Addendum_2.pdf
PDF 246 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- RFQ-7-26-03
- Issued by
- Brevard County, Florida
About this file
This is Addendum 2 to a Request for Qualifications issued by Brevard County, Florida for Professional Engineering Services related to the Grissom Parkway Widening project (RFQ # 7-26-03). The project requires design services to widen the existing two-lane roadway to four lanes with median separation, turning movements throughout the corridor, roundabout evaluation, and stormwater management and pedestrian improvements. The design must accommodate a phased construction approach (minimum two phases) and potentially phased right-of-way acquisition, while meeting NEPA requirements for federal funding eligibility. All design documents must be prepared, signed, and sealed by a Florida-licensed design professional employed by or retained by the contractor. The qualification opening date and time remains October 29, 2025 at 10:00 AM.
The current budget for design services is $997,053.60, with fees to be negotiated with the awarded consultant and funding subject to adjustment as needed. DRMP, the firm that provided the 30% design plans and preliminary engineering report, is not precluded from submitting on this RFQ. The County will not consider major revisions to the sample Master Services Agreement, though certain provisions may be negotiated with the awarded firm, including hourly rates for expert witness testimony. The County declined to modify indemnity provisions to comply with Florida Statute 725.08 as suggested by prospective proposers and maintained other contract language related to standard of care requirements. Proposers must acknowledge receipt of this addendum with their submittal.
View the file
Other files
Show all 15
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
Professional Engineering Services Grissom Parkway Widening
RFQ # 7-26-03
October 22, 2025 Addendum 2
TO ALL PROSPECTIVE PROPOSERS
This is an Addendum to and shall be considered as part of the original RFQ package for the above-mentioned RFP. Proposers are requested to acknowledge receipt of this Addendum with their submittal.
QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES:
Question 1: Can you provide the name of the firm that provided the 30% design plans? Will this firm be precluded from submitting on this RFQ?
Answer: DRMP provided the 30% plans and PER. They will not be precluded.
Question 2: Does the County have a proposed budget for the project?
Answer: The current budget for design is $997,053.60. Fees will be negotiated with the awarded consultant and funding may be adjusted as needed.
Question 3: Will Brevard County consider proposed revisions to the sample Master services contract?
Answer: The contract will be negotiated with the awarded firm, but major revisions will not be considered.
Question 4: In tab 1, the RFQ requests disclosure of “ownership interest.” Could you please clarify what is specifically meant by this term? For example, is the County seeking information on equity ownership, corporate structure, or other forms of financial interest?
Answer: Please provide information regarding equity ownership
Question 5: Tab 1 requires a substantial amount of information to be included within a single page. Would the County consider allowing proposers to expand this section to two pages to ensure clarity and completeness?
Answer: Tab 1 is meant to be a brief introduction letter, with a high-level summary of the business and overview of the firm. Please note that Tab 1 is not scored. Maximum will remain at 1 page.
Question 6: As currently worded, we believe that the indemnity provision, Section 25 (1) and (2) of the Draft Contract is not in compliance with FL Statute 725.08 and is unenforceable. Would the County consider rewording same to conform with the statute? Suggested language per FL Statutes 725.08: “The design professional shall indemnify and hold harmless the County , and its officers and employees, from liabilities, damages, losses, and costs, including, but not limited to, reasonable attorneys' fees, to the extent caused by the negligence, recklessness, or intentionally wrongful conduct of the design professional and other persons employed or utilized by the design professional in the performance of the contract.”
Florida’s Space Coast
CENTRAL SERVICES GROUP Telephone (321) 617-7390 PURCHASING SERVICES Fax (321) 617-7391 Brevard County Government Center 2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way, Bldg. C, Suite C-303 Viera, FL 32940
Professional Engineering Services – Grissom Parkway Widening
RFQ # 7-26-03
October 22, 2025 Addendum 2 – Page 2
Answer: Language will remain the same.
Question 7: As currently worded, we believe that the indemnity provision, Section 17 located on page 4 and 5 of the RFQ and the indemnity provision located on page 25 of the RFQ, is not in compliance with FL Statute 725.08 and is unenforceable. Would the County consider rewording same to conform with the statute? Suggested language per FL Statutes 725.08: “The design professional shall indemnify and hold harmless the County , and its officers and employees, from liabilities, damages, losses, and costs, including, but not limited to, reasonable attorneys' fees, to the extent caused by the negligence, recklessness, or intentionally wrongful conduct of the design professional and other persons employed or utilized by the design professional in the performance of the contract.”
Answer: Language will remain the same.
Question 8: Would the County please add a clause into Section 3.3 of the sample agreement to state the Contractor will not be required to provide expert or fact witness testimony if it is a conflict of interest?
Answer 8: Section 3.3 of the Draft Contract can be amended to include the following language:
“If, in the opinion of the COUNTY, a bona fide conflict of interest exists wherein the CONTRACTOR is unable to perform the services outlined in this subsection, then the COUNTY shall hire alternative expert or fact witnesses as it deems necessary.”
Question 9: Would the County please add language in Section 3.3 of the sample agreement reflecting any expert or fact witness testimony will be provided for on an hourly basis specified for that particular service? Hourly rates for expert or fact witness testimony are not the same as design hourly rates.
Answer: Hourly rates for Expert Witness can be added to a hourly rate table and negotiated with the awarded firm.
Question 10: Would the County please modify the language in Section 8.1 of the sample contract to remove the “high level” requirement? A high level of a standard of care is not defined. Suggested language is as follows: The CONTRACTOR agrees to a level of quality control and accuracy, in keeping with its standard of care.
Answer: Language will remain the same.
Please note that the qualification opening date and time remains October 29, 2025 @ 10:00 am. All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.
Sincerely, Mary Bowers Purchasing Manager
END OF ADDENDUM 2
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .