12/12/2011
PR002650 – JILA Addition
Addendum #1 to the RFP
1. Are the forms included in Appendix C & Appendix D to be included in the submittal package due on
15Jan09, or are they to be submitted with the Cost Proposal?
These forms are to be included with the submittal package.
2. Please clarify if this project is subject to Davis-Bacon / Prevailing Wage rates due to the partial federal
funding sought for the project.
Yes, Davis-Bacon rules apply as a portion of this project is funded by Federal grants.
3. Please clarify the location of the 3,000sf of renovation within the existing JILA building, and also please
clarify the intent of the renovation. Also, please clarify the segregation requirements for these renovation
areas.
The scope of renovation remains under consideration and has not been determined at this time.
3,000s.f. includes areas impacted by addition (i.e. extending corridor through labs and adding
floor). A budget will be established for the construction managers to help the client understand
the magnitude of work expected. It is anticipated that some walls will be removed/added; room
finishes and fixtures updated. Major structural/mechanical/electrical/plumbing is not anticipated
for these renovated spaces.
4. The RFP makes no mention to a requirement for BIM. Is it CU’s intention to utilize BIM for this project?
Yes.
If so, please define the goals and objectives for using BIM on this project.
HDR is using Revit Architecture 2009 and will share with CM. Platform for Structural and MEP are
expected to be Revit Structure 2009 and Autodesk Building Systems 2008. Revit will be used as
an active archival as-built set for future renovations, remodeling and additions. The building
information model will be housed and updated routinely to be shared by appropriate project team
members. The overall expectation is that the contractor will fully coordinate their model between
disciplines to minimize on-site conflict and corresponding change orders.
5. If so, will the design team provide their 3D project model for use as the basis for initial modeling?
Yes. The CMGC is encouraged to outline meaningful, useable, but nonetheless state-of-the-art
uses for the BIM including BIM based cost-estimating and construction staging/scheduling
coordination.
6. The RFP states on page 4 that one bid package is anticipated. Please clarify if there will be opportunity
for “pre-purchase” design packages to be created to accelerate selected “long lead” critical path scopes
of work.
Pre-purchase and other bid packages to facilitate the success of the project will be considered.
Proposals need to describe how the bid package and pricing process might work to help
guarantee that the project will stay on-budget and on-schedule. The CMGC will need to address
their assumptions and corresponding risk in bidding work from progress documents. The
architect will provide one bid package for use by the CMGC.
12/12/2011
7. Within the program plan, section 6.2 Mitigation of Construction Impact states that a 4x12hr work week
that runs Thursday through Sunday is a suggested method of reducing vibration during construction. It
was discussed during the pre-submittal meeting that a 4x12hr work week that runs Monday through
Thursday is most likely how the project will be executed though. Please clarify/confirm that this submittal
should base its services/staffing on a schedule more in line with that discussed during the meeting.
4x12hr work week Monday through Thursday is a generally acceptable workday approach within
budget and schedule parameters, not necessarily mandating a 48 hour work week. Business and
coordination activities are allowed Friday. Saturday and Sunday work is at the discretion of the
CM and limited to Business and Coordination activities (no vibration). CMGC proposals should
outline their project approach and recommendations for scheduling to best balance project cost,
client needs and schedule implications.
8. Once construction begins, will the Architect have an office on-site and does the GM/GC provide this?
The Architect will not have an on-site office.
9. How involved will a JILA representative be with the pre-construction meetings/efforts?
JILA representatives will be continuously involved throughout the design and construction
process.
10. Can we be provided copies of the forms referenced in Exhibit O, paragraph 2.1.26 that are specific to this
project or a link to the forms that will be used?
State form documents can be accessed at
http://www.colorado.gov/dpa/dfp/SBREP/formstable.htm.
11. Exhibit O, paragraph 3.4.5 clarifies the uses of the contingency for the project, the fact that it used to
cover overruns in allowances seem to put the CM/GC at risk for overruns on allowances in the GMAX, is
the intent of the Exhibit and the allowances?
Please review the revised Exhibit O, which is attached for reference. For the purpose of this RFP, please
base your submittal on the items in the RFP. The above questions will be addressed and details will be
determined with the selected CM/GC.
12. In Exhibit O, paragraph 3.4.5 it is indicated that the contingency will not be used to cover mistakes etc. by
the CM/GC in performing "direct cost of work items" can this be clarified please, what is the intent of this
clause?
Please review the revised Exhibit O, which is attached for reference. For the purpose of this RFP, please
base your submittal on the items in the RFP. The above questions will be addressed and details will be
determined with the selected CM/GC.
13. Exhibit O, paragraph 6.3.4 indicates that liquidated damages are to be used for the project, it also seems
to possibly indicate that additionally there may be consequential damages, is this correct? It seems
excessive that the CM/GC could by exposed to both for finishing the project late? What is the amount of
liquidated damages per day?
Please review the revised Exhibit O, which is attached for reference. For the purpose of this RFP, please
base your submittal on the items in the RFP. The above questions will be addressed and details will be
determined with the selected CM/GC.
12/12/2011
14. Please clarify the mark-ups in paragraph 10.2.4 in Exhibit O in relation to the mark-ups in article 9.2.1.
Please review the revised Exhibit O, which is attached for reference. For the purpose of this RFP, please
base your submittal on the items in the RFP. The above questions will be addressed and details will be
determined with the selected CM/GC.
15. In article 11, included in Exhibit O, there are several requirements in regards to Builder's Risk and the
endorsements to our policies, specifically in regards to errors and omissions is the intent that we cover
errors and omissions of others in our Builder's risk policy? Additionally, can it be confirmed that builder’s
risk coverage by the contractor ends at substantial completion.
Please review the revised Exhibit O, which is attached for reference. For the purpose of this RFP, please
base your submittal on the items in the RFP. The above questions will be addressed and details will be
determined with the selected CM/GC.