The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About18- Economic Development i I I ECOi, ✓ MIC DEVELOPMENT AGCY • OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO REQUEST FOR COMMI ION/ O iNCI . ACTION FROM: TIMOTHY C. STEINHAUS SUBJECT: ARCHnFJMWAL Administrator SERVICESSTATE CONSOLIDATED DATE: December 2, 1993 OFFICES& CAL- TRANS BURRING ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Synopsis of Previous Commission/Council/Committee Action(s): On August 2, 1993, the Community Development Commission approved the formation of the State Consolidated Offices and Caltrans Building Request for Qualifications Review Committee to begin the process of contracting qualified professional consulting services. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Recommended Motion(s): (Community Development Commission) MOTION: That the Community Development Commission authorize the Agency Administrator to draft and execute a contract with Keating Mann Jernigan Rottet in an amount not to exceed $4,094,833 (reimbursables included)for structural and interior architectural services for the design of the State E Consolidated Offices and Caltrans Building on the Superblock Sif(- and, allocate $250,000 in contingency for unanticipated design changes. ` �- i �c TIMOTHY C. STEINHAUS Administrator ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Contact Person(s): Timothy C Steinhaus/David J Norman Phone: 5081 Project Area(s): _Central City North Ward(s): One Supporting Data Attached: Staff Report FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: $ 4.344.833 Source: Tax Increment Budget Authority: Requested -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Commission/Council Notes: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TCS:DJN:nml:archslct.cdc COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA MEETING DATE: 12/06/1993 Agenda Item Number: _� ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY STAFF REPORT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Architectural Services - State Consolidated Offices and Caltrans Building This report seeks Community Development Commission authorization for the Executive Director to execute a contract not to exceed $4,094,833 with Keating Mann Jernigan Rottet for structural and interior architectural services for the design of the State Consolidated Offices and Caltrans Building on the Superblock. Staff also seeks $250,000.00 in contingency for unanticipated changes in design. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The development of the Superblock towers requires the services of an experienced firm which can provide structural and interior architectural services. The State Consolidated Offices and Caltrans Building Request for Qualifications Review Committee met on October 11, 1993 for the purpose of determining a short list from which the Committee could interview the most qualified firms (see Attachment "A"). On October 21, 1993, the Community Development Commission requested that the Qualifications Review Committee consider interviewing the firms of Villanueva/Arnoni and DMJM as part of the short list. On November 2, 1993, the Committee met and took action reaffirming its previous vote and denying the Commission's request (see Attachment "B"). At its November 2, 1993 meeting, the Committee defined a local business as one which meets both of the following criteria: 1. The firm must have had a valid City of San Bernardino Business License since February 20, 1993 (six (6) months before the deadline for RFQ submission); and 2. The firm must currently employ within the limits of the City of San Bernardino a minimum of seven (7) employees or twenty percent (20%) of the firm's total work force. This definition was formed in response to staffs intention to require all of the architects on the short list to propose a minimum fifteen percent (15%) local participation goal (see Attachment "B"). It should be noted by the Commission that minority, women and disabled veterans business enterprise hiring goals are mandated by the State for this project, and will be audited by the State in accordance with applicable laws. The five (5) firms on the short list were interviewed by the Committee on November 30, 1993, and it was determined that among those five (5), the firm of Keating Mann Jernigan Rottet was the most qualified for the position of project architect (See Attachment "C"). ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TCS:DJN:mn1:archs1ct.cdc COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA MEETING DATE: 12/06/1993 Agenda Item Number: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMt-AT AGENCY Architectural Services - State Consolidated Offices and Caltrans Building November 22, 1993 Page -2- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ARCHITECT PROPOSAL Previous to the Committee's meetings of November 30, 1993 and December 1, 1993, staff asked the five (5) firms on the short list to provide additional information from which the Committee could determine the most qualified firm. The information requested included a not-to-exceed quotation and the identification of team members. Keating proposes a fee not- to-exceed $3,792,623, with reimbursable expenses not-to-exceed $302,210. This fee falls within the acceptable range as determined by staff. Staff is also proposing a $250,000 owner- controlled design contingency. The size and complexity of this project are such that changes in design are inevitable. This contingency would be needed regardless of the designer, and when combined with Keating's fee is still well within the range of proposals received by the other firms. Keating's proposal includes 15.1% local participation amounting to contracts in excess of $550,000. The local firms involved with this contract are DMJM, a local architectural and engineer firm; and Knapp and Associates, a local structural engineering firm. Although not a part of the Committee's decision making process, it should be noted that Keating's proposed base fee of $3,777,623 was the second lowest base fee of those that proposed. Adjustments to the proposals were necessary to account for instances where one firm added unnecessary disciplines to its team, or failed to add a needed discipline. None of the proposals included any provisions for solid waste/recycling. Therefore, $15,000 was added to each proposal. Keating's proposal required only one adjustment for solid waste/recycling bringing its adjusted base fee total to the $3,792,623 asked for by staff. In contrast to Keating's proposal was that of Johnson, Fain and Pereira which proposed a base fee of $4,461,000. After adding $15,000 for solid waste/recycling, but deducting $68,400 for disciplines not required of this contract, Johnson Fain's adjusted base fee was $4,407,600 - the most costly of all who proposed, and more than $600,000 more than Keating's proposal. It should be noted that the cost of this contract, as well as all other professional consulting contracts and the cost of construction of the site, will be reimbursed to the Agency by the State as part of its lease for the use of the buildings and the parking garage. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TCS:DJN:mn1:archslct.cdc COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA MEETING DATE: 12/06/1993 Agenda Item Number: / 1 ECONOMIC DEVELOPM� 4T AGENCY Architectural Services - State Consolidated Offices and Caltrans Building November 22, 1993 Page -3- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- RECOMMENDATION The development of the Superblock and the construction of the State Consolidated Offices and Caltrans Building requires the services of a architectural firm with previous experience in high-rise development. The architectural firm of Keating Mann Jernigan Rottet has considerable experience in this type of design. It is therefore the recommendation of staff that the Agency Administrator be authorized to draft and execute a contract not-to-exceed $4,094,833 (reimbursables included) with the firm of Keating Mann Jernigan Rottet for structural and interior architectural services for the design and construction of the State Consolidated Offices and Caltrans Building and that the Commission allocate $250,000 in contingency funds for unanticipated design changes. Staff re mends adoption of the form motion. r TIM,6THY C. STEINHAUS, Agency Administrator Economic Development Agency ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- r. TCS:DJN:nml:archslct.cdc COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA MEETING DATE: 12/06/1993 Agenda Item Number: Request for Qualifications Review Committee State Consolidated Offices and Caltrans Building Minutes October 11, 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 Monday, October 11, 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 Edward V. Negrete The Honorable Norine Miller Judy Cady Richard Mayo Susan Morales Jim Robbins STAFF PRESENT Ray Salvador, Administrative Assistant to the Mayor, Mayor's Office David J. Norman, Development Specialist, Economic Development Agency David Padrutt, Project Administrator, The Staubach Company MEMBERS ABSENT Roger Hardgrave PPS PRESENTATION Mr. Fred Kent and Ms. Kathy Madden of Project for Public Spaces conducted a presentation on the Downtown Plan and downtown planning concepts with special attention focused on ground level retail concepts which are both successful and unsuccessful. Following their presentation, PPS remained for further discussions in the event their technical assistance was needed. Mr. Mayo objected to the presence of PPS on the basis that PPS was not a selected Committee Member. Chairman Negrete agreed with Mr. Mayo, stating that other business people do not become involved in the Committee's deliberations and the meeting is closed to the public. Ms. Morales supported the discussion. Mr. Kent and Ms. Madden reiterated their position on retail uses and how architects can not adequately design retail spaces. PPS departed at 10:45 a.m. ATTACHMENT "A" 1 ARCHITECT SHORT LIST Mr. Padrutt submitted his shortened list and reviewed his methodology for limiting the list of qualified architects from the twenty-four (24) responses to qualifications to nine (9) qualified firms. The Committee, after further discussion, added the firms of Dworsky and Associates and Zimmer Gunsul Frasca to the list of nine (9). Motion was made by Ms. Morales, seconded by Chairman Negrete, to add Dworsky and Associates and Zimmer Gunsul Frasca to Mr. Padrutt's list of nine (9) firms and accept this list for numerical rating by the Committee. Motion was carried by unanimous vote. Another motion was made by Chairman Negrete, seconded by Mr. Mayo to recess for lunch at 11:00 a.m., and reconvene at 12:00 p.m. for the purpose of accommodating Councilwoman Miller's schedule. The motion was carried by unanimous vote. When the members reconvened at 12:00 p.m., they rated the eleven (11) firms using the attached scoring sheet. Each of the columns received a maximum of three (3) points for a total number of twenty-seven (27). Following the vote, members could not form a consensus around the top five (5) firms. Mr. Mayo objected that the local category rating skewed the figures to such an extent that without this category, better qualified firms would be within the top five (5). After a half-hour of discussion and inability to form a consensus, a motion was made by Mr. Robbins, seconded by Chairman Negrete to remove the categories of financial stability, MBE/WBE and local office from the tally sheet. The motion was approved unanimously. Further, a motion was made by Mr. Mayo, seconded by Ms. Cady, that the Committee accept as short listed the five (5) top ranking firms as scored by the Committee following the deletion of the categories of financial stability, MBE/WBE and local office. (The intent of the motion was to have the committee unanimously accept the five (5) highest ranking firms as short listed without further discussion and debate following the tally.) The motion was carried by unanimous vote. The cumulative scores from the six (6) voting members present are listed in descending order from highest rated firm to lowest rated firm. FIRM SCORE 1. Johnson Fain & Pereira 95 2. Keating Mann Jernigan Rottet 93 3. H. O. K. 93 4. Ellerbe Becket 92 5. Skidmore Owings & Merrill 91 6. Langdon Wilson 78 7. Gensler - Villanueva/Arnoni 78 8. LPA 72 9. DMJM 66 10. Dworsky and Associates 63 11. Zimmer Gunsul Frasca 60 Following the practice of the rating for the Project Administrator and Programmer, the Committee took the raw scores from the six (6) voting members and threw out the lowest and highest of the six (6) scores to eliminate any skewing from either end. These scores essentially confirmed the previous scores and they are presented in descending order. FIRM SCORE 1. Ellerbe Becket 65 2. H. O. K. 64 3. Johnson Fain & Pereira 63 4. Skidmore Owings Merrill 63 5. Keating Mann Jernigan Rottet 62 6. Gensler - Villanueva/Arnoni 53 7. Langdon Wilson 52 8. LPA 48 9. DMJM 46 10. Dworsky and Associates 44 11. Zimmer Gunsul Frasca 41 At a later date to be determined by staff, the Committee will interview the following firms: FIRM 1. Ellerbe Becket 2. H. O. K. 3. Johnson Fain & Pereira 4. Skidmore Owings Merrill 5. Keating Mann Jernigan Rottet ARCHITECT SELECTION FROM SHORT LIST Discussion centered around the need to visit the offices of the short-listed architects. Consensus could not be reached as to whether all five (5) firms should be visited or whether presentations should be made to the Committee at the Agency Board Room and subsequent visits to firms should be made after the interviews. A vote was taken on both plans with the majority deciding to visit architectural firms after the interviews with the possibility of visiting a smaller list of architect finalists. The vote was four (4) to two (2). ADJOURNMENT The Review Committee adjourned its meeting at 2:00 pm. Respectfully submitted, i (T-11 DAVID J. NORMAN, Development Specialist Development Department Reviewed and Approved: EDWARD V. NEGRETE, Chairman Councilmember, Ward I archmntssco REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS REVIEW COMMITTEE 4w STATE CONSOLIDATED OFFICES AND CALTRANS BUILDING MINUTES November 2, 1993, 8:00 a.m. A meeting of the State Consolidated Offices and Caltrans Building Request for Qualifications Review Committee was called to order at 8:00 a.m. on Tuesday, November 2, 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 Edward V. Negrete The Honorable Norine Miller Judy Cady Richard Mayo Susan Morales Jim Robbins Gene Klatt (substituting for Roger Hardgrave) STAFF PRESENT Lorraine Velarde, Executive Assistant to the Mayor, Mayor's Office David J. Norman, Development Specialist, Economic Development Agency David Padrutt, Project Administrator, The Staubach Company SCHEDULING OF ARCHITECT INTERVIEWS Mr. Norman asked the Members of the Committee to schedule interviews for architect finalists, expressing the need to be flexible for Project for Public Spaces in the calendaring of this item. Chairman Negrete expressed strong reservation at having PPS in the room during the architect interviews. Ms. Morales questioned the purpose or need of PPS during the interviews. Mr. Robbins would prefer to be educated by PPS, rather than have them involved in the choice of architect. It was unanimously decided by the Committee that PPS would give the Committee a presentation on the Downtown Plan and its goals, and questions that the Committee could ask the architect; however, the Committee does not want PPS included in the decision making process. The Committee will interview the five (5) short listed firms on November 30, 1993, and the meeting will convene at 8:00 a.m. On December 1, 1993, a selected group of architects will be chosen for field presentations at their home offices. This meeting will also begin at 8:00 a.m. ATTACHMENT "B" CONSIDERATION OF COUNCIL REQUEST OF OCTOBER 21 1993 Mr. Norman passed to the Committee a copy of Chairman Negrete's motion at the October 21, 1993 Commission meeting, which was passed by the Commission and which read: That the State Consolidated Offices and Caltrans Building Proposal (Superblock) Committee be requested to interview the two (2) local companies. Mr. Mayo questioned the apparent breech of confidentiality of the Committee and expressed his concern that the Committee's business was being leaked to outside interests. Mr. Mayo also stated that the Governor's staff and the Department of General Services are concerned about the rash of local politicking in the process and urged that the selection of design committee members be expedited so that the project can stay on track. Ms. Cady expressed outrage at Councilman Hernandez's October 27, 1993 memorandum to Councilman Edward V. Negrete having received a copy of the memorandum herself. Ms. Cady stated she would rather not be on a committee that would not be respected by the Council. Mr. Mayo made a motion to disregard the Council's request. The motion was seconded by Ms. Cady. The Committee passed the motion on a vote of six (6) to one (1), Chairman Negrete dissenting. DEFINITION OF LOCAL Mr. Norman introduced a memorandum from Timothy C. Steinhaus, Agency Administrator, which offered the following definition of a local business: "A 'local' business is a business which either: a) has its main corporate headquarters located within the City limits of the City of San Bernardino; or, b) has a satellite or branch office of no less than ten (10) employees located within the City limits of the City of San Bernardino." This definition was offered by staff because it is staffs intention to require all of the short- listed architects to propose a minimum fifteen percent (15%) local participation goal. The Committee rejected staffs suggestion and after considerable discussion of various criteria which could be used to validate the presence of a local film, the Committee formed consensus around the following criteria, both of which a firm must meet to be considered local: 1. The firm must have a valid City of San Bernardino business license since February 20, 1993 (six (6) months before the deadline for RFQ submission); and - 0 2. The firm must currently employ, within the limits of the City of San Bernardino, a minimum of seven (7) employees or twenty percent (20%) of the firm's total work force. It was also decided that this fifteen percent (15%) local participation would be a goal, and not a requirement, due to possible difficulties of securing services within the City of San Bernardino for the completion of this contract. The criteria was accepted unanimously by all members of the Committee. CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES The next meeting of the Committee will be Monday, November 8, 1993 to qualify a short list for civil engineering services. FINAL COMMENTS Chairman Negrete stated that the discussion concerning the definition of "local businesses" was helpful in that the Council is continuing to struggle with this issue. Councilman Negrete stated that he believed the Committee had done an admirable job in defining the "local" issue. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 11:00 a.m. Respectfully submitted, DAVID J. NORMAN, Development Specialist Development Department Reviewed and approved: EDWARD V. N GRETE, Ch rman Councilmember, Ward I acomncs.112 REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS REVIEW COMMITTEE STATE CONSOLIDATED OFFICES AND CALTRANS BUILDING MINUTES November 30, 1993 8:00 a.m. A meeting of the State Consolidated Offices and Caltrans Building Request for Qualifications Review Committee was called to order at 8:00 a.m. on Tuesday, November 30, 1993 in the Board Room of the Economic Development Agency, 201 N. "E" Street, San Bernardino, California, by Chairman and Councilmember Edward V. Negrete. MEMBERS PRESENT The Honorable Edward V. Negrete The Honorable Norine Miller Judy Cady Roger Hardgrave Richard Mayo Susan Morales Jim Robbins STAFF PRESENT Lorraine Velarde, Executive Assistant to the Mayor, Mayor's Office David J. Norman, Development Specialist, Economic Development Agency David Padrutt, Project Administrator, The Staubach Company PPS PRESENTATION Mr. Stephen Davies of Project For Public Spaces briefly reviewed the goals of the Downtown Plan with the Committee. He stated that the process of designing the Superblock needs an Architectural firm which is collaborative in its working process. Mr. Davies also spoke specifically about architectural features of the building which PPS considered desirable, such as awnings, cornice detail, etc. r ATTACHMENT "C" 0 ARCHITECT INTERVIEWS Beginning at 9:00 a.m., the Committee interviewed the following firms according to the schedule below: 9:00 Ellerbe Becket 10:30 H.O.K. 12:00 Johnson, Fain & Pereira 1 :30 Recess for Lunch 2:30 Keating Mann Jernigan Rottet 4:00 Skidmore, Owings & Merrill ARCHITECT RATINGS Following the interview with Skidmore, the Committee discussed the firms' presentations and their teams. The Committee also reversed an earlier decision to visit offices of the two highest rated firms, finding that such a tour would not enhance the decision making process. Following further discussion the Committee took its first vote. The cumulative scores for the seven (7) voting members are presented in descending order: FIRM SCORE 1. Keating Mann Jernigan Rottet 676 2. Ellerbe Becket 647 3. Johnson, Fain & Pereira 598 4. H.O.K. 571 5. Skidmore, Owings & Merrill 548 Following their previous practice, the Committee took the cumulative scores from the seven (7) voting members and threw out the lowest and highest of the seven (7) scores to eliminate skewing from either end. These score essentially confirmed the previous scores and they are presented in descending order. FIRM SCORE 1. Keating Mann Jernigan Rottet 483 2. Ellerbe Becket 472 3. H.O.K. 429 4. Johnson, Fain & Pereira 428 5. Skidmore, Owings & Merrill 400 • 7 The Committee decided to forward the name of Keating Mann Jernigan Rottet to Staff to negotiate a contract for approval by the Community Development Commission on November 6, 1993. PRE-CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATOR The Committee decided to meet on December 7, 1993 at 1 :00 p.m. in the EDA Board Room for the purpose of determining the most qualified firm for the position of Pre- Construction Cost Estimator. ADJOURNMENT The Committee Adjourned its meeting at 5:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, I DAVID J. NORMAN, Development Specialist Development Department Reviewed and Approved: EDWARD V. NEGRETE, Chairman Councilmember, Ward I DJN:A:ca11130.min