Addendum 2 - Lake Oswego Arch Services.pdf
PDF 173 KB Posted
- Attached to
- RFP Architect
- Solicitation number
- S-KL0010-00014141
- Issued by
- Clackamas County, Oregon
About this file
This document is Addendum 2 to the Request for Proposal (RFP) for Architectural Services issued by the City of Lake Oswego, Oregon, for the design of a new South Shore Fire Station 212. The addendum provides clarifications and responses to nine key questions from potential proposers, addressing topics such as site surveys, geotechnical reports, environmental assessments, sustainable design metrics, and project phasing. The City confirmed they will procure necessary surveys and reports, seek LEED equivalency, and that the project will involve a two-phase approach with Conceptual Design in Phase 1 and further design development in Phase 2, working directly with a Construction Manager/General Contractor (CM/GC) selected in Phase 1.
The addendum specifies additional requirements for proposal submission, including using a portrait (vertical) orientation, with horizontal pages allowed only for site plans, schedules, or fee schedules. Proposers are instructed to include information about their subconsultant team, listing firm names and disciplines. The document indicates that Furniture, Fixtures, and Equipment (FF&E) selection and coordination should be included as an optional service. Other unresolved items include the potential need for a new traffic signal, which is dependent on a traffic study, and demolition planning for the existing building, which will be handled in Phase 2 by the selected CM/GC. All other terms, conditions, and specifications of the original RFP remain unchanged.
View the file
Other files
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
Dear Proposers, Please be advised of Addendum 2 to RFP for ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES FOR THE DESIGN
OF A NEW SOUTH SHORE FIRE STATION 212.
1. QUESTION: Does the City have a recent topographic survey of the site available for AE use? If not, will the City procure the necessary survey(s) directly from a licensed professional surveyor and provide to the Architect for use on this project?
RESPONSE: No, to our knowledge there is not a recent topographic survey. The City will procure survey services and have it available for Architect use.
2. QUESTION: Does the City have a recent geotechnical report of the site available for AE use? If not, will the City procure the necessary survey(s) directly from a licensed geotechnical engineer and provide to the Architect for use on this project?
RESPONSE: No, to our knowledge there is not a recent geotechnical report. The City will procure geotechnical services and have it available for Architect use.
3. QUESTION: Was a Phase 1 Environmental Survey Assessment (ESA) performed? If so, could it be shared with the selected AE firm?
RESPONSE: No, to our knowledge there is not a recent ESA. The City will procure geotechnical services and have it available for Architect use.
4. QUESTION: Does the City intend to target any type of sustainable performance metrics as part of this project such as LEED, or NZE certifications, or an all-electric station?
RESPONSE: We will seek LEED equivalency.
5. QUESTION: “Exhibit A Schedule” identifies FF&E selection. Will the City / LOFD / CM/PM be selecting FF&E directly, or is the intent for the A&E to specify FF&E for the project?
RESPONSE: Please include FF&E selection and coordination as an additional optional service.
6. QUESTION: Please clarify when CM/GC will be selected, in Phase 1, or in Phase 2?
RESPONSE: In Phase 1 working directly with the Architect in Conceptual Development.
7. QUESTION: Please clarify that only conceptual architectural design is required as part of Phase
1, and that Schematic Design, Design Development, etc. will proceed in Phase 2. “Exhibit A
Design Schedule” intimates that Schematic Design and Design Development should be completed before the end of Phase 1.
RESPONSE: Yes, Conceptual Design only.
8. QUESTION: Please confirm that a new traffic signal along South Shore Blvd at the new fire station is not required.
RESPONSE: Unconfirmed and dependent on traffic study.
9. QUESTION: Will the demolition of the existing building be included in this contract (Phase 2)?
This will clarify if we need to prepare a demo plan and related erosion control.
RESPONSE: Demo planning would take place in Phase 2 and lead by the selected
CM/GC.
10. QUESTION: Is it acceptable to submit the proposal in a landscape (horizontal) layout, or does the
Owner prefer a portrait (vertical) orientation?
RESPONSE: Please submit proposal in portrait (vertical) orientation. Horizontal pages are acceptable only for site plans, schedule, or fee schedule.
11. QUESTION: Should the proposing firm include details of its proposed subconsultant team? If so, what level of detail is expected within the constraints of the proposal's stated page limit?
RESPONSE: Yes, please include information for proposed subconsultant team. Please include firm name and discipline.
All other terms, conditions, and specifications of the RFP remain unchanged.
For any additional questions, please contact the individuals listed as official points of contact in the RFP.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely, Alexandra Cettie
Owner’s Representative
Otak, Inc
| 2025-07-01T11:29:14-0700 | |
| Alexandra Cettie | |
| I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .