Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRS1- Economic Development E C O N O M I C D E V E L O P M E N T A G E N C Y OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO RE=ST FOR C SSION/99MIL ACTION From: TIMOTHY C. STEINHAUS Subject: PROJECT ADMINISTRATOR Administrator CONTRACT - STATE CONSOLIDAT$D OFFICES AND CALTRANS BUILDING Date: September 15, 1993 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Synop_sis of Previous Cession/Council/Committee Action(s) : On August 2, 1993, the Community Development Commission approved the formation of the Consolidated State Offices and Caltrans Building Request for Qualifications Review Committee to begin the process of contracting qualified professional consulting services including a Project Administrator. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Recommended !1QtiQn(o) : (Community Development Commission) That the Community Development Commission authorize the Agency Administrator to draft and execute a thirty (30) month contract with the Staubach Company in the amount of $364,000 for project administration services for the Design and Construction of the State Consolidated Offices and Caltrans Building on he perblock Site. C. STEIREAUS Administrator ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Contact Person(s) : Timothy C Steinhaus/David J Norman Phone: 5081 Project Area(s) : Central City North Ward(s) : One (1) Supporting Data Attached: Staff ReDOrt Tax FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: $ $364,000 Source: Increment Budget Authority: R@ quested ------------------------------------------------------ Cgmission/Qpmugil Notes: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TCS:DJN:1mp:3359J CC1*(ISSION MEETING AGENDA Meeting Date: 09/20/1993 Agenda Item Number: J E C O N O M I C D E V E L O P M E N T A G E N C Y OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO STAFF REPORT -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PROJECT ADMINISTRATOR CONTRACT — STATE CONSOLIDATED OFFICES AND CALTRANS BIIILDING This report seeks Community Development Commission approval that the Agency Administrator be authorized to execute a thirty (30) month, $364,000 contract with the Staubach Company for project administration services for the design and contruction of the State Consolidated Offices and Caltrans Building on the Superblock. BACKGROUND On August 2, 1993, the Community Development Commission approved the commencement of a fast track request for qualifications process requesting qualifications from professional firms to provide various consulting services in several disciplines, one of which was for project administration services. Requests for qualifications were published in the Sun, the Dodge Green Sheet, Construction Management Data Press, and various minority newspapers serving the Inland Empire. The State Consolidated Offices and Caltrans Building Qualifications Review Committee met on August 22, 1993 for the purpose of determining a qualified short list of three (3) firms for the position of Project Administrator. A full account of the review committee meeting proceedings are found in Attachment A. The three (3) finalists were interviewed by the Committee on September 8, 1993 and the Staubach Company was found to be the most qualified among the three (3) finalists. The minutes from the September 8 meeting are found in Attachment B. DEAL POINTS On September 14, 1993, Councilman Edward Negrete and staff met with representatives of the Staubach Company to discuss the scope of services and Staubach's proposed fee for the position of Project Administrator. The Agency proposes contracting the Staubach Company for thirty (30) months for a fee of $364,000 for project administration services as outlined in Attachment C. More specific deal points can be found in Attachment D. which would be attached to the Agency's Standard Contract for Professional Services. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TCS:DJN:lmp:3359) COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA Meeting Date: 09/20/1993 Agenda Item Number: / - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY STAFF REPORT RE: STATE CONSOLIDATED OFFICES AND CALTRANS BUILDING September 15, 1993 Page Number -2- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- RECOMMENDATIO N The development of the Superblock and the construction of the State Consolidated Offices and Caltrans Building requires the services of a development company which has had previous experience with high rise development. The Staubach Company has that experience and their assigned Project Administrator, Mr. David Padrutt, has considerable experience in the development and construction of high rise office complexes. It is therefore the recommendation of staff that the Agency Administrator be authorized to draft and execute a thirty (30) month contract for $364,000 with the Staubach Company for project administration services for the design and construction of the State Consolidated Offices and Caltrans Building based on the deal points and Scope of Services presented herein. Staff mmends adoption of the form motion. TI14OrHY C_ STEINHAII , Administrator Eco®onic Development Agency ---------------------------------------------------------------------- TCS:DJN:lmp:3359) COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA Meeting Date: 09/20/1993 Agenda Item Number: 'C - I t �FEtNARp��O `1 BERNARDINO 300 NORTH'D'STREET,SAN BERNARDINO.CALIFORNIA 92418 O�AO D 1N EDWARD V. NEGRETE Councilman,First Ward (909)384-5268 TO: The Honorable Tom Minor Mayor, City of San Bernardino FROM: The Honorable Edward V. Negrete Councilman, Ward 1 City of San Bernardino SUBJECT: STATE CONSOLIDATED OFFICES AND CALTRANS BUILDING PROJECT ADMINISTRATOR SHORT LIST DATE: August 30, 1993 COPIES: Review Committee Members; Executive Assistant to the Mayor; Administrator- EDA; Executive Director-Development Department; Deputy Director- Development Department; File As Chairman of the State Consolidated Offices and Caltrans Building Qualifications Review Committee, 1 am pleased to inform you that at its meeting of August 27, 1993 the Committee, after a rigorous review of thirteen (13) respondents' qualifications, chose three highly qualified firms to continue in the process of determining the most qualified.individual or firm to act as Project Administrator for the development of the State Consolidated Offices and Caltrans Building on the "Superblock" site in downtown San Bernardino. The Committee will interview the following firms on Wednesday, September 8, 1993: The Staubach Company Karsten/Hutman'Margolf MacDonald Properties Based upon further supplemental information requested of the above firms in preparation for the interviews and responses given during the interviews, the Committee will forward to the City Council the name of the most qualified individual or firm for the Council's consideration. _ PRIDE IN PROIRESS �h^., ATTACHMENT "A" , Mayor Tom Minor Re: State Consolidated Offices/Caltrans Building Short List August 30, 1993 Page 2 Responses to the Request for Qualifications Pursuant to the Council's direction of August 2, 1993, staff prepared and mailed nearly 100 Request for Qualification (RFQ) packets for eight different professional services. From August 9th to August 18th, over 150 RFQs had been either mailed or picked up by interested firms and individuals. On August 29, 1993 eighty (80) RFQs had been received in response to the City's request. Of those 80 responses, thirteen (13) were for the position of Project Administrator. On August 24, 1993 the RFQ packages of each of the respondents were delivered to each Review Committee Member for review before their meeting of August 27, 1993. Pursuant to your letter of August 24th, each member reviewed the qualifications of the respondents and came prepared to discuss each. Review Committee Meeting On August 27, 1993, the Committee convened at 8:30 a.m. for the purpose of determining the Short List. Initial discussion focused on the need for a rating system in accordance with Sections 7.0 and 9.0 of the RFQ. Staff, in accordance with Council's direction to not take an active role in the rating of RFQs and possibly interfere with the Committee's independent review, did not produce a rating system for the Committee's use. Ms. Judy Cady, Business Manager, Caltrans District 08, developed a rating matrix based on Section 7.0 of the RFQ. While she had developed this matrix for her own use during her review of the RFQs before the August 27th meeting, the Committee found Ms. Cady's rating matrix a valuable tool by which to rate the RFQs (see attached). The Committee decided to use a scoring system of 0 - 3 points for each criterion. Once numbers were assigned to each criterion, members added the numbers across for a total score. Each RFQ respondent could achieve a maximum score of 21 from an individual Committee Member, and a total score of 189 from Members' combined scores. When each Committee Member had finished tallying their individual scores, the Chairman called for the tally. The scores were tallied and posted on a pad for review of the Committee. The Committee decided to invite the three highest scoring RFQ respondents to interview with the Committee on September 8, 1993, at which time the Committee will chose one firm or individual for Council consideration. The three highest scoring firms were (in order of score received): The Staubauch Company - 148 Karsten/Hutman Margolf- 139 MacDonald Properties - 125 Mayor Tom Minor Re: State Consolidated Offices/Caltrans Building Short List r August 30, 1993 Page 3 The Interview The Committee is requesting additional information from the firms on the Short List. This information will be given to the Members on Friday, September 3, 1993 for their review before the interviews of September 8th. Staff, with input from Committee Members, is in the process of forming interview questions. The Committee decided to use the same rating system for the interviews as was used for the RFQ rating on August 27th. As Chairman of the State Consolidated Office and Caltrans Building, I believe we have chosen the most qualified firms from those which responded to the RFQ to interview with the Committee. The process chosen and used was objective, efficient, and effective and preserved the political process with the least staff intervention. 1 am confident that the firm or individual selected for Council consideration will be able to effectively fulfill the position of Project Administrator for the development of the State Consolidated Offices and Caltrans Building in downtown San Bernardino. Respectively submitted, HONORABLE EDWARD V. NEGRETE Chairman, State Consolidated Offices and Caltrans Building Qualifications Review Committee Attachment EW:dle sorshert.djn , r � • REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS REVIEW COM UTTER STATE CONSOLIDATED OFFICES AND CALTRANS BUILDING MINUTES September 8, 1993 9:30 a.m. A meeting of the State Consolidated Offices and Caltrans Building Request for Qualifications Review Committee was called to order at 9:30 a.m. on Wednesday, September 8, 1993, in the Board Room of the Economic Development Agency, 201 North "E" Street, San Bernardino, California, by Chairman and Councilmember Edward V. Negrete. MEMBERS PRESENT The Honorable Norine Miller The Honorable Edward V. Negrete Judy Cady Roger Hardgrave Richard Mayo Susan Morales Jim Robbins STAFF PRESENT Lorraine Velarde, Executive Assistant, Mayor's Office David J. Norman, Development Specialist, Economic Development Agency COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP Chairman Negrete questioned staff as to the size of the Committee. Originally the Committee was appointed to have seven (7) members and the Committee had grown to nine (9) voting members. Ms. Velarde replied that Judy Cady representing Caltrans was added by the Mayor, and the Mayor had appointed Ms. Velarde to the Committee in the Mayor's stead. Chairman Negrete expressed concern that voting members of the Committee should be those of the original seven (7) member panel. Since Mr. Dan Rosenfeld of the California State Department of General Services had asked to be relieved of his duties on the Committee for other assignments in northern California, Ms. Velarde suggested that Ms. Cady be substituted for Mr. Rosenfeld, and that Ms. Velarde have no vote on the Committee. This solution was unanimously accepted by the Mayor and Committee Members. The seven (7) voting Committee Members are: Chairman Edward Negrete; Councilwoman Norine Miller; Roger Hardgrave, Director of Public Works; Rich Mayo, Department of General Services; Judy Cady, Caltrans District 08; Mr. Jim Robbins, Lier's Music; Susan Morales, Assistant to the Agency Administrator, Economic Development Agency. ATTACHMENT "B" REVIEW COMFUTTEE IrIIr'"ES September 8, 1993 Page -2- (" 3 APPOINTMENT OF VICE CHAIR Mr. Norman suggested to Chairman Negrete that a Vice Chair be appointed in the event the Chairman was unable or unavailable to fulfill his duties. Chairman Negrete made a motion, seconded by Mr. Hardgrave, that Councilwoman Miller be appointed Vice Chair. The motion was carried by unanimous vote. COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES Chairman Negrete expressed the need to have Committee Minutes after each meeting of the Review Committee. The Chairman made a motion, seconded by Mr. Robbins, that the Chairman's letter of August 30, 1993 to Mayor Tom Minor discussing the choice of the Project Administrator short list be accepted as minutes for the August 30, 1993 meeting. The motion was carried by a unanimous vote. PROJECT ADMINISTRATOR INTERVIEW RATING SHEET AND FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS Mr. Norman provided the Committee with a rating sheet (attached) and follow up questions (attached) which could be asked of each Project Administration interviewee if it was deemed their presentation did not cover the anticipated questions adequately. The list was amended in the following manner: Question 1 was amended to read: "How long has the key person been a member of the firm or project team, and what has been their involvement as presented in the case studies?" Question 5 was amended to read: "What makes your firm more effective than others in developing multi-building and multi-tenant sites of similar size and complexity?" Question 6 was added to read: "Within the context of this public sector development, how do you intend to conduct the process of forming the project team?" Mr. Norman explained the rating sheet and its use, and described his intent with each of the rating criterion. INTERVIEWS MacDonald Properties, dba The Collaborative, began its presentation at 9:50 a.m., and ended at 10:40 a.m. After the MacDonald presentation, Chairman Negrete suggested that members of the Committee complete a pencil rating of each of the firms, and then after the last interview, re-examine their penciled ratings in light of all of the presentations. This suggestion was unanimously accepted by all members of the Committee. REVIEW COMMITTEE MINIMES September 8, 1993 Page —3— The Staubach Company began its presentation at 11:05 a.m., and finished at 12:15 p.m. The Committee broke for lunch at 12:15 p.m., and reconvened at 1:00 p.m. Karsten/Hutman Margolf began their presentation at 1:00 p.m., and finished at 2:15 p.m. PROJECT ADMINISTRATOR RATINGS AND RECOMMENDATION The Committee performed three different numerical ratings for each of the firms interviewed. The first rating was a strict numerical rating based on the cumulative total of all seven (7) voting Committee Members. The cumulative totals of the firms are presented in descendng order: Firm Total Score The Staubach Company 604 MacDonald Properties 537 Karsten/Hutman Margolf 532 By suggestion of Mr. Mayo, the Committee took the raw scores from the seven (7) members and threw out the lowest and highest of the seven (7) scores to eliminate any skewing from either end. These scores essentially confirmed the previous scores, and they are presented in descending order: Firm Total Score The Staubach Company 428 MacDonald Properties 392 Karsten/Hutman Margolf 375 Finally, suggestion was made by Mr. Hardgrave that Members rank the three (3) firms in descending order based upon scores individually given by each of those Members. For example, a Member could have rated the Staubach Company first, MacDonald Properties second, and Karsten/Hutman Margolf third. Those first, second and third rankings were then added for a total score from among the seven (7) Committee Members. The lowest score would indicate the highest Place rankings given by each member. These totals are given in ascending order: Firm Total Score The Staubach Company 11 MacDonald Properties 13 Karsten/Hutman Margolf lg Chairman Negrete made a motion, seconded by Mr. Robbins, that the Mayor be presented the findings of the Review Committee. The motion was carried by (` unanimous vote. l REV]" COMMITTEE PIIV— ES September 8, 1993 Page —4— RATING SYSTEM FOR PROGRAMMING SERVICES Mr. Mayo expressed his concern that the weighting of rating elements was inappropriate and disproportionate in regards to MBE/WBE status. It was suggested by Mr. Mayo that the rating system be similar to the interview rating system used for Project Administrator with the addition of a column for MBE/WBE status and local firm status. Each of these criterion would receive one (1) point. A firm which produced a MBE/WBE certification from any governmental entity would receive one (1) point. Likewise, a local firm with an office in San Bernardino or a joint venture with an office in San Bernardino would receive one (1) point. Mr. Norman agreed to alter the rating form and provide members of the Committee with a new form and a list of certified MBE/WBE firms for the Committee's use in rating the Programmers. N= MEETING The next meeting for the Review Committee will be on Monday, September 13, 1993, at 9:30 a.m., in the Economic Development Agency Board Room. The Chair suggested that three (3) to five (5) programming firms be recommended for a short list for the review of the Project Administrator. It is anticipated the Project Administrator will execute a contract shortly after approval of the City Council on September 20, 1993. Councilwoman Miller announced that she will not be able to make the next meeting. She agreed to send her rating sheets for the position of Programmer in her stead. ADJOURNMENT The Review Committee adjourned its meeting at 3:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted DAVID J. NORMAN Dev-elopment Specialist Reviewed and Approved: EDWARD V. NEGRETE, Cha an Coumcilmember, Ward 1 DJN:nml:3353J , j RATING GUIDE FOR: )JECT ADMINISTRATOR — STATE CON; IDATED OFFICES AND CALTRANS BUILDING. FIRM NAME: POSSIBLE SCORE DESCRIPTION RATING 1 30 EXPERIENCE — OTHER SIMILAR PROJECTS DONE BY KEY PERSON, YEARS OF INVOLVEMENT WITH THIS TYPE OF WORK. BASIC BACKGROUND. 2 30 PROJECT PERSONNEL — DEPTH AND AVAILABILITY OF ADEQUATE PERSONNEL TO ACT AS A "CONSULTING DEVELOPER". 3 25 DEPTH OF UNDERSTANDING OF THE PROJECT — DO THEY UNDERSTAND WHAT IS EXPECTED ON THIS PROJECT? ARE THEY AWARE OF THE COMPLEXITIES INVOLVED? DID THEIR PRO- POSAL INDICATE DEPTH OF KNOWLEDGE OR MERELY INTEREST IN DOING ANY WORK AVAILABLE? 4 15 COMPLIANCE WITH SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS — DID THEY RESPOND TO ALL QUESTIONS AND REQUIREMENTS IN THE REQUEST? HAVE THEY SUPPLIED SUFFICIENT INFORMATION TO COM- PLETE YOUR EVALUATION? POSSIBLE SCORE 100 COUNTS: RATER DATE 3346J a , REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS INTERVIEW FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS PROJECT ADMINISTRATOR STATE CONSOLIDATED OFFICES AND CALTRANS BUILDING 1. How long has the key person been a member of the firm or project team? 2. Please describe your method of conflict resolution between team members 3. What techniques will you employ to keep design and construction costs in check? 4. What are the major potential pitfalls in public sector development projects? How do you avoid them? 5. What makes your firm more effective than others in developing multi-building and multi-tenant sites? 6. Do you (the Consultant) have any questions or final comments? 3349) Exhibit COMPENSATION TO CONSULTANT FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF SCOPE OF WORK The Consultant shall be compensated in an amount not to exceed $364,000 for the implementation of the Scope of Work as attached to the Agreement as Exhibit , except under the circumstances as hereinafter provided. Compensation is predicated upon a Scope of Work comprised of two distinct phases designated as the Design/Pre-Construction Phase and the Construction Phase anticipated to be completed during a 30-month period commencing on October 1, 1993, and terminating on March 31, 1996. The Design/Pre-Construction Phase shall commence on October 1, 1993, and shall extend for a 12-month period through and including September 30, 1994. Compensation shall be paid to the Consultant in an amount equal to $15, 333 per month during the Design/Pre-Construction Phase. The Construction Phase shall commence on October 1, 1994, and shall extend for an 18-month period through and including March 31, 1996. Compensation shall be paid to the Consultant in an amount equal to $10,000 per month during the Construction Phase. All compensation payable to the Consultant, whether during the Design/Pre-Construction Phase or the Construction Phase, shall be paid by the Economic Development Agency of the City of San Bernardino("EDA") within 30 days after submission of monthly invoices to the EDA subsequent to the conclusion of the monthly period for which compensation is then being sought. The monthly compensation rates shall be inclusive of all professional services, employee expenses, indirect costs, overhead, telephone (local and long distance charges) , fax transmissions, travel*, messenger and express delivery services, duplication expenses and all expenses of any nature incurred by the Consultant in the undertaking of the Agreement. *Travel Expenses shall include vehicular and other travel within a 200 mile radius of consultants office. All travel beyond the 200 mile radius shall be reimbursed by the Economic Development Agency upon presentation of invoice but only in the event Consultant requests and received, in writing, approval for such travel expenditure. ATTACHMENT "C" f5 ­ 1 In the event either the Design/Pre-Construction Phase or the Construction Phase is extended as a result of occurrences that are not within the control of the Consultant or were not caused by the Consultant, directly or indirectly, the Consultant shall provide the EDA with one (1) 30-day extension period during either the Design/Pre-Construction Phase or the Construction Phase at the option of the EDA. During any such 30-day extension period the Consultant shall provide the same level of services as required during the applicable Phase for which no compensation shall be paid to the Consultant for such 30-day extension period. The EDA at its option may elect to invoke such 30-day extension period during either the Design/Pre-Construction Phase or the Construction Phase. Should the EDA elect to invoke such 30-day extension period during the Design/Pre-Construction Phase, the Construction Phase shall then commence as of November 1, 1994 rather than as of October 1, 1994. In the event the Construction Phase is not completed within the 18-month period and the EDA has not previously elected to invoke such 30-day extension period, the Consultant will automatically be required to provide the same level of services during a continuation of the Construction Phase for such 30-day extension period. Should the Design/Pre-Construction Phase extend or be reasonably anticipated to extend for a period of time greater than 13 months, the EDA at its option may elect to provide notice to the Consultant to the effect that either (i) the terms of the Agreement and the provision of services to the EDA shall be placed in abeyance for not to exceed a 6-month period beyond the combined initial 12 month Design/Pre-Construction Phase and the 30-day extension period or (ii) the EDA may continue to compensate the Consultant at the same compensation level for the continuation of such Design/Pre-Construction Phase provided that the Consultant maintains the same staffing level and time commitment during any such continuation of the Design/Pre-Construction Phase. 0� � 1 . Should the Construction Phase not be completed within the combined 18 month period and a 30-day extension period (provided that the automatic 30-day extension period was not previously invoked by the EDA to extend the Design/Pre-Construction Phase) the EDA may elect to compensate the Consultant during the continuation of any extension to the Construction Phase at the same monthly compensation rate provided that the Consultant maintains the same staffing level and time commitment during the completion of the Construction Phase. In the event the Design/Pre-Construction Phase is completed prior to October 1, 1994, and the Construction Phase commences prior to such date, the EDA will continue to compensate the Consultant for the agreed upon 12 monthly payments at the monthly compensation rate applicable during the Design/Pre- Construction Phase. Should the Construction Phase be completed prior to the stated termination date of the Agreement, whether attributable to either a decrease in the time required for the completion of the Design/Pre-Construction Phase or a decrease in the time required for the completion of the Construction Phase, the Consultant shall continue to receive, on a lump sum basis, the compensation that would have been due on a monthly basis at the monthly compensation rate required to be paid by the EDA through the term of the Agreement. In the event the EDA determines during the Design/Pre-Construction Phase that the Project differs significantly from that as defined in the Agreement and the Proposal to the State and Caltrans, the EDA shall have the right pursuant to Section of the Agreement either to terminate the Agreement or to renegotiate the terms of the Agreement to more accurately reflect the professional services and the time frame required to implement an amended Scope of Work for any such redefined Project. The Consultant estimates the following minimum hourly commitments by staff of the Consultant during each Phase of the Project: 1. Design/Pre-Construction Phase 102 hours per month - Onsite Project Manager (to be located in an EDA provided office at least sixteen hours per week upon terms, conditions and hours of work to be mutually agreed upon by the Consultant and the Agency Administrator to the Economic Development Agency)* 48 hours per month - Other Support Staff 24 hours per month - Other Staff on an as-needed basis 2.Construction Phase 5o hours per month - Onsite Project Manager (to be located in an EDA provided office at least sixteen hours per week upon terms, conditions and hours of work to be mutually agreed upon by the Consultant and the Agency Administrator to the Economic Development Agency)* 48 hours per month - Other Support Staff 48 hours per month - Other Staff on an as-needed basis Any extension of time to complete either the Design/Pre-Construction Phase or the Construction Phase which requires the EDA to extend payment of the agreed upon monthly compensation rate for a period of time greater than the 12-month Design/Pre-Construction Phase or the 18 month Construction Phase, as applicable, shall be predicated upon the staffing levels and time commitments of Consultant's staff being maintained, as set forth above. Any diminution of staffing levels or time commitments during any such extension period shall proportionately reduce the then applicable monthly compensation rate to reflect the actual staffing levels and time commitments required of the Consultant during any such extension period. *Provided, however, in the event the duties of the on-site Manager require the attendance at meeting locations other than the Economic Development Agency offices, the required travel and meeting time will be credited towards such hourly commitments upon such written justification by the Consultant. 19 (dl,6 " SCOPE OF WORK STATE CGjL4S0LIDATED OFFICES AND CALTKANS BUHJ)ING Project Administrator OVERVIEW The development of State Consolidated Offices and Caltrans Building in downtown San Bernardino on "the Superblock" site bounded by "E" and"D" Streets and Fourth and Fifth Streets is one requiring the abilities of an individual or fmi n which can act as "consulting developer." As envisioned,the project will involve the development of one fifteen(15)story office tower of approximately 315,000 gross square feet, an eleven(11) story office tower of approximately 213,000 gross square feet,and a parking garage which will accommodate 1,133 vehicles. It will be necessary for the Project Administrator to take a lead role in assisting the Project Team, coordinating all design and pre-construction activities,overseeing construction and managing tenant improvement build-out and move-in. Presented below is the Scope of Work required to adequately fulfill the position of Project Administrator. I. PRECONSTRUCTION A. Project Team Selection 1. Assist in the selection of project team members and negotiation of contracts with required team members and consultants. Such team members will include,but not be limited to, interior programmer/space planner, architect,cost estimator/value engineer,civil engineer, soils engineer,parking garage designer,retail marketing consultant,landscape architect, and other required consultants necessary for the Project Administrator to arrive at designs pleasing to the Department of General Services and Caltrans,while at the same time monitoring costs which meet the City's approved budget. 2. Draft and issue City approved Requests for Qualifications (RFQs) for various consulting contracts and assist the Economic Development Agency in assuring compliance with all State and Caltrans minority hiring goals. B. Site Acquisition and Analysis 1. Oversee and consult with the Economic Development Agency on site acquisition and analysis. 2. Monitor soils reports,title reports and other information pertinent to the site. DJN:nm1:3334J ATTACHMENT "D" SCOPE OF WORK-PMiect Administrates August 31, 1993 Page 2 C. Programming and Phasing 1. Assist the Department of General Services and Caltrans in working with the programmer in the preparation of program requirements for the project. 2. Determine phasing of the project with the City,the Department of General Services,Caltrans and other impacted entities. D. Preliminary Budget and Project Schedule 1. With assistance from the project team,establish a preliminary schedule of design engineering and construction. 2. Establish a preliminary budget for design engineering and consulting services. 3. With assistance from the cost estimator/value engineer and other consultants, establish a preliminary construction budget. 4. Submit a preliminary cash flow estimate of monthly expenditures for design engineering and construction. 5. Establish accounting procedures for the duration of the project. E. Owner Supplied Information 1. Facilitate the gathering and dissemination of all owner supplied information such as surveys and special programmatic information. 2. Facilitate the selection of, and negotiation with owners consultants such as geotechnical consultants and testing laboratories. F. Reporting Provide periodic reports summarizing the status of the budget, cash flow, schedule and other relevant project activities (frequency to be determined). II. DESIGN DEVELOPMENT, LEASE NEGOTIATION, FINANCING A. Design Development 1. Monitor the architectural and engineering services for schematic and design development plans and specifications. 2. With assistance from the architect and engineer,prepare special studies such as life cycle and energy studies as required. DJN:nml:3334J '' I SCOPE OF WORK-P- ;ect Adminis=or Angust 31, 1993 Page 3 3. Monitor and review preliminary code analysis of the schematic drawings. 4. Coordinate and monitor any changes in the building resulting from building department reviews. 5. Coordinate with all utilities. 6. Review alternate energy systems. 7. With assistance from the project team,maintain and update the schedule of design engineering and construction. 8. Obtain from the cost estimator/value engineer a schematic budget for construction. 9. Submit for review and approval the schematic budget and updates. 10. Maintain an updated cash flow estimate of monthly expenditures for design engineering and construction. 11. Continue to maintain the accounting system. 12. Continue to provide periodic project status reports (frequency to be determined). B. Lease Negotiations 1. Review lease with the City and the State for content,form and accuracy. 2. Participate in lease negotiations between the City and State. C. Retail Space Marketing & Leasing 1. Coordinate design team and retail marketing consultant to provide adequate retail space and optimize leasing of the retail space. 2. Review retail marketing program with broker. 3. Coordinate media advertisement including print,etc. 4. Consult with the Economic Development Agency in lease negotiations with City, State and retail tenants for retail space. D. Financing 1. Provide bond underwriter and other consultants with cash flow and other necessary information. 2. Assist as needed in securing bond or other financing. DJN:nm1:3334J /5 � i SCOPE OF WORK-r ;ea Adminisuvm August 31,1993 III_ WORKING DRAWINGS A. Drawings 1. Submit design development drawings to the owner for approval. 2. Monitor the production of working drawings following approval of budget,code review and schedule. 3. Monitor and administer all changes to drawings and document increases or decreases in construction costs as a result of such changes. B. Entitlements 1. Assist in obtaining necessary entitlements and permits and work with all government agencies involved. 2. Work with City staff in preparation of environmental review(E1R) C. Final Construction Budget and Schedule Review project team's final construction budget and schedule in preparation for bidding. D. Construction Bid 1. Assist in the preparation of general contractor's bid and subcontractor's bids and assist the Economic Development Agency in assuring compliance requirements with minority contracting goals applicable to State and Caltrans projects. 2. Monitor bidding and review the bids. 3. Submit successful bids to owner for recommendation to the City Council. E. Overall Budget and Schedule 1. Maintain and update an overall budget cash flow. 2. With the assistance of the project team,maintain and update the schedule of design engineering and construction. 3. Maintain the project accounting system. 4. Continue to provide periodic project status reports,budget and scheduling reports. DJ"�1:nm1:3334J SCIDPE OF WORK-Project Armor August 31, 1993 Pace 5 IV. CONSTRUCTION A. Construction Procedures 1. Establish a reporting procedures manual to be followed by all contractors, architects,engineers and consultants. 2. Subject to owner's approval,administer all change orders,field orders and estimate requests. 3. Establish payment procedures for contractor. 4. Assist in obtaining necessary permits and governmental approvals beyond original entitlements. 5. Review and monitor contractor's detailed construction schedule. B. Monitor Construction 1. Monitor weekly field inspections and reports. 2. Administer job meetings with contractor, architect and engineers. C. Overall Budget and Schedule 1. Maintain and update the overall budget, schedule and cash flow. 2. Maintain the overall project accounting system. D. Reporting Continue to provide periodic project status reports,budgets and scheduling reports. V- COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION AND TENANT MOVE IN A. Acceptance of Construction 1. With project team assistance,monitor all punch list items. 2. Review final payment request from contractor and administer procedures established for final notice of completion. B. Tenant Move In 1. Coordinate with tenant representatives,interior designers,space planners, architects and contractors all aspects preliminary to tenant move in. 2. Establish move in schedules and revise as needed. DJN:nm1:3334J SCOPE of woRK-Project Administrator August 31, 1993 Page 6 C. Final Accounting 1. Coordinate with construction auditor and review final audit of all costs paid to architects,engineers and contractors. 2. Present and document all warranties and guarantees to owner. 3. Prepare final summary status report. DJN:nm1:3334J