47PF0024R0030 Amendment 01 RFIs.pdf

PDF 53 KB Posted

Attached to
CANCELLED - Design Build Solicitation - Metzenbaum Plaza Repairs Project
Solicitation number
47PF0024R0030
Issued by

About this file

This document is an Amendment (Amendment 01) to Request for Proposals (RFP) 47PF0024R0030 for the Metzenbaum Plaza Replacement and Structural Repairs project in Cleveland, OH. The amendment extends the due dates for Request for Information (RFIs) to 7/15/2025 and proposal submissions to 7/29/2025, both no later than 4:00 PM Eastern Time.

The amendment includes responses to several key contractor questions, clarifying project requirements and evaluation criteria. Notably, GSA will consider projects using alternative delivery methods like Construction Manager as Constructor (CMC) and Construction Manager at Risk (CMaR), with project examples that more closely match the criteria receiving higher technical scores. The RFP indicates the Construction Manager (CM) award is anticipated in early August, prior to issuing the Phase II solicitation. The project involves design-build services for repairing or replacing the plaza and structural support system of the Howard M. Metzenbaum U.S. Courthouse, with an estimated cost range between $18-28 million and anticipated award in May 2026 with substantial completion in Winter 2029/2030.

View the file

Other files

Show all 12

On GovTribe

Work with this file

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Text version

RFP 47PF0024R0030 - Design Build - Metzenbaum Plaza Replacement and

Structural Repairs, Cleveland, OH

This amendment hereby extends the due date for RFIs to 7/15/2025, no later than 4:00pm

Eastern Time. The due date for proposals is also hereby extended to no later than 4:00pm

Eastern Time on 7/29/2025.

RFIs received as of 7/1/2025:

Q: A project that meets all of the stated criteria, i.e. is design-build, has been completed within the past 15 years, greater than $15M, and includes historic components in a central business district are very rare. Will the GSA consider projects that meet some but not all of these criteria, and that have been delivered via traditional design-bid-build?

A: Projects that meet all or most of the criteria listed under similar will receive higher technical scores than those that do not. However, it is permissible to submit project examples which demonstrate parts of the criteria but not all, as previously stated, those project examples will score lower technical scores.

Q: Will GSA consider expanding the Similar Project definition for Subfactor 1.A to include projects that utilized an alternative delivery method such as CMC, CMA, CMaR/GCCM in addition to design-build or IPD?

A: Yes, GSA will consider other delivery methods including Construction Manager as

Constructor/Construction Manager at Risk and will consider those as more similar for the purpose of this factor. As stated above, project examples which demonstrate more similarity to the proposed project/criteria, the higher technical score they will be eligible for.

Q: Would GSA consider moving the IPD requirement in Subfactor 1.A to the “more similar” category versus a prerequisite for ALL projects?

A: Under 1.A, IDP is not a requirement, it notes past experience with Design-Build OR IDP.

Q: Can you share a timeline for the CM award?

A: The CM award is anticipated in early August.They will at least be on board prior to issuing the

Phase II solicitation.

Q: Can you clarify the extent of systems, lighting, fire & life safety and security scope that will be included in the project? The Statement of Work, section 1.A Project description seems to list more than was discussed on site.

A: Due to the relationship between the existing plaza and building systems, some systems may require repair and/or replacement in order to perform plaza work. Section 1.A is in reference to this ancillary work.

Q: Since a CM has not been selected yet, offers do not need to submit a proprietary information agreement for Phase 1

A: No, offerors do not need to submit a proprietary information agreement at this time.

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .