Addendum - Clarification.pdf

REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS

& PROPOSAL (RFQ/P)

FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

Request for Qualifications & Proposal for Professional Services

CONSTRUCTION MANAGER / GENERAL CONTRACTOR

For

Chaffee County Sheriff Office Project

CLARIFICATION #1

November 26, 2024

Provided by: DYNAMIC PROGRAM MANAGEMENT

Chaffee County Sheriff Office CMGC RFQ/P – Clarification #1 2 © DYNAMIC PROGRAM MANAGEMENT, LLC

Request for Qualifications & Proposal – Clarification #1 A. Procurement Schedule Remaining

RFQ/P Responses due by 2:00 PM 12.11.2024 Interview Invitations sent to Short-Listed Candidates no later than 12/20/24 Interviews Week of 01.27.2025 Candidates Notified of Selection week of 02/02/25

B. Documents Issued to Date

a. Chaffee County Sheriff Office CMGC RFQP

b. Project Schedule dated 10/08/24

c. Space plan by McClaren, Wilson & Lawrie, Inc. dated 08.27.24

C. Documents Issued with This Addendum

a. Chaffee County Sheriff Office CMGC RFQP – Clarification #1 (this document)

b. Chaffee County Sheriff Office – Clarification Q & A (attached)

c. Project Schedule dated 11/25/24 (added 30% DD estimate & modified interview timing)

d. Geotechnical Engineering Study dated July 19, 2024

End – Clarification #1

CMGC RFQ/P – Clarification #1 3 © DYNAMIC PROGRAM MANAGEMENT, LLC

Chaffee County Sheriff Office CMGC RFQ/P Clarification Q/A

Question No. Question Response

1 Is there a cost estimate for the above project? Estimated Hard Cost Budget is $9.8M

2 After reviewing the proposed schedule are there any hard start or stop dates, ie: deadlines for funding/federal grants; project completion date, etc., that we should consider in our proposed schedule?

No.

3 Are there particular aspects of the AIA A133-2019 and AIA A201-2017 General Conditions that have been modified, and will these modifications be shared with shortlisted candidates prior to fee submissions?

Modified A133 & A201 will be shared with shortlisted firms prior to fee submission.

4 Are there specific software or platforms required for maintaining and sharing construction documentation?

No.

5 Are there specific requirements or preferences regarding the use of local subcontractors versus subcontractors from outside the area? If so, when will these be shared?

No specific requirements regarding the use of local subcontractors for this project.

6 Are there specific high-performance sustainability requirements, such as solar panels, EV charging stations, or guidelines aligned with LEED principles, that we should discuss in our proposal?

Solar panels & EV charging stations are anticipated to be included in project scope. The County does not anticipate pursuing LEED certifications.

7 In order to ensure we have the appropriate expertise in the team, are there specific features regarding access control, security systems, and overall technology that we should address while presenting our experience and qualifications?

These details will be finalized with the design team in the future. In your response to the RFP, please identify any technology or specialty subcontractors used in past law enforcement facility projects

8 It is understood that the proposed team will be involved in this project from start to completion.

With this in mind, are there any minimum time requirements for each team member’s dedication to the project?

Determining minimum requirements for team member’s dedication time is the responsibility responding firm.

9 Will demolition of existing building be managed by GC or Owner?

Contractor

10 Will abatement be managed by GC or Owner? No abatement is required.

11 Is the addition anticipated to be PEMB? CMU &

Structural Steel?

These details have not been finalized at this time.

CMGC RFQ/P – Clarification #1 4 © DYNAMIC PROGRAM MANAGEMENT, LLC

12 Is the dispatch building anticipated to be PEMB?

CMU & Structural Steel?

The future dispatch building is not included in this project.

Are existing sanitary / water services adequate to serve addition or will there be any tie ins for new services and utilities work?

These details have not been finalized at this time. Assume existing services are adequate.

14 What are the expectations for foundation types, drilled or rammed aggregate piers, building and site subgrade preparation?

Project Soils Report is attached.

15 Will any scopes be handled by Owner that should be excluded from GC scope of work, i.e. (low-voltage, access controls, security cameras, etc.)?

The listed scopes of service are expected to be included in the design drawings and managed by the Contractor

16 Will any special construction be utilized, i.e. (bullet-proof glass)?

These details have not been finalized at this time.

17 Will the exiting building be occupied during construction?

No.

GES 24-201

1537 G Street

Salida, CO 81201

(719)539-2312

Fax (719)530-9111

2035 1/2 Grande Avenue

Monte Vista, CO 81144

(719)628-2069

Fax(719)530-9111 M O U N T A I N

ENGINEERING AND TESTING, INC.

Mr. Don Reimer July 19, 2024 Chaffee County PO Box 699 Salida, CO 81201

Subject: Geotechnical Engineering Study Proposed Chaffee County Sheriff’s Building 7420 W US Hwy 50, Salida, CO 81201

Project No. 24-201

Dear Mr. Reimer:

This geotechnical engineering study was performed to evaluate the subsurface soil and ground water conditions to provide geotechnical engineering criteria for the structural foundation design at the subject project. As requested, a representative of Mountain Engineering and Testing (MET) visited the subject site on June 24, 2024 to record the subsurface conditions in two exploratory test pits at the site. The project was performed based on our proposal P-24-079 executed on May 24, 2024.

Proposed Construction: The proposed construction is an addition to an existing commercial building.

Foundation plans were not provided to us at the time of this study. Foundation loads are anticipated to be light to moderate and typical of the proposed construction. If loads, locations, or conditions are significantly different from those described above or depicted in this report, MET should be notified to reevaluate the recommendations contained herein.

Site Conditions: The 2.55 acre lot is located at 7420 W US Hwy 50, Salida, CO. The lot has an existing commercial building in the southeast corner of the lot, with asphalt and concrete covering the western half of the lot. The eastern half of the lot is an undeveloped field. The lot is bordered to the east, west, and north by commercial properties and to the south by US Hwy 50. The lot is flat, and vegetation at the site consists of grasses and shrubs.

Subsurface Conditions: Subsurface conditions at the site were observed in two test pit excavations extending to a maximum depth of 7 feet. The location of the test pits are shown on the Test Pit

Location Plan, Figure 1. The test pit logs with the legend and notes are presented on Figures 2 through 4.

The density of the native soil was evaluated with a 5/8-inch penetrometer driven into the various strata with blows from a 10-pound hammer falling 12-inches. This test is similar to the standard penetration test described by ASTM D 1586. Depths of the penetrometer testing and the corresponding resistance values are shown on the test pit logs.

The subsurface conditions encountered in TP1 consisted of dense, brown, well graded gravel (GW) with sand. The gravel consisted of sub-rounded gravel to 3 inches, and sub-rounded cobble to 10 inches in diameter, with fine to coarse grained sand. The cobble content increased with depth. The test pit was concluded at 7 feet due to refusal.

7420 W US Hwy 50 GES

GES 24-201

1537 G Street

Salida, CO 81201

(719)539-2312

Fax (719)530-9111

2035 1/2 Grande Avenue

Monte Vista, CO 81144

(719)628-2069

Fax(719)530-9111 M O U N T A I N

ENGINEERING AND TESTING, INC.

The subsurface conditions encountered in TP2 consisted of 2 feet of loose, fill material silty sand with gravel. Test pit TP2 was excavated adjacent to an existing asphalt pad. The silty sand consisted of fine to coarse grained sand with sub-angular gravel to 4 inches in diameter. The silty sand was underlain by dense to medium dense, well graded gravel (GW) with sand, similar to that in TP1. Test pit TP2 was concluded at 6 feet.

The results of gradation testing performed on one sample obtained from test pit TP1 is shown on

Figure 5, as well as the test pit logs.

Ground water was not encountered in the test pits TP1 or TP2 at the time of excavation. Seasonal ground water was estimated at a depth greater than 7 feet. Ground water observations and estimated seasonal ground water are based on current conditions and may not be indicative of other times or locations. Ground water levels may fluctuate with varying seasonal and weather conditions.

Foundation Recommendations: The following design and construction criteria are recommended for a shallow foundation system penetrating any fill material or silty sand and bearing on the native, well graded gravel or compacted structural fill. The following design and construction criteria are recommended for a spread footing foundation system.

Footings (interior and exterior) should have a minimum embedment from the native surface sufficient to bear directly on the well graded gravel, or directly on structural fill placed and compacted and designed for:

o An allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,000 psf.

o An allowable coefficient of friction of 0.39.

Exterior footings and footings beneath unheated areas should be placed at least 24 inches below the exterior grade for frost protection.

Spread footings should have a minimum width of 16 inches for continuous footings and 24 inches for isolated pads.

Continuous foundations walls expected to span greater than 8 feet should have additional reinforcement top and bottom sufficient to achieve the expected span, under the maximum expected factored load.

Subgrade soils disturbed by excavation operations should be re-compacted prior to placement of foundation elements. If the presence of large rocks makes disturbing the native soil below the footing elevation unavoidable, then the rocks should be removed and replaced with compacted structural fill. MET recommends a 4-6 inch leveling course of structural fill to avoid point loading of rock/cobble on the foundation elements.

If soft or yielding soils are encountered, MET should be contacted to assess the soil conditions and recommend remedial measures. Typical procedures involve removing soft/yielding subgrade soils to firm material and replacing them with compacted structural fill or gravelly, native soil. Any structural fill should be compacted in 6 inch lifts per the recommendations discussed in “Fill Materials” until the desired footing elevation is achieved.

If groundwater is encountered, MET should be contacted to assess the soil conditions and recommend remedial measures. Typical procedures involve removing any soft/yielding subgrade soils below the groundwater surface to firm material and replacing them with crushed rock.

GES 24-201

1537 G Street

Salida, CO 81201

(719)539-2312

Fax (719)530-9111

2035 1/2 Grande Avenue

Monte Vista, CO 81144

(719)628-2069

Fax(719)530-9111 M O U N T A I N

ENGINEERING AND TESTING, INC.

Estimated settlement of footings bearing on structural fill is less than 0.5 inches under dry, drained conditions.

Once the excavation is exposed, but prior to placement of any fill or footing formwork, a representative of MET should be called out to verify the nature and density of the foundation excavations to ensure that relatively uniform soil conditions are present and to confirm that MET’s recommendations are consistent with actual conditions. If MET is not able to verify the soil conditions, MET cannot be held responsible for recommendations that may be inconsistent with actual conditions.

Floor Slabs: A minimum depth of 6 inches of compacted structural fill or gravel is recommended below floor slabs placed in accordance with the recommendations in the "Fill Material, Placement and

Compaction" section of this report. Topsoil, fills, and deleterious material; if encountered below slab areas, should be removed and replaced with the structural fill material recommended under the heading “Fill Materials, Placement and Compaction” in this report.

Floor slab control joints should be used to reduce damage due to shrinkage cracking. Joint spacing is dependent on slab thickness and aggregate size, and should be consistent with recognized guidelines such the Portland Cement Association (PCA) and the American Concrete Institute (ACI). A vapor retarder membrane is recommended for slabs with moisture sensitive floor coverings to reduce moisture in the concrete slab. Concrete placement and curing should be in accordance with the

American Concrete Institute recommendations. Improper curing techniques and/or high slump concrete can cause excessive shrinkage, cracking and/or curling of the concrete slab. Floor slab control joints should be used to reduce damage due to shrinkage cracking.

Concrete placement and curing should be in accordance with the American Concrete Institute recommendations. Improper curing techniques and/or high slump concrete can cause excessive shrinkage, cracking and/or curling of the concrete slab.

Lateral Earth Pressures: The lateral equivalent fluid pressures for soils above a free water surface are recommended below:

Backfill Material Active Passive At Rest

Onsite well graded gravel 34 pcf 400 pcf 53 pcf

Imported Structural Fill 34 pcf 400 pcf 53 pcf

All foundation walls should be designed for appropriate surcharge pressures such as adjacent buildings, traffic, construction materials and equipment. The pressures recommended above assume drained conditions behind the walls and a horizontal backfill surface. If water or sloping backfill conditions occur, we should be contacted to reevaluate our recommendations.

The natural on-site soils, exclusive of topsoil and other organic matter, can be used as foundation wall backfill. However, the on-site materials placed within 3 feet of foundation walls should not contain materials greater than 3 inches in diameter.

GES 24-201

1537 G Street

Salida, CO 81201

(719)539-2312

Fax (719)530-9111

2035 1/2 Grande Avenue

Monte Vista, CO 81144

(719)628-2069

Fax(719)530-9111 M O U N T A I N

ENGINEERING AND TESTING, INC.

Site Clearing and Subgrade Preparation: Strip and remove existing vegetation, debris and other deleterious materials from the proposed subgrade areas. All exposed surfaces should be free of mounds and depressions that could prevent uniform compaction. Foundation subgrade should be free of any surficial fill material or silty sand and penetrate to bear on the well graded gravel.

Stripped materials consisting of vegetation and organic materials should be used to revegetate exposed areas after completion of grading operations. Organic materials should only be placed in non-structural areas. Onsite rounded or subrounded cobble is not suitable for stabilization aggregate.

Fill Materials, Placement and Compaction: The on-site well graded gravel, exclusive of topsoil and materials greater than 2 inches in diameter, is suitable for use as foundation backfill, but not as structural fill. Imported structural fill should conform to the following:

Sieve Size Percent Finer Plasticity

2 inch .................................... 100 Liquid Limit . . . . . . . . . 30 max.

1.5 inch .......... . ...................... 90-100 Plasticity Index . . . . . . 10 max.

¾ inch ……………………….. 50-90

No. 4 Sieve ............................ 30-50

No. 200 Sieve ........................ 3-12

Frozen soils should not be used as fill or backfill, and fill should not be placed over frozen ground. The subgrade preparation during winter should follow ACI 306 Chapter 6 when temperatures fall below freezing.

The following compaction recommendations are provided for structural fill depths less than five (5) feet. If fill materials are placed in excess of five feet, we should be contacted to review the conditions and provide additional recommendations, if necessary. The compaction and moisture contents shown in the following table are recommended for granular soils.

FILL AREA

MINIMUM COMPACTION

MOISTURE CONTENT

Below Foundations

98% Std. Proctor (ASTM D698) or

93% Mod. Proctor (ASTM D1557)

Optimum Moisture, +/- 3%

Below Floor Slabs

95% Std. Proctor (ASTM D698) or

90% Mod. Proctor (ASTM D1557)

Landscape & Wall Backfill

90% Std. Proctor (ASTM D698)

GES 24-201

1537 G Street

Salida, CO 81201

(719)539-2312

Fax (719)530-9111

2035 1/2 Grande Avenue

Monte Vista, CO 81144

(719)628-2069

Fax(719)530-9111 M O U N T A I N

ENGINEERING AND TESTING, INC.

Compliance: Performance of the foundations supported on compacted fills or prepared subgrade depend upon compliance with the above earthwork recommendations. To assess compliance, observation and testing should be performed under the direction of the geotechnical engineer. We recommend that any structural fill placement below foundations should be observed and tested by an

MET representative.

Surface Drainage: The exterior ground surface within 10 feet of the building should have a minimum positive slope of 6 inches over 10 feet. A minimum slope of 2½ inches over 10 feet is recommended in paved areas. Drains and roof downspouts should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill.

Subsurface Drain System: The granular soils encountered classify as GW and are considered Group I soils per the 2015 IRC Table R405.1. Therefore a subsurface perimeter drain system is not necessary for the foundation due to the well-draining soils along with the fact that below grade areas are not being pursued. If plans change, MET should be contacted to revise these recommendations.

Crawlspaces, if used, should have proper ventilation and the surface of the crawlspaces should be covered with a vapor retarder membrane to reduce the moisture levels in crawl crawlspaces.

Regardless of these precautions, elevated moisture levels may occur in the crawl space area or below slabs from extended periods of shallow ground water that can result in mold or mildew. Mold and mildew spores can adversely affect the air quality in the building potentially resulting in adverse health effects.

Concrete: Based on the soils encountered in the test pits and a sulfate concentration of 200 ppm measured in sample, we recommend that Type I-II cement be specified for concrete exposed to the on-site soils. Material testing of foundation concrete for slump, entrained air, and compressive strength is recommended during placement.

Limitations: This study has been conducted in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices in this area for use by the client for design purposes. The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this letter are based upon the data obtained from the exploratory test pits and the proposed type of construction. The nature and extent of subsurface variations across the site may not become evident until excavation is performed. If during construction, fill, soil, rock or water conditions appear to be different from those described herein, this office should be advised at once so reevaluation of the recommendations may be made. We recommend on-site observation of excavations by a representative of the geotechnical engineer.

The scope of services for this project does not include either specifically or by implication any environmental or biological (e.g. mold, fungi, and bacteria) assessment of the site or identification or prevention of pollutants, hazardous materials or conditions. If the owner is concerned about the potential of such contamination or pollution, other studies should be undertaken.

GES 24-201

1537 G Street

Salida, CO 81201

(719)539-2312

Fax (719)530-9111

2035 1/2 Grande Avenue

Monte Vista, CO 81144

(719)628-2069

Fax(719)530-9111 M O U N T A I N

ENGINEERING AND TESTING, INC.

Please contact us at 719-539-2312 if you have any questions of if we can be of further assistance.

Sincerely, MOUNTAIN ENGINEERING AND TESTING, Inc.

Frank Block, P.E.

Project Engineer

Attachments:

Figure 1 Test Pit Location Plan

Figures 2 and 3 Log of Exploratory Test Pits

Figure 4 Legend and Notes

Figures 5 TP1 Gradation Test Results

Appendix A General Engineered Fill Recommendations

MET FB

Typewriter 7/19/2024

Appendix A General Engineered Fill Recommendations

A. Clearing and Grubbing

a. Areas where excavation or fill placement will be undertaken shall be cleared of all trees, stumps, roots, brush, rubbish, organic soil, or other objectionable matter as determined by the Soil Engineer. Organic soil which is suitable for topsoil shall be stockpiled for later use in landscaping, B. Preparation of Area to be Filled

a. Scarification: After vegetation and other unsuitable material have been removed, the ground surface of the area to be filled shall be scarified to a depth of at least six (6) inches, and the ground surface is free from ruts, ridges and other uneven features.

b. Benching: Where fills are placed upon hillsides or slopes where the slope ratio of the original ground exceeds 5 horizontal to 1 vertical (20%), the original ground slope shall be stepped or benched, and the surfaces of benches scarified to a depth of at least six (6) inches. Ground slopes which are flatter than 5 horizontal to 1 vertical shall be benched when considered necessary by the Soil Engineer.

c. Subgrade Compaction: After the foundation for the fill has been scarified and benched as necessary, the ground surface shall be bladed until it is uniform size and brought to the proper moisture content for compaction.

The ground surface shall then be compacted to the densities recommended in the geotechnical report.

d. Existing Earth Fill: Any unsuitable existing fill on the site shall be removed until undisturbed native soil is exposed. The native soil shall then be scarified, prepared, and compacted and suitable structural fill shall be placed, in accordance with these guidelines.

C. Compacted Fill

a. Fill Materials: Material for fill shall consist of suitable soil as identified in soil reports and/or approved by the Soil Engineer. The fill materials used shall be free of vegetation, frozen material, or other deleterious material.

The fill shall no contain particles having a diameter greater than three (3) inches.

b. Rock: The maximum rock size in fill materials shall be three (3) inches.

Large rocks shall not be allowed to nest and voids between rocks shall be carefully filled with properly compacted soil. No large rocks will be permitted within twelve (12) inches of finished grade.

c. Fill Placement: Fill shall be placed in uniform, level layers which do not exceed six (6) inches thickness after compaction. Each layer shall be placed, mixed, and spread in such a manner as to insure uniformity of each layer, and to prevent the formation of layers or zones of material which differ significantly in characteristics from the surrounding fill.

d. Moisture Control: Prior to compaction, the fill material shall be brought to its Proctor optimum moisture content, plus or minus 3% to insure even and uniform moisture conditions within the layer. The contractor may be required to add water to material in the excavation or borrow areas prior to transporting to the fill if, in the opinion of the Soil Engineer, proper moisture control cannot be obtained by adding water directly to the fill surface.

e. Compaction Procedure: After each layer has been spread, mixed, and brought to the proper moisture content, it shall be mechanically compacted to the recommended density. Other levels of compaction may also be specified by the Soil Engineer depending upon the type of soil encountered. Compaction of each layer shall be continuous over the entire area of the layer, and compaction equipment shall make sufficient passes to insure uniform and adequate compaction of each layer.

f. Compaction of Slopes: The face slopes of fills shall be properly compacted. Compaction on face slopes of fills may be accomplished progressively in increments of three (3) to five (5) feet in fill height, or may be done after the fill is brought to its total height.

D. Quality Control

a. Moisture Density Tests: Prior to commencement of fill operations, a Proctor test, shall be made for each soil material anticipated in the excavation and borrow areas. Additional Proctor tests shall be made during construction if different materials are encountered, or if soil mixtures on the fill warrant additional testing. Occasional single-point density tests shall be performed if necessary to verify the appropriateness of the Proctor values being used.

b. Density Testing: Field density tests shall be made by the Soil Engineer of the compaction of each layer of fill. At least one test shall be made for each layer of fill, and sufficient suitable compaction of each layer has been achieved. Density tests shall be taken in the compacted material below the disturbed surface. When these tests indicate that the density of any layer of fill or portion thereof has not been properly compacted, the particular layer or portion shall be reworked until the required density has been obtained.

E. Seasonal Limits

a. No fill material shall be placed, spread, or rolled while it is frozen or thawing, or during unfavorable weather conditions. When fill operations are interrupted by weather conditions, fill operations shall not be resumed until the moisture content and density of the previously placed fill are tested for density.

ID Task Mode

Task Name Duration Start Finish

1 Arch Procurement 103 days Fri 7/19/24 Tue 12/10/24 2 Geotech Report - Completed 1 day Fri 7/19/24 Fri 7/19/24 3 McClaren Test Fit/SD design compl1 day Mon 9/9/24 Mon 9/9/24 4 Draft & Finalize Architect FRQ/P 16 days Tue 9/17/24 Tue 10/8/24 5 Architect RFQ/P 3 wks Wed 10/9/24 Tue 10/29/24 6 Short list Architects 7 days Wed 10/30/24 Thu 11/7/24 7 Architect Prep for interview 8 days Fri 11/8/24 Tue 11/19/24 8 Architect Interview 1 day Wed 11/20/24 Wed 11/20/24 9 Architect Selected 5 days Thu 11/21/24 Wed 11/27/24 10 Contract Negotiated 8 days Thu 11/28/24 Mon 12/9/24 11 BOCC approval 1 day Tue 12/10/24 Tue 12/10/24 12 Design & GMP Development Process180 days Wed 12/11/24 Tue 8/19/25 13 Schematic Design 35 days Wed 12/11/24 Tue 1/28/25 14 100% Design Development 10 wks Wed 1/29/25 Tue 4/8/25 15 30% DD Estimate 10 days Mon 2/24/25 Fri 3/7/25 16 100 % DD Estimating 15 days Wed 4/9/25 Tue 4/29/25 17 100% Building Permit / 90% CD 12 wks Wed 4/30/25 Tue 7/22/25 18 Final GMP Estimate 1 mon Wed 7/23/25 Tue 8/19/25 19 Additional Procurement 252 days Mon 5/13/24 Tue 4/29/25 20 CMT Procurement 15 days Mon 2/24/25 Fri 3/14/25 21 Cx Procurement 15 days Wed 4/9/25 Tue 4/29/25 22 Abatement Consultant 1 day Wed 5/22/24 Wed 5/22/24 23 Soils Engineer 1 day Mon 5/13/24 Mon 5/13/24 24 GC Procurement 99 days Wed 10/9/24 Mon 2/24/25 25 Draft & Finalize Contractor RFQ/25 days Wed 10/9/24 Tue 11/12/24 26 CM/CG RFP/Q 21 days Wed 11/13/24 Wed 12/11/24 27 Shortlist CM/GC 7 days Thu 12/12/24 Fri 12/20/24 28 CM/GC Prep for interviews 25 days Mon 12/23/24 Fri 1/24/25 29 CM/GC Interviews 5 days Mon 1/27/25 Fri 1/31/25 30 CM/GC Selected 5 days Mon 2/3/25 Fri 2/7/25 31 Contract Negotiated 10 days Mon 2/10/25 Fri 2/21/25 32 BOCC approval -Meeting date T 1 day Mon 2/24/25 Mon 2/24/25 33 Permitting 71 days Wed 7/23/25 Wed 10/29/25 34 Building Permit Review 2 mons Wed 7/23/25 Tue 9/16/25 35 Building Permit Comment/Respons10 days Wed 9/17/25 Tue 9/30/25 36 Building Permit Review #2 1 mon Wed 10/1/25 Tue 10/28/25 37 Building Permit Issue 1 day Wed 10/29/25 Wed 10/29/25 38 Construction 653 days Wed 5/1/24 Fri 10/30/26 39 Abatement 0 days Wed 5/1/24 Wed 5/1/24 40 Building Construction 260 days Thu 10/30/25 Wed 10/28/26 41 Substantial Completion 1 day Thu 10/29/26 Thu 10/29/26 42 Punch List 15 days Fri 10/9/26 Thu 10/29/26 43 Furniture Move-In 5 days Fri 10/16/26 Thu 10/22/26 44 Final Completion 1 day Fri 10/30/26 Fri 10/30/26

5/1

M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F Half 2, 2024 Half 1, 2025 Half 2, 2025 Half 1, 2026 Half 2, 2026 Half 1, 20

CCSO Total Project Schedule 11.25.24

1 Page 1 Dynamic Program Management

End – Clarification #1