2025-12PC Addendum 1 072825.pdf

2025-12PC Architect/Engineering Services for PC County Solid Waste Buildings Remodel

DATE: 7/28/25

The following changes are hereby added to and made part of Bid #2025-12PC.

Questions, Answers, Clarifications and Revisions:

Questions Q1: 4.2.8.1 – The phrase, “including without limitation to litigation and court costs and attorney’s fees” is unachievable and uninsurable.” This was probably written for a Contractor, not who mostly utilizes General Liability. Not a Design Professional, who has Professional Liability insurance.

4.2.8.5 – Professional Liability is a claims-made policy. The utilization of the term “each occurrence” is only for an occurrence-based policy. There should be a “per claim” and “aggregate” limit requirement for professional liability. Can it read:

o $1,000,000 per claim o $1,000,000 aggregate

4.2.8.6.1 – We do not think the County can be granted additional insured status on the Work Comp and Professional Liability policy, per standard policy terms and conditions.

Can you provide clarification on the design professional liability insurance statements above?

Ans: The county recently had a remodel project of an estimated $11M and agreed to these terms with the Architect in B133-2019 when it came to insurance. The county feels we would be willing to agree to similar language on this Contract.

§ 2.6 Insurance. The Architect shall maintain the following insurance until termination of this Agreement. If any of the requirements set forth below are in addition to the types and limits the Architect normally maintains, the Owner shall pay the Architect as set forth in Section 11.9.

§ 2.6.1 Commercial General Liability with policy limits of not less than One Million Dollars($ 1,000,000.00) for each occurrence and Two Million Dollars($ 2,000,000.00) in the aggregate for bodily injury and property damage.

§ 2.6.2 Automobile Liability covering vehicles owned, and non-owned vehicles used, by the Architect with policy limits ofnot less than One Million Dollars($ 1,000,000.00) per accident for bodily injury, death of any person, and property damage arising out of the ownership, maintenance and use of those motor vehicles, along with any other statutorily required automobile coverage.

§ 2.6.3 The Architect may achieve the required limits and coverage for Commercial General Liability and Automobile Liability through a combination of primary and excess or umbrella liability insurance, provided such primary and excess or umbrella liability insurance policies result in the same or greater coverage as the coverages required under Sections 2.6.l and 2.6.2, and in no event shall any excess or umbrella liability insurance provide narrower coverage than the primary policy. The excess policy shall not require the exhaustion of the underlying limits only through the actual payment by the underlying insurers.

§ 2.6.4 Workers' Compensation at statutory limits.

§ 2.6.5 Employers' Liability with policy limits not less than One Million Dollars($ 1,000,000.00) each accident, One Million Dollars($ 1,000,000.00) each employee, and One Million Dollars($ 1,000,000.00) policy limit.

§ 2.6.6 Professional Liability covering negligent acts, errors and omissions in the performance of professional services, with policy limits ofnot less than One Million Dollars($ 1,000,000.00) per claim and Two Million Dollars($ 2,000,000.00 ) in the aggregate.

§ 2.6.7 Additional Insured Obligations. To the fullest extent permitted by law, the Architect shall cause the primary and excess or umbrella polices for Commercial General Liability and Automobile Liability to include the Owner as an additional insured for claims caused in whole or in part by the Architect's negligent acts or omissions. The additional insured coverage shall be primary and non-contributory to any of the Owner's insurance policies and shall apply to both ongoing and completed operations.

§ 2.6.8 The Architect shall provide certificates of insurance to the Owner that evidence compliance with the requirements in this Section 2.6.

RFP add#1 2025-12PC

pg. 2

Q2: We carry $1M per occurrence (claim) and $2M aggregate see attached. Will this be sufficient?

Ans: See Above

Q3: We noted the inclusion of ventilation and fire suppression systems in the scope, will full MEP design services (mechanical, electrical, and plumbing) be required from the AE team, or will certain systems or equipment be provided and coordinated by the Owner?

Ans: MEP would be a full design and Fire Protections would be a performance Spec.

Q4: Can you confirm whether the existing Transfer Facility is a pre-engineered metal building, and if so, whether the proposed addition will follow the same construction type?

Ans: It is Pre-Engineered Metal Building and Yes, we would be looking for similar construction type.

Q5: Finally, on the current site plan, the area shown appears to depict a completely new building. Based on the RFP language, we understand the intent is to construct an addition that ties into the existing roof structure, can you confirm whether the addition is to be located at the rear of the current facility?

Ans: There is no new building being developed on this site. We are proposing an addition that matches the roof line on the East End of the Transfer Facility that will hold the Compactor, electrical, and water lines.

Q6: Does Portage County have any existing drawings that can assist in creating the proposal for the RFP and/or can be provided to the selected AE?

Ans: No on sharing the documents now for creating the RFP. Yes to sharing the documents with winning AE.

Q7: Is municipal water available and if so, is it large enough for the requested fire protection?

Ans: Yes and the water utility has a 6” main that comes into the site past the weight scale. We have 2” water service at respective curb stops. We believe we have 1” meters. We realize we may need to tie into the 6” service for Fire Suppression. That will be a part of design and construction.

Q8: Have you determined if there is adequate power at the buildings to power the proposed equipment or is that task part of the scope of this project?

Ans: The presumption is that it is all there but we would need to verify.

Q9: Are existing drawings available?

Ans: See Response to #6

Q10: Is there an existing geotechnical report for the area of the site that the new addition is planned? If not, should that be included in the design proposal?

Ans: No and No

Q11: New roof for the Transfer Station – Can you clarify that the new roof scope is limited to the roof membrane and not the roof structure? What type of roof system will be replaced?

Ans: Yes the structure is fine. Limited to the roof membrane.

Q12: Will the entirety of the tipping floor be replaced or just a wear layer?

Ans: Entirety of Tipping Floor

Q13: Do you know if the existing MRF tipping floor drains are functioning? Do anticipate redoing any of the floor drains and subsurface piping as part of the tipping floor replacement scope?

pg. 3

Ans: Currently operational. At this time we are not sure the budget allows for the replacement of the drains and subsurface piping.

Q14: What type of in-floor heat system is there and how will its future operational needs be accommodated with the building remodel?

Ans: There is not in floor heat in MRF which is the building that the floor will be replaced. Even though the transfer facility has a heated floor, the addition will not need to have in floor heat as we will not be dumping garbage that would freeze in the winter on that floor.

Q15: Is compactor equipment part of the $2MM estimated cost?

Ans: No

Q16: Can the same vendor or company bid on the design as well as the resulting construction project? For example, Fire suppression. Can a company that designs fire suppression systems bid on the design and construction of the system?

Ans: Yes, provided that they would work with the alternate vendor builder if they do not win the Construction portion via the CMaR Bid Package.

Q17: The timeframes highlighted on the Attachment E Cost Proposal does not appear to include time for the public bidding and award process, nor does it provide a fee for services related to AE support during the bidding phase of the project. What duration should we account for regarding the bidding phase as it relates to the overall project timeline?

Should the AE team provide a fee for services related to the bidding process?

Ans: A maximum of 6 weeks for the bid process. Once we have the Construction Documents the CMaR will manage the bidding process.

Q18: Architectural

a. Record ‘As-Built’ Documents (Transfer & Tip Floor / Processing Facility).

b. Electronic Files in AutoCAD format.

c. Operation & Maintenance, Facility Condition, and Hazardous Material Studies

d. Validate height / top of wall elevation of Transfer and Tip Floor / Processing Facility as noted in the RFP.

Ans: a-c. Any records we have are in PDF. d. Transfer Facility Overhead Door are 14’ 16’ 14’ and the new door can be 14’. The Recycling (MRF) Overhead Doors are 16’ and 16’ (tipping floor doors) Note the measurement you request are on page 2 of Attachment F.

Q19: Civil

a. Site Survey (boundaries, topography, easements, and zoning regulations).

b. Identify Potable Water, Sanitary Sewer, Communications, and Electrical Service.

c. Stormwater Management / Drainage Studies / Leach Field Reports.

d. Any known site constraints or challenges (surface or subsurface)?

Ans: a-c. We will provide what we have at time of award. d. None that we know of at this time.

Q20: Structural

a. Record ‘As-Built’ Documents (Transfer & Tip Floor / Processing Facility)

b. Any known structural limitations or previous modifications that impact future Transfer Facility addition or renovation within Tip Floor / Processing Facility?

Ans: a-b Any records we have are in PDF.

Q21: MEP

pg. 4

a. Record ‘As-Built Documents (Transfer & Tip Floor / Processing Facility).

b. Any known need to expand Electrical Service Capacity / Infrastructure to accommodate two compactor units (lead time for switchgear and transformers is quite lengthy and can influence project schedule).

Ans: See Q20 b. We think the electrical needs are adequate. We understand lengthy lead times.

Q22: Geotechnical

a. Soil Condition Report (soil type, density, strength, and percolation).

Ans: We would order one if needed at the time we start design

Q23: Equipment

a. Current Equipment Specifications and Proposed Compactor Specifications.

Ans: We would provide after we procure those items by end of 2025.

Q24: Environmental

a. Previous Environmental / Leachate Studies

b. Hazardous Material, Hydrology, and Water Quality Studies.

Ans: An Environmental Review and a Phase 1 Environmental Assessment was done on the site. The ER showed no significant impact, and the ESA did not reveal any recognized environmental conditions with the property.

Q25: Operational Continuity During Construction

a. Do you anticipate seasonal blackout periods, peak operations times, or operational sequences that constrain construction phasing?

b. Do you have specific requirements for maintaining 7:30 am to 3:00 pm operations and access to existing loading docks during term of construction?

Ans: a. Work will be sequenced to maintain operations. b. we will shift operations around to accommodate the construction process but it will need to be accounted for in the Construction timeline developed by the CMaR.

Q26: BABA Compliance and Procurement Strategy

a. What specific Buy American Build America documents, processes, and pre-approved suppliers / materials would be required by Portage County?

b. What is Portage County Experience with BABA compliance?

c. Are there preferred procurement strategies in-place?

Ans: a. We would use information provided in these links as guidance for specifications for procurements of goods and services done on these projects. We feel pages 20-22 on the first link best spells out parameters for the procurements. https://www.hud.gov/sites/dfiles/OCHCO/documents/cpd-25-01.pdf . We included the link to the general website as well here: https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/baba/ b. Minimal c. None that we are aware of. The CMaR will go to the market with specifications and the suppliers will need to meet the requirements.

Q27: Project Coordination and Authority Structure

a. CMAR Procurement: How will design coordination, cost estimating, and project schedule / decision making authority be structured?

b. What is the Owner Representative specific role and responsibilities?

Ans: a. The County and who we hire as a representative will be in charge of the project b. If the County hires an Owner Rep they would have all the same powers and decision making authority as the County.

Q28: Please clarify any scope of work related to BABA that will be the responsibility of the AE.

Ans: The Designer will need to understand the specifications that are in BABA to assist the purchasing process by the CMaR.

https://www.hud.gov/sites/dfiles/OCHCO/documents/cpd-25-01.pdf https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/baba/

pg. 5

Q29: Please provide the attendee list from the Pre-Proposal Site Visit.

Ans: see below

Q30: Please clarify what will be available or provide any existing survey or geotechnical investigations for the site.

Ans: See Responses to Previous questions, specifically Q22

Q31: Please clarify if any replacement/repair design work will be required for the existing damaged north wall of the tip floor.

Ans: Nothing will be needed.

Q32: Attachment E Cost Proposal lines 2.1-2.4 say to list the fee as a % of $2mil, but the table heading says % of total fee. Please clarify which % should be listed.

Ans: There are two different percentages. In line 1.1 we want to know what your fee percentage of GMP would be so we would have a guide to what an adjustment in fee would be if the GMP is less or more. In lines 2.1-2.4 we want you to break your fee down in percentage for the different design phases both in dollars and percentages.

See Example.

Directions for 1.1 Submit Your Cost Materials as a Separate File in your Email as Part of the Proposal) The County is looking for Estimated Cost of Design and Engineering expressed as a dollar figure and a percentage of Construction Cost of Work if the estimated GMP is $2,000,000 in Line 1.1

$$ Amount

Fee Percentage(%

) Based on GMP of $2m Comments

Line 1.1 Estimated Total Cost of Design and Engineering of Project (200 Points) $160,000 8%

pg. 6

Directions for 2.1-2.4 Compensation for each phase of services should also be noted as percentage of overall fee.

$$ Amount % Of Total

Fee Chr to Cty Comments Line 2.1: Design and Engineering Services for Schematic Design thru Cost Estimating of Schematic Design done by CMaR. Architect Fee as a fixed amount and also list as percentage of overall GMP if project is $2,000,000. (2-3 month duration

$40,000 25%

Line 2.2: Estimate Design and Engineering Services for Design Development. Fee as a Percentage of GMP if Cost of Work is $2,000,000 (1-2 Month Duration)

$48,000 30%

Line 2.3: Estimate Design and Engineering Services for Construction Documents. Fee as a Percentage of GMP if Cost of Work is $2,000,000 (1-2 Month Duration)

$40,000 25%

Line 2.4: Estimate Design and Engineering Services for Construction Phase. Fee as a Percentage of GMP if Cost of Work is $2,000,000 (Construction is Estimated to be 6 months. Work completed between March-October)

$32,000 20%

Totals= Should Equal Amount from

1.1

Should Equal 100%

Q33: Section 6.2 request sending a Flash Drive with information. Is this correct?

Ans: This is a typo, please follow instructions in Section 2 specifically section 2.3 for submitting the Proposal and the Cost Proposal.

*******End of Addendum 1********

*******End of Addendum 1********