RFP 20250521 Addendum 1.pdf

Connie Gibson, Procurement Manager

1 Center Street Virginia Phone (434) 432-

Website:

www.pittsylvaniacountyva.gov

June 8, 2026

RE: RFP# 20250521- AE Service for New Courthouse and Feasibility Study

The following shall serve as Addendum #1. Please acknowledge receipt of this addendum when submitting your proposal.

Dear Vendor:

1. On page 2 of the RFP it reads "Pittsylvania County offers the option to submit bids or proposals electronically through the Commonwealth of Virginia’s eVA procurement marketplace" however, later on down the page it states "Pittsylvania County will still accept paper responses, as well as requiring a paper response for the electronic bids/proposals for review purposes.” Can the county please clarify whether or not they will accept electronic submissions through the EVA portal and do NOT require a paper submission. We do accept electronic proposals, but we also require a paper copy of the original proposal. We do not need the original copy on the close date and time.

2. On page 7 of the RFP, "Proposal Preparation Shall" the 4th and 6th bullet, seem to be asking for us to provide information on completed courthouse projects (as in built projects), however since this RFP is for a feasibility study, can we also show courthouse studies that we have completed (unbuilt) which means that the requested construction information (changes orders, etc.) would not be applicable? The

RFP is not only requesting the study but possible A/E services for the new courthouse (drawings, plans etc). Once we receive the study, determines how we are going to move forward. You need to included anything that you seem relevant to the project.

3. .On page 8 of the RFP, “Proposal Preparation Shall”, 6th bullet, it states “Provide a spreadsheet of firms

4 most recently completed courthouse (or comparable) projects…”. Typically, we provide our submittal response as a PDF, not in excel format. Can we provide the requested information in a PDF format?

That will be adequate

4. Does the prime need to be a Virginia-based firm, or may a firm from another state – provided its architects hold current Virginia licensure in good standing – submit as prime contractor for this engagement? The firm may be from another state as long as architects and engineers are licensed in VA. Qualified firms should also be familiar with VA laws and regulations.

5. Is there a minimum work share or self-performance requirement for the prime contractor? There is not a minimum work share or self-performance requirement for the prime contractor.

6. With respect to the comparable project references requested in the Proposal Preparation section: are projects of larger scale or program complexity acceptable as comparables? Would civic, institutional, or http://www.pittsylvaniacountyva.gov/ justice-related facility projects of comparable technical complexity be considered if courthouse-specific projects are limited? Projects of larger scale or program complexity as well as civic, institutional, or justice-related facility projects of comparable technical complexity may be considered if courthouse-specific projects are limited.

7. Should the project experience, reference projects, and professional qualifications described in the proposal pertain exclusively to the prime firm, or may the County consider the combined experience of the prime and named subconsultants as a team? The County may consider the combined experience of the prime and named subconsultants.

8. Are as-built drawings or existing construction documents for the 1853 courthouse and its subsequent additions (1898, 1917/1927, 1968, 1989–1991) available to shortlisted firms prior to or upon selection?

Staff should be able to provide as-builts for the 1968 and 1989 additions to shortlisted firms. Should these drawings include sensitive information, a signed non-disclosure agreement (NDA) by shortlisted firms is required.

9. Has the County established a preliminary project budget or funding ceiling for either the new courts facility or the renovation and repurposing of the existing courthouse? The County has not established a preliminary project budget or funding ceiling at this time.

10. Under Phase II, could the County clarify the intended scope and deliverable depth of 'preliminary engineering' for each of the two conceptual options? Specifically, is the expectation narrative-level utility and infrastructure analysis, or are preliminary engineering calculations and system schematics anticipated? Narrative level utility and infrastructure analysis should be included with each conceptual option, with more in depth preliminary engineering calculations and system schematics being developed as part of the preferred concept.

11. Are both Phase II conceptual options expected to be developed to equivalent levels of detail and documentation, or may the scope allow for one option to be developed in greater depth should the

County develop a preference during the planning process? The scope may allow for one option to be developed in greater depth should the County develop a preference during the planning process.

12. May the full A/E design and construction administration services referenced in Phase II and Section III, Item 4 be awarded as a separate agreement at the County's discretion, or is the intent to negotiate a single contract covering all phases at award? The full A/E design and construction administration services referenced in Phase II and Section III may be awarded as separate agreements at the County’s discretion.

13. Is the 2018/2019 space needs assessment be available for review prior to this proposal submission? The

2018/2019 space needs assessment/study may be provided upon request to shortlisted finalists on this project, with the understanding the document is shared in confidence. A signed NDA will be required prior to the County releasing this document.

14. Can you confirm that 21,780 sf noted on the public record is indeed the current square footage of the existing courthouse? According to the County’s CAMA system, the total square footage is 57,013. Per the 2018/2019 needs assessment, the gross area is an estimated 48,843 ft ².

15. Is there an anticipated size for the new courthouse? Or is it the expectation that the size should be guided by the anticipated program? This should be guided by the anticipated program.

16. Are boundary surveys, parcel maps, or GIS data for the existing courthouse site and adjacent properties within the required 1,000-foot radius (per Virginia Code § 15.2-1646) available for review? County GIS is available here: https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/72964533b5b14058835193306c7a33bc. The existing courthouse is located on parcel 2426-01-1629. A plat from circuit court land records is also attached.

17. Has the County had any preliminary contact with the Virginia Department of Historic Resources

(VDHR) regarding the feasibility study or the National Historic Landmark designation of the existing courthouse? If so, has any preliminary guidance been provided regarding the scope of VDHR coordination required? The County’s current courthouse is a National Historic Landmark per https://www.dhr.virginia.gov/historic-registers/187-0007/. A historical district also exists for part of the town of Chatham per https://www.dhr.virginia.gov/historic-registers/187-5001/. Further coordination with VA DHR will occur once a path forward becomes clearer.

18. Are there any recent, ongoing, or planned utility or infrastructure improvements to the existing courthouse including HVAC replacement, electrical upgrades, plumbing, or IT infrastructure, that the selected firm should take into account as baseline conditions for the Phase III building condition assessment? An HVAC replacement project for the original building and 1968 portion should be completed in the next 3-4 months.

19. For proposal submission requirements, there is a provision to submit the proposal using eVA, but then later you say, “Pittsylvania County will still accept paper responses, as well as requiring a paper response for the electronic bids/proposals for review purposes.” Please clarify if electronic submittals are allowed, or if you require hard copies to be sent. The County does receive electronic submissions through eVA. We also require a paper response; however this does not have to be received by the due date and time of the proposals.

20. Please confirm that the selected team is not precluded from future design work associated with outcomes of the study. The selected team is not precluded from future design work associated with outcomes of the study.

21. Please confirm reference projects can be submitted from the collective submitting team including the prime and any subconsultants. Reference projects may be submitted from the collective submitting team including the prime and any subconsultants.

Sincerely, Connie Gibson

Procurement Manager