared resources, and with what rationale and guiding principles? What synergies exist between the Health Sciences Schools, the Colleges of Environment, Engineering and Arts & Sciences, and Medical Center programs and how could/should these be engaged for maximum value for faculty, students, the campus community, external visitors and collaborators for pedagogy, research and clinical practices. Given the existing density of this area, what will optimize stewardship of this limited land resource? How might the unique waterfront location of the South Campus be best celebrated and utilized as an asset? What are the magnitude and nature of educational changes ahead, and what are the possible implications for the development and growth in South Campus? How might the relationship between the South Campus and its adjacent campus areas be strengthened? With what shared infrastructure, amenities and dynamics? What priorities does the SCS Phase II anticipate, and with what choices and trade-offs for the University? Page 4 of 14

5 An analysis of the potential character of the future South Campus area will be informed by the historic development of the overall campus, the goals reflected in recent plans and in focused conversations with current and future area stakeholders. Influences on the character include the campuses planning goals for the area, the current Campus Master Plan, the ongoing Campus Landscape Framework Plan, the SPH Visioning, Space and Programming study (commencing in April 2014) and relevant resources including relevant Health Sciences development models from elsewhere. Growth and expansion, an identity for the SPH, a sense of place internal to the existing buildings and external to the surrounding landscape as well as the desire for a stronger connection to the campus and the water front will also impact the decisions made regarding the character of this area. A discussion of appropriate options for the area s future character will be engaged broadly to develop a multi-dimensional understanding of the interplay of functions, parcelization, facility types, density and massing, public realm, transportation/mobility and infrastructure. The character envisioned will provide a sense of place and a unique identity to South Campus as a setting for an integral, collaborative and cohesive set of teaching, research and clinical activities, with strategic connections to the Central Campus, the UWMC, the waterfront and the community. PLANNING COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGY & PROGRAM A strategy for engaging Health Sciences Schools, College of Engineering, Environment and Arts and Sciences faculty, staff and students in the planning process will be created in consultation with the University, Health Sciences Administration and Deans and will be utilized to assist in developing the SCS Phase II plan. An opportunity that may be explored early in this effort, and then be developed as desired, is to convene and engage in a shared exploration of these questions through a forum as part of the development of the South Campus Plan. The consultant will work with UW leaders and staff in a process designed to bring together the full range of ideas, resolved as a strategic, grounded, flexible vision expressed and illustrated to be easily understood as a framework that facilitates realizing the potential of the South Campus area in support of the Health Sciences vision. Page 5 of 14

6 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT PRINCIPLES AND GUIDELINES To assist in realizing the vision for South Campus, the plan will identify and develop policies, principles and strategic guidelines that facilitate and support the envisioned character. South Campus is expected to be an area of intense growth and change over the next twenty years. The South Campus study will evaluate the development capacity of this area and investigate its capacity to satisfy projected University demand for new facilities. This will be accomplished by structuring at least three development scenarios, with associated costs, depicting possible built futures that accommodate demand in a variety of ways. The analysis will be designed to focus and assist consideration by UW leadership of choices and tradeoffs to be made regarding focusing development in the immediate Health Sciences area, and/or accommodating growth of South Campus. It will inform the next Campus Master Plan about massing and density options, and associated initiatives such as a public open space system, pedestrian and bicycle enhancements and other mobility enhancements, green streets, and other programs that support the proposed density and use mix. Sustainability is a fundamental and enduring value of UW, and is currently implemented through a variety of programs and practices that have built the UW s national reputation for sustainability leadership. In extending this commitment further in the South Campus, the SCS Phase II will address potential means by which to do this programmatically, socially, ecologically, physically and financially. Consultation with UW Facilities Services, Transportation Services, the Office of Planning & Budgeting, UW s Environmental Stewardship office, and others regarding planning for future energy, power and transportation scenarios will assist in defining a sustainability profile for the future of this area. ACTION PLANNING Identify implementation scenarios and prioritize key, strategic policies and projects in South Campus. Page 6 of 14

7 SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION CRITERIA The SOQ must include and will be evaluated based on the criteria listed below. Each firm s SOQ must include an index and be organized by discrete sections corresponding to the criteria and in the same order as listed below. Excluding the cover letter and the response to GSA Standard Form 330, Part II, the SOQ should be submitted in no more than 25 page sides. 1. Cover Letter A cover letter of 1-2 pages, addressing, at a minimum, the following: a. Expression of interest in this project. b. A high level summary of your firm s relevant qualifications. c. Indicate the size of your firm and discuss your capability to manage a project of this size and scope within the identified time frame, relative to your other workload. d. Acknowledgement that you have reviewed any addenda issued to the RFQ, as posted on the University s website. e. The name and contact information of the individual that the University should contact regarding questions about the SOQ and scheduling a potential interview. The contact information should include the following: name of individual, title (Mr., Ms., etc.), firm name, address (city, state, zip code), telephone number, and address. 2. Project Understanding Address the following in terms of your team s specific qualifications to address the services described below: a. Team expertise and availability: The SCS Phase II is expected to take approximately 6-8 months from the initiation of the work to its conclusion. This work will require a wellcoordinated, agile interdisciplinary team. Essential team members should be identified by discipline and expertise and their experience and qualifications relevant to this scope should be described. Team members availability to provide services on this project should be described. b. Communications and Engagement: A strategic campus communications and engagement approach must engage faculty, administration and students of the UW Health Sciences Page 7 of 14

8 community. Engagement will periodically include members of the UW Medical Center, the Colleges of the Environment, Engineering and Arts and Sciences and other community members and leaders as appropriate. Indicate your experience in providing these strategic communications and engagement activities. c. Coordination with Other Efforts: The Campus Master Plan will inform and be influenced by the South Campus Study Phase II. Please describe past and current relevant project examples and approaches the team has been responsible for to demonstrate the team s ability to cohesively incorporate other concurrent planning efforts. d. Components of the South Campus Study Phase II: The vision for the South Campus area will be implemented through a series of policies, guidelines, projects and actionable next steps. The South Campus Study will help inform the One Capital Plan and next UW Campus Master Plan, will inform UW participation in other University planning (SPH Visioning, Space and Programming Study commencing in early April 2014 and created to develop a vision and associated facilities and space program for a new SPH building, HS Deans Inter-professional Education Initiative and the Campus Landscape Framework) and will inform future capital planning and project planning and design. Reference and date relevant examples of work that the team has been responsible for that include similar components of the planning process: i. Existing Conditions - physical and functional characteristics, projected demand, building ii. iii. iv. program Capacity for growth and expansion Identification of enabling projects and phasing plans that will allow for the phased implementation of building renovation and growth in the area Cost associated with various scenarios for future growth and development, implications and trade-offs v. The character of a campus vi. vii. viii. Land Use Policies and Practices-Campus Master Plan Issues, Others Sustainable futures Implementation Strategies and Next Steps Page 8 of 14

9 3. Relevant Experience of the Firm and Key Staff a. Demonstrate and describe your firm s successful completion of similar relevant projects, in the supervision, coordination, communication, management of schedule and budget throughout the project phases. Compare original and final budget and schedules for three (3) projects. b. Describe the demonstrated expertise and experience of the team in reference to the following types of work: Scenario-based area planning and development including urban campus planning and design; communications and engagement; coordination with other internal and external efforts; familiarity with desired components and enabling, phasing and funding feasibility assessment. Please summarize your experience focused on relevance to this project scope. c. Include a copy of the resumes for key staff proposed for this work. 4. Staffing Plan & Availability a. Discuss the availability of the specific team members being proposed for this project. Also provide a staffing plan, indicating the percentage of work-hours commitment of individual lead and key staff for each phase of the project, including but not limited to, principal-incharge, project manager, project planner, and other lead and key roles. 5. Relevant Regulatory Knowledge & Sustainable Design Experience with Area Planning a. Demonstrated expertise and experience in sustainable planning and design practices. Identify experience in utilizing an area planning approach, and other practices used by your team in defining sustainable design goals and actions. Identify and describe which proposed team members have this experience. b. Describe the team s knowledge of and experience with the institutional planning and permit processes of the City of Seattle or other city/county government agencies, other applicable regulatory agencies and with the administrative review processes and requirements of public agencies. Page 9 of 14

10 6. MWBE Outreach Plan The University has strong commitment to encouraging the use of Minority Business Enterprises (MBEs) and Women s Business Enterprises (WBEs) on its contracts. Please provide a detailed description of the specific strategies, approaches, and steps your firm will use in seeking to meet the University s voluntary goals such that the participation of MBEs will equal 10% of the dollar amount of the contract for this project, and that the participation of Women s Business Enterprises (WBEs) will equal 6% of the dollar amount of the contract for this project. MBEs and WBEs to be used in meeting the University s goals must be certified by the State s Office of Minority and Women s Business Enterprises (OMWBE). 7. Other Documentation a. References: Provide at least three (3) project owner references for work completed by your firm. References should be selected from projects prominent in your RFQ with relevance to this scope of work. Cited references should include project name, reference name, title, project role, and current contact telephone number, and address. Refer to the Selection Process section of this RFQ for information about how reference checks will be used in the evaluation process. b. GSA Form 330, Part II: As part of the qualifications submitted, include a copy of the completed Federal Government GSA Standard Form 330, Part II. The form is available online at: c. Acceptance of University s Standard Contract: The University intends to enter into an agreement with one firm as a result of this RFQ process and to utilize its standard Agreement for Professional Services for the work. The Agreement is available for review on the Capital Projects Office s website at Click on the For Consultants & Contractors link on the left side of the page, then click on the Standard Contracts & Forms link under Tools for Consultants and Contractors and select the Agreement for Professional Services Miscellaneous OA4 located in the Consultants section. Each firm must affirm in this section of the SOQ that the terms and conditions of the agreement is acceptable, or if the firm takes exception to any of the proposed language in the agreement, the firm must specifically describe the reasons for the Page 10 of 14

11 exceptions and propose in this section of the SOQ alternative language for review and consideration by the University. The University makes no commitment that it will modify any of the terms of the standard agreement based on the firm s suggestions. Firms should not comment on the terms of Attachment A to the Agreements that include compensation provisions. Failure to respond to this item may result in the University eliminating the firm s SOQ from consideration. WEIGHTING OF EVALUATION CRITERIA The SOQ will be evaluated based on the following points for each evaluation criterion: SOQ EVALUATION CRITERIA POINTS 1. Cover Letter Project Understanding Relevant Experience of the Firm and Key Staff Staffing Plan and Availability Relevant Regulatory Knowledge & Sustainable Design Experience Specific to Area Planning (rather than buildings) MWBE Outreach Plan 5 TOTAL 100 Selection Process: The SOQs will be reviewed by an evaluation committee and the most qualified firms will be invited (by phone and/or ) to an interview on or about May 29, Key team members are expected to lead the interview to describe their approach to this study as described in this RFQ. A fifty minute interview period will be allocated to each firm, as follows: 25 minutes to present, 20 minutes for Q&A, 5 minutes for consultant questions and closing statement. Set up will occur during the Page 11 of 14

12 5 minutes prior to the interview, and 5 minutes will be allocated at the end of the interview to take down and remove presentation material. The University reserves the right to conduct reference checks for the highest scoring firm(s) either after qualifications have been evaluated, and/or after interviews have been held. In the event that information obtained from the reference checks reveals concerns about the firm s past performance or their ability to successfully perform the contract to be executed based on this RFQ, the University may, at its sole discretion, determine that the firm is not qualified to move forward in the selection process and/or enter into negotiations with the University. In conducting reference checks, the University may include itself as a reference if the firm has performed work for the University, even if the firm did not identify the University as a reference. Likewise, the University reserves the right to check references for the firm from other owners and designers even if they were not identified by the firm as references in the Statement of Qualifications submitted. The firm interviews will be evaluated based on the following points for each interview evaluation criterion listed below: INTERVIEW CRITERIA POINTS 1. Project Approach: The teams understanding of, and approach to, the requirements of the project Personnel: Demonstrated experience and knowledge relevant to the project Communication: Interpersonal communication among team members and with the interview committee; use of communication tools and techniques. 4. Presentation and Questions: Clarity of expression and thoroughness in the firm s presentation, and in providing insightful answers to questions asked by the interview committee. Quality of questions asked by the firm TOTAL 100 Page 12 of 14

13 The most highly qualified firm, based on the total points from the evaluation of the SOQs and interviews, will be invited to enter into negotiations with the University. Only one firm (the prime consultant) will be designated as the contracting entity. If the University and the most highly qualified firm cannot agree on terms that are fair and reasonable, the University may enter into negotiations with the next most highly qualified firm. The University will work with the selected firm to finalize the sub-consultant team, if needed, prior to consultant contract award. ANTICIPATED SELECTION PROCESS SCHEDULE RFQ Advertised 4/9/2014 Closing Date for Consultant Inquiries: Submittal Deadline for SOQ 5 PM on 4/15/ PM on 4/29/2014 Shortlisted firms notified for interviews 5/8/2014 Interview date 5/29/2014* Award Contract TBD/2014 * Submitters should hold the interview date in order to be available SUBMITTAL DEADLINE AND FORMAT One (1) original, eight (8) copies, and one (1) CD/DVD in PDF format of the Statement of Qualifications containing the information required in this RFQ must be received at the Capital Projects Office, no later than the submittal date as stated on the first page of this RFQ, or as modified by any subsequent addenda. Excluding the cover letter and the GSA Standard Form 330 Part II, the SOQ shall not exceed 25 page sides in length. Submittals sent by mail or courier shall be sent to the address below (use the box number for U.S. Postal Service (USPS) delivery ONLY). Faxed or ed submittals will not be accepted. Page 13 of 14

14 Consultants are responsible for ensuring receipt of the SOQ at the Capital Projects Office by the deadline stated above, and should take into account internal UW delivery times once USPS delivers a submittal to the box number indicated, and other delays that may occur when using a delivery service. Submittals received after the deadline will not be considered. University of Washington, Capital Projects Office Attention: Lyndsey Cameron, Principal Architectural Associate University Facilities Building Box Seattle, WA Any addenda issued for this RFQ will be accessible at the following website address: by clicking the For Consultants & Contractors link and then selecting the Consultant Business Opportunities link. Consultants are responsible for checking the website for any addenda prior to submission of qualifications. If you are unable to download the addenda, you may contact the individual noted at the end of this RFQ. MWBE The University of Washington is committed to providing the maximum practicable opportunity for participation by minority business enterprises (MBEs) and women business enterprises (WBEs) in its contracts through direct contracts with the University, and sub-consulting or supplier participation. The University strongly encourages MBEs and WBEs certified by the State OMWBE to respond to this RFQ. Goals of 10% for MBEs and 6% for WBEs have been established for this project. However, no minimum level of MWBE participation will be required as a condition for entering into a contract. The University is also an affirmative action-equal opportunity employer. QUESTIONS All questions regarding this RFQ should be addressed to Lyndsey Cameron, Principal Architectural Associate, at (206) , or by at lyndsey2@uw.edu. Page 14 of 14