All respondents may not subcontract more than 50% of the work whether they are an M/WBE or not. There is negotiation to this clause.

Transcription

1 Lower Manhattan Coastal Resiliency Project 6272 / Contract Questions & Answers Date: October 28, ) Articles and of the subject RFP are specific to M/WBE participation goals and subcontracting requirements. It is understood that a M/WBE consultant submitting as prime cannot subcontract more than 50% of the work. Are there any restrictions relative to the percentage of work a responding Non- M/WBE prime consultant may subcontract? We assume there is no similar restriction relative to assembling our team and performing the work if the prime consultant is not an M/WBE. All respondents may not subcontract more than 50% of the work whether they are an M/WBE or not. There is negotiation to this clause. 2) In our review of the subject RFP, we noted that on page 8, Item 4. Minority and Women-Owned Business Enterprise Participation, there is a 30% goal, comprised of a 15% MBE and 15% WBE goal. In addition, item 4.2 states that the firms must be certified by the Empire State Division of Minority and Women s Business Development. We searched the list of ESD certified WBE firms based on 50 commodity codes that have direct relevance to the Lower Manhattan Coastal resiliency project opportunity, and have relevant experience in the NYC, Lower Tier, Long Island and Lower Hudson areas. Approximately 50 firms resulted from the search. The WBE firms identified in the search are limited to providing primarily architectural design services, surveying, and some landscape architecture. Is there flexibility such that we can utilize the City certified WBE firms in addition to any ESD certified WBE firms to meet the 15% WBE goal stated in the RFP? All participating MBE and WBE firms must be certified by Empire State Development s Division of Minority and Women s Business Development ( DMWBD ). Those firms that are certified by the NYC Department of Small Business Services must begin the certification process with DMWBD by the proposal due date; these firms must be certified by 1

2 DMWBD by the completion of the contract term. Respondents that are including city-certified firms must also include a narrative explaining their back-up process in case these firms are not certified by the end of the contract term. 3) The RFP identifies 4 subareas as part of the Lower Manhattan. What is the basis for the breakdown? Within the study area, four sub-areas have been defined based on topographical data, drainage, use, previous planning studies, and additional characteristics. Expansions or changes to the boundaries of each sub-area, and/or additional reaches may be proposed and/or redefined by the Consultant in their proposal for the purposes of identifying opportunities for independent utility, to highlight unique site constraints or design treatments, or in consideration of additional site infrastructure or topographical characteristics. It may also be appropriate to suggest a further break down of each of the four sub-areas. For example, with appropriate rationale, it is acceptable to propose that the Two Bridges sub-area be further broken down into two sections: Montgomery to the Manhattan Bridge, and the Manhattan Bridge to the Brooklyn Bridge. Furthermore, recommendations for one sub-area may include recommendations for adjacent areas that may be impacted by the implementation of flood protection. 4) Page 9, section 4.3 M/WBE Participation Goal, item indicates A respondent may not subcontract more than 50% of the total value of the contract unless it is working under a retainer contract or a construction management contract. Confirm this statement applies only to M/WBEs as prime respondent. If not, please clarify the intent and if there is flexibility in this percentage. See answer to Question 1. 5) Page B-22, item 1.J, Ensure the cost estimates shall be consistent with the project Budget as specified by EDC. Will the budget and specific funding requirements be established at the time of project initiation? 2

3 It is anticipated that the capital budgets for future implementation of each of the sub areas will be known in the early phases of this study. For example, award announcements through the National Disaster Resiliency Competition are expected in January Potential funding awarded to the City through the National Disaster Resiliency Competition and other sources will be used in future RFPs for future planning activities, final design and construction, not associated with this current contract. 6) Is there any flexibility to move capital budget funds between the four planning areas? Sources of funding for implementation have varying degrees of flexibility. For example, it is expected that at least $8M will go towards a project in The Battery. The $100M available in capital funds is not tied to a geographic location. Potential implementation funds awarded through the National Disaster Resiliency Competition may be restricted to a specified area depending on the nature of the award. Award amounts, if any, are currently unknown. See answer to Question 5. 7) Will you provide guidance as to the future planning horizon years to be used within the cost benefit analysis? Or should these follow adaptation investments/asset useful lives? Additional guidance will be provided to the selected Consultant team. At this time, there is no specified goal for useful life. 8) Should the cost benefit analysis be based on each planning area, and interventions within each area? Or should this analysis be combined or rolled up? The cost and benefits of providing flood protection for the entire study area, and within each of the sub areas is required. 9) In the RFP on page B-28 under 5.1.d Hazardous Materials, it states that this will be done by others. Should this section of the environmental review be excluded from the proposal as the RFP states that it will be done by others? Please note that the RFP in several places refers to environmental testing to be included. 3

4 That section is listing examples of technical areas that would likely need to be included in preparing for an anticipated Environmental Impact Statement or Environmental Assessment. Hazardous Materials is not expected to be done by others. 10) Will EDC consider teams that are (a) led by an architect, (b) led by a landscape architect, or (c) led by an architect or landscape architect jointly with a civil engineer? All of the referenced combinations will be considered. RFP respondents are encouraged to consider a co-lead team that emphasizes engineering and design. It is recommended that respondents deliver a clear rationale for their team structure in their responses. 11) Does NYCEDC have an approximate budget for this study? The approximate budget for this study is $6.75 million. 12) Will NYCEDC provide the InfoWorks CS model for the study area? Task 2.2.e asks that the Consultant evaluate the resolution and capability of the available InfoWorks CS model detailing the City s existing drainage infrastructure in the vicinity of the project area and update or refine the model as necessary to have confidence in model results. Consultant will provide DEP rainfall and tidal conditions that need to be assessed and DEP will run the InfoWorks Model and provide the outputs to the consultants to be used in the resiliency analysis. All outputs will include time series of stormwater and CSO flows and will have a geo-reference. DEP will also provide subcatchments and outfalls used in the InfoWorks modeling as a GIS shapefiles. 13) Will NYCEDC provide all the relevant drainage and sewer network information for the study area in GIS format? See answer to Question ) NYC s appeal of FEMA s Jan-2015 Preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) suggests that FEMA s flood elevations may be overestimated throughout NYC. Should the Coastal Flood Risk 4

5 Assessment to be performed in Task 1 as well as Task 2: Comprehensive Coastal Protection Planning and Concept Design take into account NYC s appeal? If so, will NYCEDC provide additional details regarding the basis for the appeal as well as revised flood elevation vs. frequency curves? This study will use FEMA s January 2015 Preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Maps and Design Flood Elevations will not be based on New York City s appeal to FEMA, as the appeal has not yet been resolved. 15) Please provide details regarding available construction funding as well as known potential additional funding sources/amounts. At this time, it is known that there is $8M in City Capital to go towards a flood protection project at The Battery, and an additional $100M in City Capital for the entire LMCR study area. National Disaster Resiliency Competition awards are anticipated to be announced in January 2016, and additional sources of funding for implementation may become known during the duration of the LMCR study. Award amounts, if any, are currently unknown. See answer to Question 5 and Question 6. 16) In our review of the subject RFP, we noted that on page 8, Item 4. Minority and Women-Owned Business Enterprise Participation, there is a 30% goal, comprised of a 15% MBE and 15% WBE goal. In addition, item 4.2 states that the firms must be certified by the Empire State Division of Minority and Women s Business Development. We searched the list of ESD certified WBE firms based on 50 commodity codes that have direct relevance to the Lower Manhattan Coastal resiliency project opportunity, and have relevant experience in the NYC, Lower Tier, Long Island and Lower Hudson areas. Approximately 50 firms resulted from the search. The WBE firms identified in the search are limited to providing primarily architectural design services, surveying, and some landscape architecture. Is there flexibility such that we can utilize the City certified WBE firms in addition to any ESD certified WBE firms to meet the 15% WBE goal stated in the RFP? See answer to Question 2. 5