We are looking to keep the same Comp Plan format and just update the chapters.

Transcription

1 RFP ADDENDUM A. Q&A 1. Are you expecting a similar format to the last round? We are looking to keep the same Comp Plan format and just update the chapters. 2. Are you envisioning a simpler update to incorporate new requirements only, or a reexamination of goals, policies, implementation? Incorporate the new stuff with our existing goals and policies and come of those may have been updated since our last plan. We are not looking to do a vision exercise or anything similar major goal setting process. We expect our Plan to be similar to the 2030 Plan as the recession stalled out much of our plans for the past decade. 3. Are you intending to do a full update to the Transportation Plan (with updated modeling?) No, we would like to do an update that incorporates new studies and data since the last Comp Plan to the extent it meets the TPP and System Statements. If additional modeling is needed to comply, then we will have to do that. 4. Are you intending to incorporate/discuss MVTA policies/plans regarding local bus service in addition to the transit systems and future alignments with Orange Line called out in the RFP? Yes 5. Do you envision this process including a discussion about the location of the Orange Line BRT station? Locations for Phase one have been decided. And we will look at the southern platform options as part of our future planning within the Comp Plan. (Although there is a draft concept out there). 6. Can we have a list of the previous sewer and water studies that have been completed since the last comp plan that you would like to be incorporated into the Comp Plan? (similar to the transportation plan section) a. There are no new sewer studies to be incorporated. Several water related studies have been completed or will be completed by summer They are: b. Freeway Landfill Water Table Analysis by Barr - Done c. Quarry Bottom Mining Analysis by Barr Done d. Wellhead Protection Plan Parts 1 and 2 by B&V Done e. Quarry Water Source Testing by City/B&V Ongoing f. Drinking Water Supply Overlay District by WSB Done g. SE Groundwater Group - Dakota County Water Supply Study by Met Council and HDR Done

2 h. City of Burnsville/Savage Water Supply Study by B&V and Barr underway complete by summer Do you have a desired submittal date to Met Council (other than December 31, 2018) or other goals regarding schedule/milestones? To be determined with our consultant 8. Would it be possible to get a copy of the City Council s most current Ends & Outcomes? They are located in the first part of the Annual Monitoring Report (page 9) in the attached link On page 7 of the RFP, it states that the update is to align with the City s goals and objectives (Ends & Outcomes). Is the selected consultant expected to use the Ends & Outcomes from the December 2006 Visioning for the 21 st Century document, have theses Ends & Outcomes been updated since 2006 or will this process create a new visioning document with the Comprehensive Plan? No new visioning exercise is anticipated. We will use the 2016 Ends and Outcomes as our guide. 10. Do you anticipate any public input meetings, open houses or similar events that are open to the general public other than the required public hearings? Will the review Panel meetings include any time for public input? We would seek guidance from our consultant on the value of this. We certainly are looking to seek public input from social media and find ways to reach a broad group of citizenry from various means. 11. Comprehensive Planning is a dynamic process and it is impossible to anticipate exactly what issues will arise, the level of interest by the public or the Planning Commission and the City Council s decisions regarding this input. Should we attempt to estimate an allowance for Things that might come up, or how would you envision us building in some flexibility? We would suggest you budget for this as a contingency in your proposal. 12. Since the City will be separately updating the Parks Master Plan, should parks be addressed at all in the City Services and Facilities Plan chapter update?, the Parks plan is part of the City Services offered and the chapter will need to be updated to include the new Parks plan details. 13. The Draft section list in the RFP includes Wetlands Plan Update, Forestry Plan Update and related sections. Do you envision that these documents will be updated as stand-alone documents, or that these documents have already been updated and summaries included in

3 the Comprehensive Plan update? If wetlands and forestry plans are to be updated, please describe the anticipated level of effort, including any expected public input/outreach specific to these items. The City is in the process of updating the Wetland Plan and expects that information to be incorporated into the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The Forestry Plan section of the 2040 Comp Plan should include an update of new data, programs and inventories, etc. undertaken by the City since the last Comprehensive Plan was completed. Public input on the Forestry Plan will be included with the public input process for the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. No separate process is anticipated. 14. In many of the technical services areas the RFP seems to state that new and updated technical studies exist and that these shall form the bulk of the information that will be included in the update. We assume that our work would involve meetings with staff, the review of these technical studies, the preparation of summaries to present to the Review Panel. WE would then facilitate discussion at the Review Panel, Planning Commission and City Council. Can you please confirm that understanding? How should our proposal account for the possibility for new, related ideas to emerge that might require additional research or analysis? Provide an allowance to be used if necessary? We expect the technical plans to be reviewed and discussed with our stakeholders along the way. This could happen in various ways and we are open to what that could be based on the overall processes proposed. New ideas not anticipated at the on-set of the project should be budgeted for in a contingency budget and timeline. 15. I believe in the last Comprehensive Plan update process the Planning Commission was part of the Advisory Committee. How do you envision the Planning Commission s role in this process. Will the review Panel meeting results be advisory to the PC? We are open to how this could work procedurally and want input from the consultant on procedures. The review panel could include a couple Planning Commissioners or the review panel and the Planning Commission could work simultaneous (be at the same meetings). We are looking for a process that is inclusive, relevant, and efficient. 16. How hands on do you think the City Council will want to be in this process? Very little. We anticipate updates to the Council at relevant points to make sure there is cohesion between the Council and the Planning Commission s work. The Council is supportive of an update to the current plan with a Review Panel assisting the Planning Commission. 17. Finally, the last time around we worked in partnership with you and other staff members and we definitely respect the deep knowledge you all have about the City. What role will the staff play in this planning process? We are looking for the consultant to write/update the plan and graphics, lead the review panel and Planning Commission through the process, provide strategies for public input as well as the implementation plan. The deliverable of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan lies with the

4 consultant. Staff will provide input, guidance, be a resource, attend all meetings, and review all documents, etc. and provide updates to the City Council. 18. Is the City in agreement with the Metropolitan Council s Systems Statement? 19. The 2012 update of the Comprehensive Plan is on the City s website in a track changes form. Was this update formally adopted by the City? 20. Would you characterize this 2016 update as a major update of the Burnsville Comp Plan? NO, but we are looking to spend some time on Economic Development items. 21. On page 1, it states that the Planning Commission will be responsible for preparing the Comprehensive Plan. Does the City have any desire to use a more broad-based steering committee to be involved in the planning process as well?, we intend to have a stakeholder committee and the Planning Commission guiding the updates. 22. Is it acceptable to use a limited amount of 11x17 size sheets in the proposal response? 23. The City completed a sustainability plan in The Metropolitan Council suggests including sustainability in the new Comp Plan Updates. Does the City envision incorporating sustainability into the Comp Plan update? 24. If sustainability is included, would it be cross referencing 2009 plan, area-by-area discussion of sustainability indicators, a full update to the Sustainability Plan imbedded into the Comp Plan, a concurrent Sustainability Plan update, or some other form? Incorporate the current sustainability Plan into the Comp Plan as appropriate. It is currently referenced and several of the concepts are throughout the 2030 Plan. 25. Would sustainability education/reminder session(s) be appropriate for the Part I. Participation Process to discuss how those principals affect the various Comp Plan components?, as part of our stakeholder meetings, but it does not have to be a separate meeting per se. 26. The 2012 Comprehensive Plan Update included considerable new work regarding Transportation and little new work for Water and Sewer Plans. Is the City looking for the

5 water and sewer models developed prior to the 2012 Comprehensive Plan Update to be updated or improved? Are you intending an update to the water distribution system modeling along with GIS report figures to illustrate the modeling results? Will the previous water distribution system model be available for our use? The City has just completed a model update. The full calibration and pressure fire flow analysis will be done by August 1, The City will provide the GIS info for incorporation by the Comp Plan consultant in to the figures. 27. Is there an anticipated timeline for development of the MN River Quadrant? We are currently in the early stages of redevelopment on the south side as some major soil correction work is wrapping up. The redevelopment around the quarry is dependent on quarry operations ceasing, which is out 20 years and the redevelopment of Freeway landfill is depended on proper closure which could be about 35 years out (best estimates) We intend to revisit the vision and timing as part of our 2040 Comp Plan discussion. 28. Has the City established a budget for the project? Do you have a budgeted amount you would like us to scope our services around? We are looking to get the best work for the best price. We have advised our Council this could cost upwards of $400K over the next two years ($200 K in 2016 and $200K in 2017) and we ve budgeted $260K in 2016 to get our technical plans done first. Our budget would include EVERYTHING (plan updates, technical plans, maps, graphics, public outreach, meeting, etc.) up to full adoption by Met Council and our City Council. 29. Does the City have a desired completion date for the project? We will work on an agreeable timeline with the consultant. 30. Are the 6 anticipated EDC meetings in Part II. Planning Services included in the meeting counts listed in Part I. Participation Process? NO 31. Page 1 identifies 12 Review Panel meetings. This group is not referenced in any other section of the RFP. Who are the members of the Review Panel? This is the stakeholder committee working alongside the Planning Commission providing input and direction on the updates. 32. Part II. Planning Services 2. (a and b) requests that the consultant review and provide recommendations on the MRQ and HOC. Review and recommendations may range from a complete reevaluation to a light treatment that primarily focuses on next steps. What is the desired scope of the review of the MRQ and HOC sites?

6 We are looking for a complete review and re-evaluation based on current known conditions and future projections. As a part of this, we will want to include some specifics within our implementation plan. 33. Page 9, item 8a. The statement indicates that The City will accept bids on the full scope or parts of the scope. This approach may tend to favor individual firms using the entire proposal to highlight one particular skill set as compared to another similar firm that submits its qualifications as part of a larger team and has limited space to demonstrate its qualifications. How will this be addressed when scoring each of the proposals? Is it better for a well-qualified team to submit together or for well qualified consultants to submit individually? The City is looking to get the best work we can at the best price. Not having done this in a while, we wanted to leave the option open for consultants to submit to do all or parts of it. The market will tell us what approach gets us the best quality product at the best price, and we are hearing from various sources that this would most likely be a team approach. If multiple consultants are selected, the City would be looking to have one project manager on the consultant side to coordinate the various individual consultant efforts. 34. Please provide a detailed listing of all materials included in the 7 page limit. Questions related to the 7 page limit include: a. The RFP provides exceptions from the 7 page limit for resumes, references and supplemental information. Does that exclusion apply to all items listed in IV Proposal Content? No, however cover letter and transmittal letter are not included in the 7 pages. ; C. Statement of Qualifications No; items 4(a-e) No, 5 (a-c) can be supplemental and 9 (a-b) can be supplemental? b. If so, would you prefer that we follow the order of items as listed under the Proposal Content section, or can we deviate from that order and include items 4, 5 and 9 as Appendices at the end of the document? Resumes, References, and Items in No. 9 can be separate appendices from the 7 pages, however a brief response to Item 4 a-e should be included in the 7 pages. c. Is the Key Personnel-Resumes section the most appropriate place to include related firm project experience and if so, is it also not included in the 7 page limit? 1a is the place to talk about the firm. d. Section IV(C )(8)(c) requests a copy of a sample bill which will minimally account for one full page of the 7 page limit. Can a sample invoice be included in an appendix and not within the required 7 pages?

7 e. Section IV(C)(3)(a) asks for information on specific approaches, methods, assumptions that will be utilized to accomplish the work in Section 2. There is no Section 2 header. Is this reference to Section 2 meant to include all of the items listed in Part II? Planning Services? This is a general question and meant to reference parts I, II and III of I. INTRODUCTION, B. Scope of Work.