36C24123R0074 0004.docx

Modification to a Previous Notice Modification to a Previous Notice

GENERAL INFORMATION

BASE NOTICE TYPE

SET-ASIDE

Network Contracting Office 1 VA Central Western Massachusetts HCS 421 North Main Street Leeds MA 01053-9764

POINT OF CONTACT*

Contracting Officer Chelsea Rodrigue chelsea.rodrigue@va.gov 413-584-4040x6712

PLACE OF PERFORMANCE

VA Central Western Massachusetts HCS

421 North Main Street

Leeds MA

COUNTRY

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

AGENCY’S URL

URL DESCRIPTION

DESCRIPTION

The purpose of this amendment is to:

1. Post the answers to the RFI questions.

2. The SF330 due date is extended to 2:00pm EST July 27, 2023.

631-22-010 Renovate Building 6 (Cascades) for Acute Inpatient Mental Health - RFIs SF330 Relevant Questions:

1) Can the SF330 due date can be postponed until a week after the RFI responses have been received?

VA Response: The SF330 due date is extended to 2:00pm EST July 27, 2023.

2) Section E:

a) Please confirm selection criteria 7, Commitment to the use of SDVOSB Subcontractors, is void.

VA Response: Respondents must provide a narrative on how they will commit to the use of Service-Disabled Veteran- Owned small businesses, Veteran-owned small businesses, and other types of small businesses as subcontractors.

3) Section F:

a) Part 1: Please confirm only 3 projects profiles should be submitted, rather than the 10 requested in the SF330 Standard Form.

VA Response: Respondents must provide three recent and relevant projects; any project provided in addition to the three will not be evaluated as part of this criteria.

Part 2: Will a Historic Preservation Consultant be required, and if so, do they need to be part of the SF330? What is the design team’s responsibility in regard to the Section 106 process vs what will be handled by the VA? We assume the design team will prepare documents which will be submitted by the VA, please confirm.

VA Response: SF330 evaluation factor #2 does not call for a Historic consultant. Assumption noted above in current/confirmed.

b) Part 2: Please clarify scope of requested commissioning:

i) Please confirm a 3rd party commissioning agent is required vs the HVAC contractor.

VA Response: Confirmed. A/E will need to hire HVAC commissioning agent.

ii) If so, please clarify if commissioning agent is to be hired as part of the construction contractor’s scope or by the A/E.

VA Response: commissioning agent is to be hired and managed by the design team.

iii) Please confirm if building envelope commission is also required, or just MEP?

VA Response: Not required. Only HVAC required.

iv) Will a 3rd party commissioning agent be required as part of the design team or just during construction, and if so, do they need to be part of the SF330?

VA Response: commissioning agent will be part of design and construction.

c) Part 2: Will a PSRDM consultant be required on this project, and if so, do they need to be part of the SF330?

VA Response: Yes, however effort level is expected to be light on this project.

4) SOW, Section 1.2: Required Disciplines and Expertise

a) SOW notes geotechnical work. Please confirm if a geotechnical consultant should be included as part of the design team? Based on the understanding of the requested courtyard and connector, we do not believe this will be needed.

VA Response: Geotech doesn’t need to be part of design team on SF330 paperwork. However, a Geotech may be required if the design for the courtyard warrants it (i.e., soil classification for structural purposes).

1) Please clarify if a topographic, site, and utility survey of the existing courtyard is available or if these services should be provided by the design team. Please confirm if GPR services should be provided by the design team.

VA Response: Minimal documentation is available. It should be assumed that all of these services are to be carried in this scope of work.

b) Please confirm if a full building scan is required, or if the Revit model can be completed based on field surveys and existing documentation?

VA response: No, partial scan of area within scope of work is acceptable.

i) If a full scan is required, the scanning team will not be able to access areas above ceiling such as the MEP and structure unless ceiling tiles are removed or there is enough space above ceiling. Please confirm if access will be provided, or if a scan of only the accessible space is acceptable.

VA Response: No, partial scan of area within scope of work is acceptable.

Design Scope Questions:

5) Special Notice for Qualifications Section A:

a) Please confirm the extent of the masonry repairs needed. Does the VA anticipate needing to replace masonry, repoint masonry, or something else?

VA Response: It is anticipated that most of the building will need to be repointed and some windowsill replacement.

6) SOW, Section 1.2: Project Specific Scope of Work

a) Is the renovation area on 1 floor or 2? If there is a second floor, please provide a sketch of that floor.

VA Response: The renovated area consists of only the first floor; however, scope may impact second floor, attic, and basement.

b) Please confirm current use of Building 6 and provide existing floor plans. Please confirm intent is for a gut renovation of the existing 9,500 SF, including all new wall locations?

VA Response: Existing space (first and second floor) houses administrative offices. The intent is to fully gut the first floor and redesign the whole area, however structural impacts will have to be taken into consideration when designing space and new wall locations.

c) Is there a report available for review of the existing known issues with the building envelope?

VA Response: no reports are available.

d) Please confirm the expected scope for the courtyard improvements. We understand that a new enclosed, accessible connector will be provided between Buildings 4 and 6. We understand that an enclosed courtyard will be created, access via the connector.

i) Please confirm this understanding is correct VA Response: Confirmed.

ii) Please confirm that no site utilities are expected to be altered as part of the site scope VA Response: Not confirmed. Site survey performed by design team to determine if existing utilities will be impacted by new design.

iii) We expect both hardscapes and landscape plantings will be included as part of the design, please confirm.

VA Response: Confirmed.

e) Environmental and other permits

i) Please confirm the design team would be responsible for preparing the permit applications, but that the VA would be responsible for submitting all permits to the applicable agencies via the GEMS coordinator.

VA Response: Confirmed.

ii) We anticipate the existing site has had prior permit approvals through the Commonwealth and Municipality for prior construction activities. Please confirm which land use permits through the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection or the municipal planning authority apply to the proposed project.

VA Response: All Necessary permits as determined by the successful bidder. VACWM has an MS4 General permit, Permit Number MAR042026. The VA expects that the project designer will comply with National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The project shall be designed in accordance with best practices and MassDEP, EPA standards to mitigate the stormwater runoff within the limits of the project work area. The designer will be expected to perform an Environmental Assessment and Environmental Impact Study (EIS) if necessary, in accordance with NEPA. The designer shall create Erosion and sediment control plans for exterior work. The construction contractor will be responsible for the permits required for construction as well as submitting the SWPPP.

f) SOW references Government Furnished drawings, record (as-built) drawings, and other planning documents which are part of this contract. Please clarify if drawings are available for review during the RFP process prior to award.

VA Response: There will be a site visit for the top three candidates that we will request a proposal from. Drawings will be provided at this time.

7) SOW, Section 2.2:

a) Please confirm if there are any phasing requirements as of this project, or if building 6 will be totally vacated during construction.

VA Response: Phasing may be required for floor space/occupants.

b) Please confirm if there are any other ongoing design or construction projects to Building 6 that would affect this project or available as-built drawings.

VA Response: Not at this time.

8) SOW, Section 3.1:

a) Please confirm if Revit 2020 or later is acceptable in lieu of the requested Revit 2019 version. Current AutoCAD licensing only allows for the last 3 versions of Revit to be available.

VA Response: Acceptable.

9) SOW, Section 3.2:

a) We understand that the A/E will be responsible for all meeting minutes during the design phase. Typically, that responsibility moved to the contractor during construction. Please confirm the VA’s intent is to have the contractor responsible for the weekly construction meeting minutes.

VA Response: Confirmed.

10) SOW, Section 4:

a) If the VA does opt to not award the project for construction immediately, will the VA require the Design team to re-evaluate the documents for current codes and standards at the time it is issued for construction? If an evaluation or changes are required, please confirm this would be considered an additional service.

VA Response: They will not be re-evaluated unless it is a significant change which will be handled under a change order.

b) The noted time for RFI and Submittal responses of (3) and (5) working days is shorter than the standard (7) and (14) calendar days. While we will do our best to meet those goals, it may not always be possible due to the complexity of some RFIs/Submittals, coordination required with the contractor or other consultants and general scheduling of potential holidays or vacation. Please confirm that these response dates are understood to be goals and not a hard requirement.

VA Response: See attached update SOW showing revised review durations for RFI and Submittals

11) SOW, Section 5:

a) The overall design schedule of 270 days appears to be achievable, however, we are concerned that there is no time allowance for the cost estimating. As the documents for each submission will need to be submitted to the cost estimator approximately 2 weeks prior to the submission to the VA, we have some concerns about any of the shorter submittal phases. Please confirm if it is acceptable to submit an alternate schedule that takes into account the time needed for the cost estimate at each phase (approximately 1 week for the 10% and 2 weeks for each of SD, DD and CD phases) to be added to the total project duration.

VA Response: The design schedule of 270 days is to remain. The re-scheduling of certain deliverables (i.e., cost estimate) during the period of performance can be adjusted within reason to accommodate the design process.

Modification to a Previous Notice