Upload
others
View
1
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
JACKSON COUNTY FAIRGROUNDS
EVENTS & CONFERENCE CENTER
PROJECT
DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES
RECOMMENDATION
Design/construction of a
new events & conference
center (develop year
around meeting and
events/ exhibition space)
Projects Being Proposed
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Construction of a 30,000 to 35,000 square foot structure to
provide indoor, year around, events space for activities. Uses
will include flat shows; trade shows; conferences; education
events; wedding receptions; arts, entertainment & concert
events; and other functions that require spaces for small,
medium, and large groups of people. The center will also
provide customer service and office space for the Jackson
County Fair staff and the Jackson County Parks and Recreation
Department.
Banquet style space to seat a minimum of 500 guests.
A kitchen space appropriate to service a minimum of 500
guests.
20,000 sq. ft. of exhibition space for events programming
that can be divided into a minimum of four separate smaller
spaces to accommodate a variety of event sizes and needs.
Landscape and parking improvements surrounding the
structure that will enhance the surrounding downtown area
along Ganson Street and the Grand River.
Current
Future
Investment Cost to Support Project Construction
Events Center Structure $4,000,000
Design, GC, Fees 905,985
Furniture, Fixtures, Equipment 600,000
Landscaping 75,000
Circulation, Paving, Parking 300,000
Soils Testing & Remediation 119,015
Total Investment Cost $6,000,000
FUNDING SOURCES - How will the Project Be Funded
Source Amount
Private Sector Investment $4,000,000
County Issued Capital Improvements Bond $4,000,000*
(Tax Delinquent Revolving Fund will fund annual debt service)
Total Project Construction Revenues $8,000,000
Total Investment Phase 1 Improvements $8,000,000
Balance (County General Fund neutral) $ 0
*Bond amount includes future track removal project
Capital Improvements Bond Details
Projected Terms:
Borrowing Period – 20 years
Anticipated Borrowing Rate – 4%
Annual Debt Service Payment - $290,871
Total Payments Over 15 Years - $5,817,412
Source Funding Debt Service Payments – County Tax Delinquent Revolving Fund
The terms as detailed above would have NO negative impact on the
County’s general operating budget and therefore would not impact the
delivery of other county services.
Projected Construct Schedule for the New Events & Conference Ctr.
Date Initiated
1. Issued Request for Proposals for Design/ Build Services Sept. 1, 20172. Opened proposals/ staff begin review & evaluation documents October 12, 20173. Held interviews with most qualified/ highest rated proposers/ firms November 7, 20174. Review Team finalized recommended firm to provide design/ build services, November 15, 20175. Present recommendation to Fair Board for approval December 5, 20176. Present recommendation to County Commission for approval January 2, 20187. Final Approval of design services/ phase I design-build contract January 16, 2018
8. Start design process - define building program/ space allocation January 20, 2018 9. Site Soil Testing/ Environmental Review of Site January 20, 201710. Prepare Schematic Design (design concepts are developed/ tested) February 20, 201811. Begin Design Development Phase/ Final Design is developed April 20, 201812. Updated cost estimates for construction are developed May 15, 201813. Negotiate a final Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) for construction
Finalize a construction contract with the CM/ BuilderPrepare/ submit staff report requesting approval of a constructioncontract / authorization to sell bonds June 1, 2018
14. Study Session: Design & Construction Estimate Presented to County Commission June 5, 2018Review “Guarantee Maximum Price” Contract - CM Firm.
15. Agencies & Affairs Committee/ GMP contract approval/ authorization to sell bonds June 11, 201816. Full Board of County Commissioners
GMP Construction contract approval/ final authorization to sell bonds June 19, 201817. CM Begin development of construction drawings/ construction packages June 20, 201818. Begin submitting first packages of construction drawings to City for July 15, 2018
Review/ permitting19. Ground breaking/ construction begins August 15, 201820. Final occupancy permit/ new events & conference ctr. is opens August 1, 2019
The “Design Build” team selected to lead
the new Events & Conference Ctr. Project
will be acting as the CM @ Risk. The firm
will be the construction manager of the
project. They will coordinate the work of
a great number of different trades and
sub-contractors performing the actual
construction of the new structure. These
sub-contracts will most likely come from
the local market, if available to do the
work, creating employment for local
residents. Keeping the trades and
construction work as local as possible will
be a priority of Jackson County and the
Design Build Team we select. The
Construction Management Firm will not
be doing the actual building of the
structure.
The Construction Management Firm will
hold all of the sub-contractor contracts
and will assume all risk for quality
workmanship and payment of contractors.
They will be required to properly bond
and insure the entire construction process
through the final construction and
warranty stages of the project.
What is Design Build and CM @ Risk?
Selection Process
Design and Construction Management Firm
Internal Staff Review Team
Jeff Hovarter, County Parks Director
Denise Owens, County Fair Manager
Rusty Wellman, County Facilities Project Manager
Mark Vysoky, County Parks Planning & Maintenance Manager
Kyle Lewis, County Parks Facilities & Events Operations Manager
Jack McCloughan, County Parks Maintenance Supervisor
Chris Bolt, Director Jackson County Department of Transportation
Design/ Construction Manager Selection Process
Eight Firms turned in proposals in response to the RFP:
*Wieland Construction
*Frederick Construction
*Acquest Realty
*Laux Construction
*Braun Construction Group
*Phoenix Contractors
*RW Mercer
*Rockford Construction
Evaluation Criteria for Design/Build Selection (The Internal Staff Review Team evaluated the initial proposals, response
to the request for additional information, and information shared during each firm’s interview, when considering/ rating each
firm. The following criteria were used in considering each firms response).
1. Firm Experience in Event and Conference Center design & construction.
a. Do the architect and the construction manager have prior experience in event center projects?
b. Has the team done these projects together?
c. What similar experiences do they have? What can their experience bring to JCP to make our process
and facility amazing?
d. Do they have processes in place to complete a Design/Build project with the team they have
proposed?
2. Fees and schedule quoted for the project.
a. The architectural phase I and phase II plus the preconstruction, CM fees and General Conditions
needed to be analyzed, ranked and compared to each other in order to properly compare them on
an equal playing field.
b. Placing the selected four finalist and placing all of their fees and general conditions in a spreadsheet
gave the selection committee the ability to compare “side-by-side” how each proposal compared to
the others.
c. Items such as length of the construction, inclusion of insurances and bonding allowed the committee
to truly compare the proposals fairly.
3. Total Costs
a. Phase I Fees
b. Phase II Fees
c. CM Fees
d. Pre-construction Fees
e. General Conditions
f. Geo tech and soil testing costs
g. Performance and Payment Bond costs
5. Strength of the Team
a. How did the architect and the CM fit together and what other groups did the CM bring to the table
to form the team? Did they use outside resources or provide everything “in-house”.
b. Who was the lead in each group. Were the team members a good fit with the County team.
c. Did the committee have confidence that the team would achieve the goals of the County to deliver
the event center on time and within budget.
6. Project Concepts
a. Did the proposal deliver a concept design that conveyed that they have an understanding of what
the project entails and what the goals of the County are.
b. Did they give thought to the concept presented for surrounding landscape, buildings, topography,
watershed and fairground functionality?
c. Did they give effort to understanding the internal functions stated for uses in the center?
7. RFP requirements & Presentation Quality
a. Did they fulfill the requirements of the RFP with their proposal?
b. Did they present in a concise and understandable way? Did the team fit well together
4. Risk evaluation and financial strength of the team.
a. Each CM was asked to provide their bonding ability and capacity as part of their proposal.
b. By evaluating the bonding limits and the rates that each firm quoted, we could properly
determine which firms were capable of protecting the County while providing the best cost for
premium.
c. The firms that are capable of bonding the whole project can offer benefits to the local bid
market by creating bid packages in a way that allows local subcontractors the opportunity to bid
the work by covering them under the overall bond, by writing smaller scopes and opening the
project up to more/ smaller Jackson companies.
Each firm was placed in a spreadsheet and rated for the criteria
stated.
A score was assigned to each category based on the information
received and the firms were ranked according to their score.
General conditions for each proposal were place in the spreadsheet .
The apparent gaps in the GC’s were evaluated and appropriate
equalizers were applied to compare the GC’s fairly to each other.
Fees, general conditions, pre-construction, geo tech and bonding costs
were put in the spreadsheet to determine the actual costs for each
firm to complete the project in accordance with the RFP.
The committee selected the top four firms for interviews and another
scoring was completed after the interviews.
Design and Construction Manager
Recommendation.
Based on the Results of the Evaluation Process the Staff
Review Team is Recommending the team of Rockford
Construction and Progressive a.e. to lead the Design and
Construction Management of a new events and conference
center on the county fairgrounds.
The recommendation is support by the following
information:
Rockford Construction has the most experience building events & conference centers
Rockford and Progressive a.e. (the architect) are the most experienced project
team, having completed over 100 projects together, including event centers projects
The strongest interview connection and apparent staff to facilitate the project
The strongest technology both in the office and in the field to support the project
They had the strongest apparent project manager of any of the teams
The strongest bonding capacity ($200 million) and the highest volume of annual work
With their strength financially and through their bonding capacity, they provide the
County with the best risk protection in completing the project
Rockford had the best rating for insurance and the best bond premium of any of the
proposals. Their bond price was $37,500 compared to $60,000 up to $120,000 for the
other firms. These are direct dollars of savings to the County.
Rockford best demonstrated the ability and capacity to write project scope work in smaller
units thereby opening up more opportunity for local subcontractors to participate in the
project. Rockford’s excellent bonding capacity covering all of the subcontractor’s also
increases the opportunity for more local contractor participation.
Rockford’s size as a company gives them purchasing power in the acquisition of building
materials and products and the ability to pass that pricing on to local successful
subcontractors. This will lower the County’s cost of construction allow us to get more value
out of our dollars invested.
Rockford had the lowest stated construction management fee at 2.25%
Rockford had the lowest combined evaluation fees in the summary spreadsheet after making
the adjustments for months of construction, insurance premiums, bonding premiums and GC
modifications.
The final adjusted or comparable costs for the top firms as summarized in the attached
spreadsheet are:
Rockford Construction $905,985
Wieland Construction $949,110
Frederick Construction $958,730
RW Mercer Company $1,051,600
ROCKFORD CONSTRUCTION AND PROGRESSIVE A.E.
INTRODUCTION
DESIGN BUILD APPROACH
Rockford Construction and Progressive AE share
an extensive history of successfully completing
more than $220 million in projects together including six Design Build
efforts. They offer the most experienced team approach and understanding
of how best to work together to achieve the client’s goals.
Rockford Construction and Progressive AE - shared project experience
includes the following successfully completed projects:
• Fulton Place – Apartments/Retail
• Hillsdale College - Searle Conference Center
• Hillsdale College - Simpson Hall
• Kawasaki - Grand Rapids R&D Facility
• Meijer - Bridge Street Market (Bridge & Stocking)
• Grand Rapids Art Museum
• 35 Oakes Barfly Buildout
• Aquinas College - Student Housing
• Blue Cross Blue Shield (86 Monroe)
• Grand Rapids Community College - Sneden Hall
• Grand Rapids Community College - Learning Center
• Hillsdale College - McIntyre Hall
• Hillsdale College - Phillips Auditorium
• Mary Freebed YMCA
• Mercy Health – The Shoppes
• Mercy Health Wound Clinic
• Southeast YMCA
• St. John Vianney
• St. Michael’s
TO: Agencies and Affairs Committee
Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Jeff Hovarter, Parks Director
SUBJECT: Fairgrounds Events & Conference Ctr. / Selection of the Design Build Team
DATE: December 11, 2017
Motion Requested
A motion to accept a design-build proposal for services from Rockford Construction in the amount of
$182,600 to execute Phase 1 design of a new events & conference center; the overall fees and
general conditions for project development not to exceed $905,985; and upon completion of phase 1
design, authorizing the County Administrator to negotiate a final guaranteed maximum price with
Rockford Construction to complete the construction of the events & conference center with the
overall project costs not to exceed $6,000,000.
Questions
or
Comments?