Question
|
Does the University have an intended construction delivery method in mind for this project (CMaR, Design-Bid-Build, etc.)? If CMaR is the intended delivery method, at what design phase should the GMP documents be expected?
|
Answer
|
The delivery method will be CMaR. Two GMP's are anticipated; 1) Early procurement of long lead item equipment based on a separate bid specification completed as soon as possible and 2) the balance of the project at DD Phase.
|
Submitted
|
10/5/2022 11:37:15 AM (CT)
|
|
|
Question
|
The RFP identifies the need for BOR approval for this project. However, this typically occurs at an early phase of the project (as identified in Attachment D, 1.c). Section 1.5 identifies the completion of construction documents be no later than 1/31/23. Is it the University's intent to have BOR approval take place at an earlier date, and as a result then stipulates a deliverable of an earlier design phase?
|
Answer
|
With the issuance of Addendum #3 adding a brief update of the Predesign Report, the University hopes to go to the Board of Regents in December. Once approved, we'll proceed immediately into design. The 1/31/23 date is no longer valid. Proposers should schedule forward from the December approval date. Rather than a University dictated completion date, the greater priority is the early bid package and overall GMP date based on DD package. These two dates will drive completion schedule. Build your schedule accordingly.
|
Submitted
|
10/5/2022 11:31:57 AM (CT)
|
|
|
Question
|
The RFP Document does not address structural engineering scope of work. It is the University’s intention for these design teams to provide predesign services for the necessary structural evaluation to accurately identify potential structural scope associated with this project? If so, will the University modify Attachment E, Table 1 of the RFP to designate this additional service?
|
Answer
|
The required structural engineering should be included as a Basic Service.
|
Submitted
|
10/5/2022 11:21:49 AM (CT)
|
|
|
Question
|
The requirements of the RFP and the predesign report include a new rooftop generator for standby power as an alternate scope. Can the university confirm that the expected scope of this project is to provide a new rooftop standby generator to address the program associated with this project, and not to further investigate the feasibility, evaluation, or reconfiguration of the existing generator for RAR’s needs?
|
Answer
|
Correct. The results of a metering study indicated that the existing generator is not sufficient. A new generator is included in the scope of this project.
|
Submitted
|
10/5/2022 11:11:36 AM (CT)
|
|
|
Question
|
Cost estimating is referenced within the RFP and was briefly mentioned during the site walk through, but specifics associated with this scope is not clearly defined. Can the University clarify at which point in the design phase or phases that cost estimating should occur if it is required at all?
|
Answer
|
Cost estimating is not required.
|
Submitted
|
10/4/2022 04:59:21 PM (CT)
|
|
|
Question
|
Can the existing ductwork drawings be made available to potential bidders to allow them to understand the design scope that may be necessary to execute the desired building systems changes associated with the scope of this project (combining several systems into one)?
|
Answer
|
Per Addendum #3, this question is no longer relevant.
|
Submitted
|
9/29/2022 10:35:37 AM (CT)
|
|
|
Question
|
It was mentioned in the pre-bid walkthrough that the University could be interested in combining schematic design (SD) and design development (DD) phases. Can this be clarified, and how or will Attachment E be modified to reflect this?
|
Answer
|
The University recommends a combined SD/DD phase. Attachment E will not be changed. Proposers can leave the SD line blank and insert combined phase fee in DD phase line if they agree with a combined phase. The bid package for early procurement of equipment still applies.
|
Submitted
|
9/29/2022 10:33:48 AM (CT)
|
|
|