Description: AGENDAHED.JPG
  

Item No:                    5G.

 

Meeting Date:           August 12, 2013

 

From:                          Mike Thornton, Purchasing Manager for

                                    DC Maudlin, Interim Public Works Director

 

Subject:                      Resolutions authorizing execution of continuing services agreements with AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. and DRMP, Inc. for professional stormwater design and studies engineering services

 

 

 


Staff Recommendation:

Staff recommends approval of two resolutions authorizing execution of a continuing services agreement with AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. and DRMP, Inc.

 

Analysis:

The purpose of this solicitation is to establish continuing services agreements with two qualified firms to provide professional stormwater design and studies engineering services.

 

The scope of services includes, but is not limited to performance of all stormwater design and studies engineering tasks related to (1) Stormwater Preliminary and Final Design, (2) Field Survey and Data Collection, (3) Hydrologic and Hydraulic Analysis, (4) Grant Funding Assistance, (5) Protection and Control Integration, (6) Plans Preparation, (7)  Bid Document Development, (8) Construction Management Support, (9) Grant Funding Assistance, (10) Regulatory Permitting, (11) Public Information Services and (12) Other Stormwater Related Services As Needed.

 

All work will be in accordance with Standards for Stormwater Design and Studies Engineering.  For future projects, the City will negotiate the technical aspects of the scope of work, deliverables, fees, on a project-by-project basis.  Tasks will be estimated and billed at hourly rates in accordance with the professional’s fee schedule.   All work will be documented by the issuance of a Task Order.  The appropriate approval will be requested from the appropriate approving body (Commission or City Manager) depending on the cost of services for the individual Task Order.

 

On March 11, 2013, the Purchasing Division issued Request for Qualifications (RFQ) number 150053 inviting interested and qualified firms to submit Technical Proposals/Qualifications Statements which demonstrated the professional qualifications and competence of their organization by responding to specific evaluation criteria published in the RFQ, by which their proposals would be judged against to determine which would be best to serve the needs of the City.

 

On April 11, 2013, the City received qualification statements from 12 engineering firms.  A technical evaluation panel consisting of staff from the Public Works Department evaluated the responses which detailed the respondent organizations project team, firm’s approach to the stated needs, and previous experience with stormwater projects in relation to the evaluation elements of the RFQ.

The State of Florida adopted the Consultants Competitive Negotiation Act (CCNA) more than 30 years ago. This law has served as ‘the standard’ as other states have studied and enacted other qualifications-based procurement laws for professional services. The purpose of the act was to require government agencies including municipalities to:

· Provide public notice of all projects;

· Select the most qualified firm for a particular project through consideration of a firm’s qualifications without consideration of fees; and

· Negotiate fair and reasonable fees with the selected firm(s).

 

This solicitation was conducted in compliance with the CCNA, Florida Statute 287.055 governing the “Acquisition of professional architectural, engineering, landscape architectural or surveying and mapping services,” which contains policy and procedural requirements to be followed when soliciting, evaluating and selecting contractors to perform professional services. The CCNA requires the evaluation of current statements of qualifications and performance data, together with those that may be submitted by other firms regarding the proposed project demonstrating their qualifications, approach to the project, and ability to furnish the required services.

 

To comply with the CCNA, the solicitation included established evaluation criterion elements successfully used to conduct similar CCNA type procurements previously. The criterion, based on the scope of work, with their relative importance emphasized by maximum obtainable point values were:

·         Firm’s Project Team - 35 points

·         Evaluation of statement of approach - 35 points

·         Firm’s Experience with Previous Storm Water Projects - 30 points.

·         Local Vendor Preference - 10 points for tier 1 or 4 points for tier 2

 

In the tradition of fundamental source selection principles which stress the need to adhere strictly to the evaluation criteria set forth in the RFQ and following the evaluation and scoring methodology in the source selection/technical evaluation plan, the proposals were evaluated by the technical evaluation panel in a fair, uniform, and objective manner solely in accordance with the CCNA and evaluation criteria.

 

The result of those evaluations is detailed in the ranking list as follows on the next page.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Firm Name

Location

Points

Rank

Ordinal Points

AMEC

Tavares, FL

245.51

1

6

DRMP

Orlando, FL

243.17

2

9

Jones Edmunds

Gainesville, FL

238.52

3

12

Springstead

Leesburg, FL

239.05

3

12

Atkins

Orlando, FL

238.11

5

15

CDM

Maitland, FL

242.01

6

16

Chen-Moore

Gainesville, FL

235.51

7

18

CPH

Sanford, FL

231.53

8

25

Team Engineering

Orlando, FL

226.73

9

27

BESH

Tavares, FL

226.94

10

28

Calvin, Giordano

West Palm Beach, FL

220.68

11

30

Tillman

Ocala, FL

201.47

12

36

 

Options:

1.  Approve the resolutions authorizing execution of the agreements with AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. and DRMP, Inc.; or

2.  Such alternative action as the Commission may deem appropriate.

 

Fiscal Impact: 

The actual fiscal impact is unknown at this time. Actual expenditures will depend on hours billed for fee based services. Projects will be estimated and detailed in separate task orders.

 

Submission Date and Time:    8/12/2013 10:20 AM____

 

Department: Public Works_____________

Prepared by:  Terry Pollard___________                     

Attachments:         Yes __X__   No ______

Advertised:   _X__ Not Required ______                     

Dates:   ____March 10, 2013____________                     

Attorney Review :       Yes___  No __X__

                                                

_________________________________           

Revised 6/10/04

 

Reviewed by: Dept. Head ________

 

Finance  Dept. _BLM,_____________                                     

                              

Deputy C.M. ___________________                                                                         

Submitted by:

City Manager ___________________

 

Account No. _______N/A__________

 

Project No. ________N/A__________

 

WF No. ___________N/A__________

 

Budget  ___________N/A__________

 

Available __________N/A__________