City Council Agenda Packet 05-22-1995 SpecialAGENDA
SPECIAL MEETING • MOWnCELLO CnV COUNCIL.
Monday, May 8$, 1995.5 p.m.
Wayor: Brad Fyle
Council Members: Shirley Anderson, Clint Herbst, Brian Stumpf. Tom Perrault
1. Call to order.
2. Review RFPs and interview four wastewater treatment plant facilities
consultant proposals.
3. Adjourn.
Special Council Agenda - 5/22195
Presentation of oronoeals and interview for selegtion of engln�ing
consultant for design of wastewater treatment slant e:oansion. (J.SJ
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
At a previous meeting, City Council requested staff to develop a request for proposals
for wastewater treatment facility improvement design and distribute the RFP to a
limited number of top engineering firms capable of completing our project. City staff
worked currently on the RFP as well as a list of qualified engineering firma. The list
was narrowed down to a manageable number of three firms in addition to the firm of
OSM/RCM, that completed our Facilities Plan. The RFP was sent to these firms on
April 28, 1995. A pre -proposal conference was held on May 8, 1995, and all four
firma were in attendance. As part of the pre -proposal conference, a detailed tour of
the wastewater treatment plant facility was conducted and copies of the Facilities
Plan and other design data and plan sheets were provided to the consultants. The
deadlines for submittal of the proposals was May 18, 1995, at 4 p.m. All four firms
submitted proposals. After the receipt of proposals, the names were drawn out of a
hat for scheduling of the proposals and interviews. The following is a list of the firms
and the presentation times.
5:00. 5:30 p.m.: Short Elliott -Hendrickson Inc. (SEH), St. Paul, Minnesota
6:30 - 6:00 p.m.: Toltz, King, Duvall, Anderson and Associates, Inc. (TKDA), St. Paul,
Minnesota
6:00 - 6:30 p.m.: HDR Engineering, Inc., Minneapolis, Minnesota
6:30 - 7:00 p.m.: Reike Carroll Muller Associates, Inc. and Orr-Schelen-Mayeron and
Associates, Inc. (RCM/OSM), Minnetonka/Plymouth, Minnesota
Each of the four firms submitting a proposal are well recognized in the wastewater
industry and should be capable of completing a project for us. During the pre -
proposal conference, we asked the firms if an approximate 20 -minute presentation
with a 5.10 minute question and answer period was appropriate for the presentation
and interview process. All firms agreed that this would be enough time. I have
asked each of the firms to come a little bit early, as they could use the conference
room for staging so that they could keep the setup time in the council chambers to
the minimum. Consequently, we expect to stay relatively close to our schedule. It
should not present a problem if the Council wishes to take a break between the first
two and second two consulting firm proposals. We may just start the regular session
of the Council meeting a few minutes later.
We do not expect the Council to be able to absorb all of the information provided in
the proposals and the interviews and presentations and make a decision Monday
evening as to which consultant to select. It is anticipated that we would have
another special meeting or workshop on or about May 30 or June 5 to go into more
Special Council Agenda - W2195
detail between the proposals and develop a criteria for ranking and selection If you
would like staff to do this ahead of time, to develop a ranking procedure and rank the
proposals, that could also be arranged.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. The first alternative at the conclusion of the presentations, vvould be to request
Citv staff to develov a rankine oropdure and rank the proposals for review at
a special meeting or woriahop on May 30 or June 6, for the selection to occur
on that evening or at the regularly scheduled meeting, June 12, 1996.
2. The second alternative after completion of the proposal presentation and
interview process would be to set a special meeting or workshop date at which
the fpungl could plevelon the ranking criteria and procedure to select one of
the consultants. The actual selection could take place at the workshop or
special meeting or at the regularly scheduled meeting on June 12, 1995.
3. The third alternative after the presentation and interview process would be to
attempt to reach a decision as to which consultant to select near the end of the
regular meeting on May 22, 1896.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Due to the complexity of the proposals and the magnitude of the tasks, it is
recommended that the proposals be reviewed in depth and ranked at a special
meeting or workshop as outlined in alternative ql or q2. If you feel comfortable with
staff developing and ranking proposals, you can select alternative 01, Staff would
consist of the City Administrator, Public Works Director, and Professional Services
Group. If you do not feel comfortable with this procedure, you could select alternative
42, and we could develop the ranking procedure and criteria at the workshop or
special meeting.
The three-week time fume for the review of the proposals should be adequate. The
Council could find that even the best proposal requires some clarification before
selection. This would give us time to correspond or get additional information from
one or more of the consultants before the Council makes their final decision.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
I have enclosed a copy of the request for proposals so that you may use this as a
guide to determine the completeness of the proposals. The proposals themselves are
not being provided due to their bulky mature.
CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT:
Planning and design to provide for a cost-effective and orderly increase in wastewater
treatment capacity.
BACKGROUND:
1. The City of Monticello currently operates a trickling filter/activated sludge facility
last upgraded in 1980, with an average daily design capacity of 910,000 gallons per
day, a peak hourly flow capacity of 1,400,000 gallons per day, and an average daily
loading capacity of 6,200 pounds of BODS. Some interim improvements must be
implemented in order to realize design capacity.
2. Professional Services Group has provided contract operation of the treatment plant
since September of 1986 and will play a major role in the expansion of the plant.
3. With the projected growth of the community, the demand for wastewater treatment
will outgrow the treatment capacity of the present treatment facilities in the near
future.
4. The team of OSM/RCM has recently completed a facilities planning report for the
City. A copy is available for your review.
SCOPE OF ENGINEERING SERVICES:
Preliminary Desism of Plant Exuansion
It is proposed that the preliminary design begin immediately after a review
of the Facilities Plan, confirmation of the expansion plan by the City Council,
and verification with the MPCA of the correct procedures for project approval
and low interest loan tLnding. Once the preliminary design is begun, the
major interim improvements (such as the new primary clarifier) shall be
designed, bid, and constructed ASAP! The final design shall then be
completed for the expansion to be started. The expansion may be completed
in two 10 -year phases or in one single phase if growth projections and
financial considerations warrant same.
The preliminary design work shall include tasks as outlined herein:
Prepare preliminary design documents consisting of final design
criteria, preliminary drawings, outline specifications, and written
descriptions of the wastewater treatment facilities improvements
WWTPIMPR.PRO: 4IM5 Pap t of 5
project. No work shall begin, however, until the engineer has advised
the City of the requirements for MPCA design project approvals and
low interest loan criteria and the City has met those requirements.
Review design at various stages with the City and PSG. Most likely
reviews are at 25%, 50%, 75%, and 100% level.
Based on the information contained in the preliminary design
documents, submit a revised opinion of probable total project costa.
Furnish 10 copies of the preliminary design documents and present
and review them in person with the City Staff and Council. Attend
public hearings as required to present project data
Final design of major interim improvements such as the new primary
clarifier, prepare bid documents, conduct bidding process, review bids and
recommend award, provide construction engineering and inspection services.
Provide recommendations and assist PSG and City with minor interim
improvements.
Final Design of Plant Expansion
e. On the basis of the amepted preliminary design documents and the revised
opinion of probable total project cost, prepare for incorporation in the
contract documents IIW drawings to show the scope, extent, and character of
the work to be furnished and performed by contractor.
b. Provide technical criteria, written descriptions, and design data as required
for filing applications for permits with or obtaining approvals of such
governmental authorities as have jurisdiction to approve the design of the
wastewater treatment facilities improvements prgject, and assist in
consultations with appropriate authorities throughout the approval process
and construction.
C, Advise the City of arty adjustments to the latest opinion of probable total
project cost caused by changes in general scope, extent, or character of design
requirements of the project or construction costs. Furnish to the city a
revised opinion of probable total project costs based on the drawings and
specifications.
d. The RFP shall include an estimate of fees for completion of the design phase
of the improvements, The fee schedule shall be proposed by the engineer and
shall be based on the staged improvements as noted in the thcilities plan.
The fee may be based on a percentage or other structure such as hourly costa
and estimate of hour with not-to•euoed figures.
aVKTPIMPR.PRO: 4MM
V
Pogo 2 of
e. Prepare for review and approval by the City, its legal counsel, and other
advisors contract agreement forme, general conditions, and supplementary
conditions, and (where appropriate) bid forms, invitations to bid, and
instructions to bidders (all of which shall be consistent with the forms and
pertinent guide sheets prepared by the Engineers Joint Contract Documents
Committee), and assist in the preparation of other related documents.
Furnish 10 copies of the above documents and of the drawings and
specifications and present and review them in person with the City Staff and
Council.
4. Bidding Process and construction
a. Advertise and conduct the bidding process, review contractor requests for
substitutions, and review the bids and make recommendations for award
Assist with MPCA review and authorization to proceed.
b. Provide shop drawing review, construction engineering, inspection, and
prepare accurate as -built drawings.
PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:
1. A pre -proposal conference will be held at city hall, 250 East Broadway, at 1:30 p.m.
on Monday, May 8, 1995. A tour of the plant will follow.
2. 18 copies of the proposals shall be submitted to:
Mr. John Simola
Public Works Director
City of Monticello
City Hall
P.O. Box 1147
Monticello, Minnesota 55382-9245
3. Deadline for submittals will be May 18, 1995, at 4 p.m.
4. Late proposals will not be accepted or reviewed.
PROPOSAL CONTEN SENGEgEERING FMM SELECTION:
1. Selection of the engineering firm will be based on the written proposal and an
interview. Submittals must contain adequate information to permit the City to
evaluate the firm.
2. Selection of the most qualified firm will be based upon the following criteria
a. A work plan describing the manner in which the project will be performed,
including a proposed work schedule to match expected needs and estimated
fee schedule.
WWTPIMPRPRO: 478198 Pop s of 5
b. Understanding of the proposed project and special qualifications of the firm
as it relates to this project
C. Ability to design new and upgraded wastewater treatment facilities. List of
wastewater treatment plants designed by the Engineer. Information and
references for at least three (3) projects where an existing similarly -sized
wastewater treatment facility has been expanded and upgraded to double its
capacity. Provide estimated and actual construction costs and engineering
costs as well as change order data descriptions (number and coat).
d. Resumes of personnel to be assigned as project manager and project staff for
environmental engineering, structural engineering, mechanical engineering,
electrical engineering, civil engineering, construction, and architecture.
e. Familiarity and ability to work with MPCA.
f. Interview presentation and answers to questions at the interview to be held
the evening of May 22, 1895.
3. The selected proposal will serve as the basis for negotiating a contract for
engineering services.
4. Upon submission, all proposals become the property of the City of Monticello which
has the right to use any items presented in any proposal submitted in response to
this request for proposal, whether or not the proposal is accepted.
5. The City of Monticello reserves the right to reject any proposal based on the
evaluation criteria contained herein.
The City of Monticello also reserves the right to cancel or amend this request for
proposal at any time before submission deadline. Any changes in the status of the
request for proposals will be brought to the attention of all parties that have
received the request for proposals.
7. The City of Monticello will not be held responsible for any costs incurred by
applicants in preparing proposal documenta.
It is expressly advised that proposing firms are not to privately lobby individual
City Council members or the Mayor at any time during the selection process.
Evidence of tho same will be grounds for disqualification of the engineering firm's
pz'oPosal•
9. The following is an anticipated schedule of events:
a. RFP's mailed to consultants ................ April 28, 1895
b. Pro -Proposal Conference ....... . .......... May 8, 1895 -1:30 p.m.
C. Proposals due . May 18, 1995, 4:00 p.m.
d. Consultant interviews & presentations ........ May 22, 1995
Mmisan ow" ..................................... ro auw d, fe e. drmw4.d
V
W rMMPR.PRO: 42898 Pao 41
e. Consultant selection ......................
f. Contract negotiation .....................
g. Start project . ...... ................ .
h. Start construction interim improvements
(primary clarifier) ...... ......... .
i. Start construction of plant expansion .........
j. Project completion .......................
May 28 - June 12, 1895
June 12 - June 26, 1995
July 1, 1995
Spring 1996
Spring 1997
Fall 1998
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, QUESTIONS SHOULD BE DIRECTED 70:
Mr. John Simola
Public Works Director
City of Monticello
City Hall
P.O. Box 1147
Monticello, Minnesota 55362-9245
(612/295-3170, extension 2)
0V
W ?rKMPR W: 4FAM P8V0 d 5