RFSOQBDC01-22-23 Addendum 1.pdf
PDF 228 KB Posted
- Attached to
- RFSOQBDC01-22/23 Addendum 1 William J. "Billy Joe" Rish Recreation Area - Facility Development Proje
- Solicitation number
- RFSQ-01290
- Issued by
- Leon County, Florida
About this file
This document is Addendum No. 1 to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection's (FDEP) Solicitation No. RFSOQBDC01-22/23 for the William J. "Billy Joe" Rish Recreation Area - Facility Development Projects. The addendum provides clarification on various questions from applicants regarding the submission requirements, including the inclusion of subconsultants, the use of SF330 forms, and the design preferences for the ranger residences and toilet facilities. The addendum also addresses questions related to the evaluation criteria, specifically regarding diversity, FDOT roadway methodologies, and the limitation on the number of projects that can be submitted per client.
The contract opportunity is focused on the facility development projects at the William J. "Billy Joe" Rish Recreation Area, located in Florida. Applicants are required to submit their bids by a specific date, and the evaluation criteria will be scored as per the RFSOQ documents. The addendum confirms that FDEP Attachments F through I are to be included in the proposal, and that additional client forms can be added to Attachment D.
View the file
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
DEP Solicitation No. RFSOQBDC01-22/23, Addendum #1, Page 1 of 2
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
Environmental Protection
Marjory Stoneman Douglas Building
3900 Commonwealth Boulevard Tallahassee, FL 32399
Ron DeSantis Governor
Jeanette Nuñez
Lt. Governor
Shawn Hamilton Secretary
May 19, 2022
NOTICE TO APPLICANTS
ADDENDUM NO. ONE (1)
William J. "Billy Joe" Rish Recreation Area - Facility Development Projects
DEP SOLICITATION NO. RFSOQBDC01-22/23
TO APPLICANTS ON THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT: PLEASE NOTE
CONTENTS HEREIN AND INCLUDE WITH YOUR BID SUBMISSION.
NOTICE
It will be required that this addendum be signed in acknowledgment of receipt and that it be included with your Bid when same is submitted to Laurinda Micheels, Government Operations Consultant II, Bureau of Design and Construction, 3800 Commonwealth Blvd. MS520, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3000. Failure to do so may be grounds for rejection of the Bid.
Signature of Contractor and Date
The Following statements supersede & supplement the corresponding items in the specifications & drawings:
1. Question: We are the prime firm (architectural firm) and plan to include subconsultants (MEP, Structural, Civil, etc.) in our submission. It appears we include their information in the Section B, Part 4i. “Project Management” and Section C “Documenting Supporting Subcontract Arrangements”. Are we to include subconsultants in any other areas such as the Section B, Part 5 “330” or Part 6 “Licenses”?
Answer: No.
2. Question: We saw that only sections A-E are required for Part 1 of SF330, which eliminates submitting Section F, Example Projects. Is the intention to submit related project experience under Section B, Part 3 “Qualifications”?
Answer: Yes.
DEP Solicitation No. RFSOQBDC01-22/23, Addendum #1, Page 2 of 2
3. Question: Are the Ranger Residences going to be a new-designs in keeping with other structures at Rish Park or does FDEP have a Prototype Residence FDEP intends to use? Is there a preferred bedroom count of square footage?
Answer: This will be determined during the design process.
4. Question: Is the Toilet Facility going to be a new design in keeping with other structures at Rish or does FDEP have a Prototype Toilet Facility FDEP intends to use? And are there a considered number of toilets per gender that FDEP is seeking?
Answer: This will be determined during the design process.
5. Question: Are 330s resumes only used in Section B part 5, or are we to include 330 Section F project pages in the packet?
Answer: You do not include Section F.
6. Question: In Attachment D there are only 3 client forms, can we add more?
Answer: Yes.
7. Question: Are FDEP Attachments F thru I supposed to be in the proposal or just an acknowledgement that we acknowledge it?
Answer: They are included in the proposal. No acknowledgement is needed.
8. Question: State Project Plan, page 15 of 19, Item 1 Diversity -The plan references diversity and Service Disabled Veteran Business as being an objective, but there are no points associated or listed on the evaluation criteria. Is this evaluation criteria going to be revised or should we anticipate these as static?
Answer: The evaluation criteria will be scored as per RFSOQ documents.
9. Question: The evaluation criteria 3g. references criteria with FDOT roadway methodologies. There is more architectural work required than road work. This is a weighted score of 10 points? Is this evaluation criteria going to be revised or should we anticipate these as static?
Answer: The evaluation criteria will be scored as per RFSOQ documents.
10. Question: The criteria page 13 of 19 discusses criteria regarding clients and that a client can only be listed once. What if we have multiple recreation projects for one or more municipal clients. If we have multiple municipal clients we can only show one project per client. This limits our ability to show depth of experience in various areas of the evaluation. Evaluation criteria 3a, 3b and 3d.
Answer: A client can only be used once, regardless of number of projects completed.
In all other respects, the contract documents of which this is an Addendum, and attachments relative thereto, shall remain in full force and effect.
NOTICE
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .