am_3_-NZP_FINAL.pdf

(x)

T17SOL10015

x x copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted ; or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT

THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted , such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

x

OCON

Washington DC 20013-7012

MRC 1200

P.O. BOX 37012

OCON

OCON

Washington DC 20013-7012

MRC 1200

P.O. BOX 37012

SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION

01/26/2017000003

13. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO MODIFICATION OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS. IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required) is not extended.is extended, Items 8 and 15, and returning

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended , by one of the following methods: (a) By completing

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

FACILITY CODE CODE

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP Code)

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6)CODE 6. ISSUED BY

PAGE OF PAGES

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.3. EFFECTIVE DATE2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)

1. CONTRACT ID CODE

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

01/26/2017

CHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority) appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return __________________ copies to the issuing office.

ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

The attached RFIs are hereby incorporated into the solicitation.

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

15C. DATE SIGNED 16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR 16C. DATE SIGNED

(Signature of person authorized to sign) (Signature of Contracting Officer)

Thomas Dempsey

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

Previous edition unusable

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9 A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect .

PUBLIC-PRIVATE-PARTNERSHIP FOR THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, FINANCING,

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE NATIONAL ZOOLOGICAL PARK CENTRAL

PARKING FACILITY [RFQ No: T17SOL10015]

RESPONSES TO REQUESTS FOR CLARIFICATION AND INFORMATION

REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION AND/OR INFORMATION CLARIFICATION

SOO1

1 Who are the advisors to the Smithsonian for above-referenced project? For purposes of this procurement, the Smithsonian Institution has engaged Jones Lang LaSalle (JLL) as its transaction advisor. The Smithsonian is also currently in the process of retaining specialized P3 legal counsel, whom we expect to have on board in time for the RFP process.

2 Will garage operations be exempt from the DC parking tax as well as DC property taxes under the public-private partnership?

To the extent possible, the tax implications of the anticipated P3 structure will be clarified during the RFP process. That said, each Proposer is wholly and exclusively responsible for conducting its own independent research and due diligence and for seeking any other independent advice, including tax advice, necessary for the preparation of bids, negotiation of agreements, and the subsequent delivery of all services to be provided in the case of Contract Award. As stipulated in section 3.5 of the RFQ, “all Prospective Respondents are strongly advised to seek their own independent financial, legal, tax, technical and other advice”.

SOO2

1 Can you please provide more details on Stage II and the RFP? The Smithsonian is still defining the specific parameters of the RFP process and will only release details of the process once the RFQ process has been successfully finalized.

2 During the RFP process, will the Smithsonian require a concept design during the RFP stage? What are the deliverables?

It is anticipated that design concepts will be included as an element of the proposal submission package, but the specifics of the submission requirements are still being defined.

3 Will there be a stipend provided to short listed teams to assist with the costs of creating a design and proposal?

In the past, the Smithsonian has offered stipends for significant design submissions. At this point, given that the delivery requirements are not yet finalized, no decision has been made regarding a potential stipend.

4 Can you provide the evaluation criteria that will be used in the RFP stage to evaluate proposals?

The evaluation criteria will most likely respond to “best value” criteria, reflecting both technical and price elements.

Smithsonian National Zoological Park CPF P3 RFQ No. T17SOL10015 Responses to Requests for Clarification

SOO3

1 Volume 1, Part 3, Section 3.1, page 49 of the RFQ. Can you please confirm that both the Lead Architect and Lead Architect Member are to complete one (1) Form F1 (for a total of 5 projects for both firms)?

Both the Lead Architect and the Lead Architect Member should complete form F1; however, the five projects would reflect the collective experience of both firms.

2 Volume 1, Part 3, Section 3.1, page 49 of the RFQ. Can you please confirm that both the Lead Architect and Lead Engineer are to each submit a separate Form F1 and that, as such, the 12 page limit is per form (and not 12 pages total for both Form F1s)?

Each Major Participant should submit a Form F1, which is essentially a project summary. As indicated in the instruction to Form F.1., project summaries should not exceed 2 pages. The 12 page limit reflects the sum of all of the project summaries. That said, given the scope of relevant experience in both architecture and engineering, we will allow for both the Lead Architect and the Lead Engineer experience summaries to be presented separately, each subject individually to the 12 page limit.

3 Volume 1, Part 3, Section 3.2, page 49 of the RFQ. Can you please confirm that both the Lead Architect and Lead Engineer are to submit a separate Technical Narrative Attachment for Form F1 and that, as such, the 5 page limit is per Technical Narrative Attachment per firm (and not 5 pages total)?

The technical narrative attachment for each project should be limited to 5 pages.

4 Volume 1, Part 4, Section 4.2, page 52 of the RFQ. The Attachment to Form G1 (Financial Information - Equity Member Experience) is given a page limit of 23 pages in the table but footnote three (3) states that all combined narrative descriptions in the financial experience attachment should not exceed 5 pages total. Can you please confirm the page limit for the total combined narrative descriptions for Section 4.2?

There is a typo on page 52. The page limit is 2 pages per description, resulting in a maximum total number of 8 pages.

SOO4

1 Could you please confirm that the concession will incorporate the rights to become the exclusive operator of all parking on the NZP site?

As cited in section 1.1. of the RFQ, it is envisioned that the concession will incorporate exclusive parking operator rights over visitor parking at the National Zoo's Washington DC campus.

2 Could you confirm whether some or all of the current lots will continue to be operational once the new facility opens?

The primary driver behind building the central parking facility is to regain acreage for the purpose of expanding animal habitat and facilitating visitation with a centralized access point. As such, the Smithsonian does not envision the existing surface lots will continue to operate once the new facility opens.

That said, one or more of the lots may be used temporarily for parking overflow, turn-around, and/or employee parking, subject to necessary approvals.

3 Could you tell me if a word version of the RFQ is available to assist us in re-producing some of the forms etc.?

The Word version of the RFQ will be made available upon request. Please email requests to Eve Errickson at ErricksonE@si.edu.

mailto:ErricksonE@si.edu

4 Could you confirm if a third party operator is involved in managing parking on the site at the moment or if all staff are employed by the SI?

As indicated in section 2.1 of the RFQ, at present, parking at the National Zoo is operated by Smithsonian Enterprises, a division of the Smithsonian Institution.

5 Could you also tell me if anything is required of us in advance of lodging the

RFQ?

No, there are no requirements of prospective Respondents prior to submitting a statement of qualification.

SOO5

1 In addition to the data included In the RFQ document, will further data on visitors, parkers, past financial information, etc. be provided In the next phase of bidding?

Yes, as indicated in section 3.5 of the RFQ, Shortlisted Proposers shall be afforded the opportunity to conduct further due diligence through (i) access to Data Room; (ii) meetings with the Smithsonian and its advisors; (iii) presentations about the Project; (iv) inspections by representatives of the Proposer; and (v) review and discussion of the draft RFP and Project Agreement. The data room will provide available information relating to parking operations.

2 Have any public opinion surveys on the zoo been conducted? For example, have any surveys on the parking facilities or on the overall impression of the zoo been conducted? If yes, please provide copies to bidders.

Any available public surveys will be provided to Shortlisted Proposers as part of the RFP process.

3 Would the Smithsonian consider a ‘pre-approval’ approach where the governing body of the zoo pre-approves the transaction subject to certain conditions being included in the bids (eg. a compliant structural bid and a minimum level of annual concession fee)?

Yes, reservation thresholds and similar parameters are being considered by the Smithsonian.

4 Is a stipend contemplated for bidders who submit binding bids in the next round but are not chosen as the winner?

At this point, given that the delivery requirements are not yet finalized, decision has not yet been made regarding a stipend. Information regarding stipends will be made available to Shortlisted Proposers as part of the RFP process.

5 What types of compensation events are being considered for the Concession Agreement (e.g. compensation for adverse actions, compensation upon termination events, etc.)

Details regarding compensation events will be provided as part of the draft RFP process, affording Shortlisted Proposers ample time to provide comments before finalizing the procurement process.

SOO6

1 What lead contractor performed the $30.7MM upgrades at the GSB? Hensel Phelps

2 Is that contractor precluded from participating on a team pursuing this RFP? We have not precluded Hensel Phelps, nor any other GC with prior understanding of the GSB, or the retaining wall, on the basis of an unfair advantage.

3 How many employee parking spaces are provided on campus? 150-200

4 Where do employees park, can you include a parking map indicating various parking “zones” on campus and who parks in those zones?

Smithsonian employees park in lots C and E.

SOO7

1 In Form A, the Submittal Letter, the sentence citing that all Major Participants will be “jointly and severally liable” is of great concern and should be adjusted.

Please deleting the phrase "that all Major Participants shall be jointly and severally liable for the performance of any future contract" from the Submittal Letter (Form A).

The Smithsonian hereby confirms that the sentence indicating that “all Major Participants shall be jointly and severally liable for the performance of any future contract" is deleted from the Statement of Qualification Submittal Letter (Form A).

SOO8

1 Appendix B, Section 2.5 on page 48: Under Key Personnel Information, there is a request for the resume of "a "principal in charge" who will be the Respondent's executive level contact for Smithsonian". Can Smithsonian please clarify if this is an individual that will be in contact with the Smithsonian during the procurement process or, after the procurement process during the construction and operation phase?

Appendix B, Section 2.5 indicates that Respondents should identify and provide resumes for two individuals. The first is the "principal in charge" who will be the Respondent's executive level contact for the Smithsonian. The Smithsonian hereby clarifies that this would be the key executive-level representative of the Respondent during contract execution. The second is the person who will lead the negotiations for the Respondent during the RFP phase of the Procurement Process. This would be the chief representative of the Respondent for purposes of the procurement.

2 Appendix C, Form B.1, on page 61 - clarification question: There are several references to "Member", which is not a defined term in the RFQ. However, in Appendix B, section 1.3 it states that Form B should be completed by for each Major Participant. Can Smithsonian please confirm that all references to Member on Form B.1 should be replaced by Major Participant?

As per section 1.5 of the RFQ, where capitalized, the term “Member” generally refers to members in an incorporated or unincorporated joint venture that constitutes a Major Participant. As such, the Smithsonian confirms that references to Member on Form B.1 may be replaced by Major Participant on Form B.1.

3 Appendix B, sections 3.1, 3.3, and 3.5 on page 49 & note on page 50:

Referencing "Notes to Part 3" on page 50, the RFQ notes that the Respondents must include, for each Major Participant listed on Forms F1-F3, such Major Participant's experience on a minimum of five projects of similar size and complexity. Can the Smithsonian please clarify if the requirement stated above is a minimum of five projects combined between all Major Participants, on each form F1, F2 and F3, or if the requirement stated above is a minimum of five projects for each Major Participant or Major Participant Joint Venture, separately.

The requirement is for a minimum of five projects combined between all Major Participants on each form F1, F2, and F3. It is not a requirement for each Major Participant or Major Participant joint venture separately.

4 Appendix B, sections 3.1, 3.3, and 3.5 on page 49 & note on page 50:

Referencing "Notes to Part 3" on page 50, the RFQ notes that the Respondents must include, for each Major Participant listed on Forms F1-F3, such Major Participant's experience on a minimum of five projects of similar size and complexity. If the requirement stated above is a minimum of five projects for each Major Participant or Major Participant Joint Venture, separately, please confirm that if the Respondent's team includes a joint venture for a given technical experience section (example: Construction Joint Venture), that the members of the joint venture combined need to furnish a minimum of five projects of similar size and complexity. If each member is required to provide a minimum of five projects individually, please expand the page count for section

3.3 and 3.4 to 24 and 10, respectively.

The requirement is for the members of the joint venture to furnish a combined minimum of five projects of similar size and complexity. Each member is not required to provide a minimum of five projects individually.

5 Appendix B, sections 3.1, 3.3, and 3.5 on page 49 & note on page 50 & page 51 :

Please reference "Notes to Part 3", subsection titled "Section 3.2, 3.4 and 3.6".

After review of the Technical Narrative Attachment outline, sections A through J on page 51 of the RFQ, there appears to be redundant information that's present on Forms F1, F3 and F5. Redundant information includes items within section a, b, c, d, e, and g. Can Smithsonian confirm if they would like the Respondent to include redundant information on the Technical Narrative Attachment that's also included on forms F1, F3, and F5, or if not, if there are additional narrative points Smithsonian would like the Respondent to speak to?

The intent is that the technical narrative will provide more detailed information pertaining to the project than what is provided in the summary forms. It is not meant to be repetitive, but to allow Respondents to provide additional details about the cited experience. In the event that the full narrative has been provided in the Forms, then respondents may provide other information that they feel is important to helping the Smithsonian better understand the relevance of the project to the object of this procurement.

6 Appendix B, Section 3.8 on page 49 & 50. In section 3.8, the Safety Narrative Attachment for Form H is listed as having a page limit of 2 pages. Can the Smithsonian please confirm that the two page limit is in addition to the pages required to fill out Form H?

The Smithsonian hereby confirms that the two page limit is in addition to the pages required by Form H.

7 Appendix B, Section 2.1 on page 47: The page limit for the Legal Structure is currently listed as "[2]", and the requirements for the section are to "Explain the proposed legal structure of the Developer and the role of each key entity." and "Provide a legal structure chart identifying the Respondent's organization and key entities..."

Can the Smithsonian confirm that the page limit for this section is 2 pages? Can the Smithsonian please clarify if the legal structure chart is excluded from the 2 page limit (i.e. is in addition to the 2 page limit)?

The Smithsonian confirms the legal structure chart is excluded from the 2 page limit.