9.17.14_ _9.24.14_Pre-propsal_Meeting_Minutes_ _Sign-in_Sheets.pdf

GSA, PBS, Acquisition Management Division

Pre-proposal Conference Meeting Minutes RFP GS-05P-14-SC-C-0065: Bean Site Upgrades Project – GC Services

Location: Major General Emmett J. Bean Federal Center, Room 111D Indianapolis, IN 46249

Date: Wednesday, September 17, 2014 @ 11:00 AM – 12:00 PM, Eastern Time & Wednesday, September 24, 2014 @ 3:00 PM – 4:00 PM, Eastern Time

These meeting minutes are not intended to reiterate everything discussed in the meeting, but identify those points that may affect an Offeror’s understanding of the solicitation. Included in the minutes are the sign-in sheets documenting everyone that was in attendance.

The purpose of the pre-proposal conference was to discuss the RFP reference above. The goal was to answer any questions regarding the Request for Proposal (RFP) as well as allow potential contractors the opportunity to tour the project site.

Potential Offerors were instructed that no oral or written statement made by a Government representative during the pre-proposal conference can add to, modify or otherwise vary from the written provisions of the solicitation and/or amendments. In the event that discussions during the conference indicated a need to change the RFP, an amendment to the RFP will be issued in writing. All amendments must be acknowledged by the time/date proposals are due.

Introductions were made; those in attendance representing the GSA were:

Katie Musselman, Contracting Officer Stephen Carbery, Project Manager Fred Yonke, Contracting Officer’s Representative Todd Reeder, Property Manger

Those in attendance representing Dewberry Architects, Inc. were:

Gary Rockow, Civil Engineer Mike Haywood, Civil Engineer Adam Keyster, Civil Engineer Mike McTavish, Electrical Engineer Adam White, Landscape Designer

A contractual overview of the project was presented by Katie Musselman, Contracting Officer, which included but was not limited to the following points:

The estimated price range for the project is more than $10M.

The performance period for this contract is 898 calendar days, approximately 2 ½ years.

This is an exterior project; the project team believes they have accounted for winter weather conditions in the 2 ½ year performance period.

This is a negotiated procurement and proposals are required to include a price and a technical package.

o Technical factors are identified in the RFP and they are weighted equally.

o Price proposal includes the SF 1442 and the contract price form. Total

Evaluated Price will include the base contract, alternate no. 1, and options 1-4.

The price proposal must also include unit prices no. 1 and 2; unit prices will not be included in the Total Evaluate Price analysis.

Offeror’s were informed that the Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with offerors. Therefore, the offeror’s initial proposal should contain the offeror’s best terms from a cost or price standpoint. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them necessary.

The Government reserves the right to make an award to other than the lowest priced offer if it is determined that to do so would result in the best value to the Government.

Proposals are due October 15, 2014 by 3:00 PM Eastern Time. Offeror’s were informed that delivery can take some time within the building, due to building security, therefore, they are encouraged to allow adequate time for packages to be delivered.

Security clearances are required for all personnel performing work under this contract, regardless of the fact that this is an exterior project.

A project overview was presented by Stephen Carbery, project manager, which included, but was not limited to, the following points:

The existing south and west parking lots will be removed, reconfigured and resurfaced to improve vehicular and pedestrian circulation, safety, and the overall aesthetic of the parking areas. This project will result in a net increase of approx. 195 spaces on-site.

The existing storm water drainage system will be removed and a new storm water management system will be installed to accommodate the revised parking lot configuration. The new system will address severe drainage deficiencies that are causing continued flooding and surface degradation.

The existing 82 foot security bollard and cable barrier system must remain intact with all drives and parking located outside of the barrier system.

The existing north loop drive will be milled, overlaid and restriped.

Existing concrete sidewalks, curbs and gutters will be replaced.

New parking lot and pathway lighting will be provided.

New landscaping will be provided at the new parking lots on the south and west sides of the 73 acre site; the design proposes approximately 532 new trees and other plantings.

The construction documents propose four (4) construction phases. The phasing plan may be altered by the successful contractor; however, a minimum of 2,150 parking spaces must be available at all times to the building tenants. There is overflow parking available in city owned lots across the street on the south and southwest sides of the site. The contractor shall provide safe, accessible pedestrian routes to the building entrances during all phases of construction.

The contractor will be responsible for conducting meetings with affected building tenants/representatives (approx.18 tenant agencies) at appropriate intervals to address construction operations and coordination procedures.

Contractor is responsible for coordinating with local government officials and obtaining all necessary permits required for the project.

The A/E, Dewberry Architects, will be involved in management and inspection services.

GSA intends to hire a full time CMa for this project.

All testing is the responsibility of the general contractor.

Contractor’s use of the premises was discussed by Todd Reeder, property manager, which included but was not limited to the following points:

The contractor may utilize a gravel area on the southeast side of the building for site trailers. Utility hook-ups are currently available from a previous project. All utilities are the responsibility of the contractor.

The northeast grassy area of the site may be utilized as a stockpiling area; contractors will likely have to create an access road to that area.

Earthwork is to be coordinated by the contractor per phase and with the contractor moving material to and from stockpile area as required.

All areas used during construction (i.e. site trailer and stockpile areas) must be restored to their original condition(s) at the completion of the project.

A question and answer session was conducted after the above information was provided; the questions and answers are below. A site walk-through of the parking lot, including the gravel area available for site trailers, concluded the meeting.

Questions / Answers

The following addresses all questions that have been received to date (including those discussed during the pre-proposal conferences and that have been received via email).

Q1. Will the RFP incorporate the IDOA Buy Indiana initiative as part of the Section IV.F?

A1. No, the IDOA Buy Indiana initiative is only applicable to state agencies. This is a federal project; therefore, it is not applicable.

Q2. Have cores of the parking lot been completed to determine if concrete is under the asphalt?

A2. Reference specification section 003132 – Subsurface exploration (pages 11 - 115) for the soils report & borings that were completed in 2009. Though the report does not indicate that there is concrete under the asphalt parking area; a unit price (per square yard) will be added for the demolition, removal, hauling, and disposition of 8” thick concrete pavement via Amendment 02.

Q3. What is the purpose of the 1” layer of asphalt, under the pavers, at the south entrance?

A3. The asphalt setting bed for pavers is required; see details 1-6 on CS502.

Q4. May proposals be hand delivered?

A4. Yes, proposals may be hand delivered. To do so, it is recommended that you come to the north entrance of the Bean Center and call the Contracting Officer so she may come out to the security desk to receive the proposal.

Q5. The cable barrier detail notes on sheet CS520 state that a minimum rating of K4 must be achieved and shall be the same system as the M50 crash tested configuration. The detail drawing on CS520 is of an engineered mil-spec design that is not based off a crash tested system. Please clarify which type of cable barrier fence is required (engineered such as the mil-spec design or rated/certified from a proprietary source).

A5. The bollards and the cable barrier system shall be designed with a minimum K4 rating as indicated in details 1-9 on sheet CS520. The foundations shown on the details are for illustrative purposes only as indicated in note 3, detail 7 on sheet CS520. The intent is for the bollards and the cable barrier systems to be K4 rated and match the appearance of the systems currently installed at the Bean Center.