Southern Wake Campus Renovations – Building SL Addendum 2 8/18/2026

1) Was there a facility assessment, program study, and/ or previous cost estimate of the needed repairs and scope of renovations that was completed? If so, are those available to be shared?

(a) No, there is no advanced planning completed for this project.

2) Is there an established or desired opening date for the occupancy of this building yet? The demonstrated schedule durations don’t easily lend themselves to a semester opening date but appears that Fall of 2028 is the latest desired date, with Spring of 2028 being possible?

(a) We have not determined a start date. Once we have completed our design development phase, we will have a better understanding of the timeline of construction and semester start date.

3) I don’t see any description for civil engineering and landscape architecture scope of work for the project in the main description, but see the consultants are to be listed in the submission. Are you able to expound upon the possible work on the exterior of the building, excluding the envelope?

(a) Please see section 4 page 1.

4) Would you happen to have any drawings available for this building?

(a) Yes, however this is a qualification request as a first step. Once we have short-listed firms. Floorplans can be provided to the shortlisted firms.

5) Will there be a pre-submittal conference or site meeting?

If not, will firms have an opportunity to visit the building prior to the submission deadline to better understand the existing conditions and prepare a more informed response?

(a) There is no pre-RFQ meeting. If you wish to tour the building and campus proper on your own, you are free to do so. Please contact Codie Pigott at crpigott@waketech.edu in order to inform building SL that there are guests.

6) Is there any additional information about the project or the existing building that you are able to share with interested firms?

(a) Unfortunately, no there is no additional information available.

7) I understand you're overseeing design and construction on the $39.5M Building L renovation for Student Services. On a project that size, security scope — access control, camera coverage, credentialing — is usually easier to build in during design than to retrofit after the fact.

Minuteman is a commercial security integrator working across the Triangle. I wanted to reach out while the project's still in design, in case it's useful to loop security into the planning conversation alongside your team's other trades.

Would a short call make sense in the next couple of weeks?

(a) This is a qualification-based request for designers. Once a design team is selected, they will begin programming, design, and construction drawings for the bidding process.

8) Do you usually procure this service as part of the primary team, or does the university employ a consultant directly to keep everything on budget?

As independent 3rd-party estimators, we work with the design team to make sure the project is designed to budget. At milestones, we do independent cost estimates, reconcile with the CMAR or the contractor, and help guide the project back to budget though VE or scope changes. After GC award we can also support the University with change order negotiations.

(a) Please see section 4 page 1. An estimator would be considered a miscellaneous consultant.

9) On the RFQ solicitation document on the EVP site, it contains a “Selecting Criteria:” In selecting designers, the selection committee should take into consideration qualification information including such factors as:

• Specialized or appropriate expertise in the type of project.

• Past performance on similar projects.

• Adequate staff and proposed design or consultant team for the project.

• Current workload and State projects awarded.

• Proposed design approach for the project including design team and consultants.

• Recent experience with project costs and schedules.

• Construction administration capabilities.

• Proximity to and familiarity with the area where the project is located.

• Record of successfully completed projects without major legal or technical problems.

• Other factors which may be appropriate for the project.

Does this need to be included with the 15-page response requirements outlined in the RFQ under Section II: Statement of Qualifications, Page 1 Content Requirements? If so, will additional pages be permitted beyond the 15-page limit to accommodate the Selecting Criteria?

(a) Yes, the “Selecting Criteria” will need to be included in the 15-page response requirements outlined in the RFQ under section II. No, there is a required 15-page limit. Your statement of qualifications should outline the evaluation criteria sheet in section 4 page 1.

10) On the RFQ solicitation document available on the EVP site, the “SUBMITTAL CRITERIA” section states that “Proposing firms must submit Five (5) complete hard copies of the Statement of Qualifications with Standard Form 254/330 (SF 254/330) and One (1) electronic copy on USB drive..” However, in the attached RFQ, the Sample Evaluation Form section notes that “Firms may optionally provide a Standard Form 330 as an appendix.” Additionally, the RFQ specifies under the STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS (SOQ) FORMATTING REQUIREMENTS, item E, that firms must provide five (5) complete hard copies of the SoQ and one (1) electronic copy on a USB drive, without mentioning the SF 330.

Does Wake Tech need a SF 330 or an SF 254? If Wake Tech does require either form, will its contents be considered as part of the materials evaluated?

a) The advertisement refers to 254/330. We only require form 330 as an appendix to your statement of qualifications. Please see section 2 under “Statement of Qualifications Formatting Requirements.” The information found in SF330 does not replace the required information for this SOQ.

11) Will there be any level of oversight by the State Construction Office (SCO)?

a) No, Wake Tech has delegated authority and therefore oversight will be from Wake County.