HomeMy Public PortalAbout03 March 27, 2017 Western Riverside County Programs and ProjectsCOMM-WRC-00037
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE
www.rctc.org
AGENDA*
*Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda
1:30 p.m.
Monday, March 27, 2017
BOARD ROOM
County Administrative Center
4080 Lemon Street, First Floor
Riverside, California
In compliance with the Brown Act and Government Code Section 54957.5, agenda materials distributed 72
hours prior to the meeting, which are public records relating to open session agenda items, will be available for
inspection by members of the public prior to the meeting at the Commission office, 4080 Lemon Street, Third
Floor, Riverside, CA, and on the Commission's website, www.rctc.orq.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, Government Code Section 54954.2, and the Federal
Transit Administration Title VI, please contact the Clerk of the Board at (951) 787-7141 if special assistance is
needed to participate in a Commission meeting, including accessibility and translation services. Assistance is
provided free of charge. Notification of at least 48 hours prior to the meeting time will assist staff in assuring
reasonable arrangements can be made to provide assistance at the meeting.
1. CALL TO ORDER / ROLL CALL
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. PUBLIC COMMENTS — Each individual speaker is limited to speak three (3) continuous minutes
or less. The Committee may, either at the direction of the Chair or by majority vote of the
Committee, waive this three minute time limitation. Depending on the number of items on the
Agenda and the number of speakers, the Chair may, at his/her discretion, reduce the time of
each speaker to two (2) continuous minutes. Also, the Committee may terminate public
comments if such comments become repetitious. In addition, the maximum time for public
comment for any individual item or topic is thirty (30) minutes. Speakers may not yield their
time to others without the consent of the Chair. Any written documents to be distributed or
presented to the Committee shall be submitted to the Clerk of the Board. This policy applies
to Public Comments and comments on Agenda Items.
Under the Brown Act, the Board should not take action on or discuss matters raised during
public comment portion of the agenda which are not listed on the agenda. Board members
may refer such matters to staff for factual information or to be placed on the subsequent
agenda for consideration.
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — FEBRUARY 27, 2017
Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee
March 27, 2017
Page 2
5.
6.
ADDITIONS/REVISIONS (The Committee may add an item to the Agenda after making a
finding that there is a need to take immediate action on the item and that the item came to
the attention of the Committee subsequent to the posting of the agenda. An action adding an
item to the agenda requires 2/3 vote of the Committee. If there are less than 2/3 of the
Committee members present, adding an item to the agenda requires a unanimous vote.
Added items will be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda.)
AGREEMENT FOR INTERSTATE 15 EXPRESS LANES PROJECT DESIGN -BUILD SERVICES
Overview
This item is for the Committee to:
Page 1
1) Award Agreement No. 16-31-057-00 to Skanska-Ames, a Joint Venture (Skanska-Ames)
as the design -builder to design and construct the Interstate 15 Express Lanes project
in the amount of $243,900,000, plus a contingency amount of $19,512,000, for a total
amount not to exceed $263,412,000;
2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute
the agreement on behalf of the Commission;
3) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve the use of the contingency
amount as may be required by the project;
4) Authorize staff to issue a Notice to Proceed No. 1 under the agreement in an amount
not to exceed $5,250,000 after execution of the agreement;
5) Authorize staff to issue a Notice to Proceed No. 2 for the remainder of the agreement
work after financial close including the successful sale of bonds and funding of the U.S.
Department of Transportation (USDOT) Transportation Investment Finance and
Innovation Act (TIFIA) loan and design -builder compliance with the agreement
requirements; and
6) Forward to the Commission for final action.
7. INTERSTATE 15 EXPRESS LANES PROJECT — AT&T UTILITY AGREEMENT
Overview
This item is for the Committee to:
Page 9
1) Approve Agreement No. 17-31-080-00 with AT&T for a utility relocation for the
Interstate 15 Express Lanes project (Project) in the amount of $296,524, plus a
contingency amount of $29,652, for a revised total amount not to exceed $326,176;
2) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the
agreement on behalf of the Commission;
3) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve the use of the contingency
amount as may be required by the project; and
4) Forward to the Commission for final action.
Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee
March 27, 2017
Page 3
8. AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH HDR ENGINEERING INC. FOR CONSTRUCTION
MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR THE PERRIS VALLEY LINE PROJECT
Overview
This item is for the Committee to:
Page 16
1) Approve Agreement No. 10-31-058-06, Amendment No. 6 to Agreement No.
10-31-058-00, with HDR Engineering Inc. (HDR) to provide construction management
for the Perris Valley Line (PVL) project in the amount of $1.7 million, plus a contingency
amount of $300,000, for an additional amount of $2 million, and a total amount not
to exceed $27,050,146;
2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute
the agreement on behalf of the Commission;
3) Authorize the Executive Director or designee, pursuant to legal counsel review, to
approve the use of the contingency as may be required for the project; and
4) Forward to the Commission for final action.
9. COMMISSIONERS / STAFF REPORT
Overview
This item provides the opportunity for the Commissioners and staff to report on attended and
upcoming meeting/conferences and issues related to Commission activities.
10. ADJOURNMENT
The next Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee meeting is scheduled
to be held at 1:30 p.m., Monday, April 24, 2017, Board Chambers, First Floor, County
Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside.
Alexandra Rackerby
From: Alexandra Rackerby
Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2017 4:18 PM
To: Alexandra Rackerby
Subject: RCTC Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee - 1pad compatible users
Attachments: Conflict of Interest Form.pdf; Conflict of Interest Memo.pdf
Good afternoon Commissioners,
The Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee agenda for Monday, March 27, 2017 is posted on our
Website at http://www.rctc.org/uploads/media items/western-riverside-county-programs-and-projects-committee-
march-27-2017.original.pdf Also, attached is the Conflict of Interest Memo and Form for your information. Let me know
if you have any questions or concerns.
Thank you.
Respectfully,
A['lie Rackerby
Records Technician
RiMerside County Transportation Commission
PO Box 12008, Riverside, CA 92502-2208
4080 Lemon Street, 3d Floor, Riverside, CA 92501
(951) 787.7141 j rctcorg
1
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS
COMMITTEE
ROLL CALL
March 27, 2017
Present Absent
�
v e d, l : HOP. rn.
County of Riverside, District I �"
County of Riverside, District V � �( �c,,c ❑
City of Banning ,Rri O
City of Corona ,,A` O
City of Eastvale 34' t121°- 0
City of Jurupa Valley 0
City of Menifee g
City of Moreno Valley )0/O
City of Norco � O
City of Perris ;X O
City of San Jacinto ;tif
,�City of Wildomar O
AGENDA ITEM 4
MINUTES
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE
Monday, February 27, 2017
MINUTES
1. CALL TO ORDER/ ROLL CALL
The meeting of the Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee was
called to order by Vice Chair Deborah Franklin at 1:36 p.m., in the Board Room at the
County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside,
California, 92501.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
At this time, Vice Chair Franklin led the Western Riverside County Programs and Projects
Committee in a flag salute.
Members/Alternates Present Members Absent
Victoria Baca*
Ben Benoit*
Brian Berkson
Deborah Franklin
Berwin Hanna
Kevin Jeffries
Andrew Kotyuk
Adam Rush
Karen Spiegel
Michael Vargas
*arrived after meeting was called to order
Marion Ashley
Neil Winter
3. PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no requests to speak from the public.
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — NOVEMBER 28, 2016
M/S/C (Jeffries/Kotyuk) to approve the minutes as submitted.
RCTC WRC Programs and Projects Committee Minutes
February 27, 2017
Page 2
5. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS
There were no additions or revisions at this time.
At this time, Commissioner Victoria Baca joined the meeting.
6. AMENDMENT TO THE 91 EXPRESS LANES OPERATOR AGREEMENT
Reinland Jones, Toll Technology Manager, presented the scope of the amendment to
the 91 Express Lanes operator agreement.
In response to Vice Chair Franklin's question regarding the difference in cost between
the presentation and the agenda item, Reinland Jones clarified the amount on the
agenda item is correct.
M/S/C (Hanna/Kotyuk) to:
1) Approve Agreement No. 13-31-105-03, Amendment No. 3 to the 91
Express Lanes Operator Agreement No. 13-31-105-00 (commonly
referred to as the ORCOA), among the Orange County Transportation
Authority (OCTA), the Commission, and Cofiroute USA, LLC (Cofiroute)
to incorporate the joint lane system maintenance agreement for an
additional amount of $1,629,194 and a total amount not to exceed
$32,826,193;
2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel
review, to execute the amendment on behalf of the Commission; and
3) Forward to the Commission for final action.
7. AMENDMENT WITH JACOBS ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. FOR THE MID COUNTY
PARKWAY PROJECT
Alex Menor, Capital Projects Manager, presented the scope of the amendment with
Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. for the Mid County Parkway project.
In response to Commissioner Andrew Kotyuk's question regarding the Placentia Avenue
interchange, Alex Menor provided a brief description and timeline for the interchange
project.
Anne Mayer, Executive Director, added the Placentia Avenue interchange project is
separate from the other projects along the 1-215 corridor.
At this time, Chair Ben Benoit joined the meeting.
RCTC WRC Programs and Projects Committee Minutes
February 27, 2017
Page 3
M/S/C (Spiegel/Vargas) to:
1) Approve Agreement No. 04-31-018-12, Amendment No. 12 to
Agreement No. 04-31-018, with Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. (Jacobs)
to continue to perform Phase III post environmental impact
report/environmental impact statement (EIR/EIS) closeout tasks
through the permitting process, conduct work to implement required
mitigation measures, and respond to requests for information and
provide non -legal technical support to the Commission and its legal
counsel for the Mid County Parkway (MCP) project for an additional
amount of $2,595,098, plus a contingency amount of $259,510, for a
total additional amount of $2,854,608, resulting in a total amount not
to exceed $49,852,025;
2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel
review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission;
3) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve the use of the
contingency amount as may be required for these services; and
4) Forward to the Commission for final action.
Abstain: Benoit
8. AGREEMENTS FOR ON -CALL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR SERVICES
Mark Lancaster, Right of Way Manager, presented the scope of the agreements for
on -call property maintenance and repair services.
In response to Commissioner Karen Spiegel's question regarding the number of surplus
parcels, Mark Lancaster stated there are a number of excess parcels from various
projects that will need to be declared as surplus. Currently, there are more than a
dozen parcels declared as surplus. Additionally, if a government agency has interest in a
surplus parcel, there are restrictions to its uses.
Anne Mayer added the Commission's objective is to sell as many of the excess parcels as
possible and discussed the process and challenges of doing so.
M/S/C (Kotyuk/Benoit) to:
1) Award the following agreements to provide on -call property
maintenance and repair services for a three-year term, and two one-
year options to extend the agreement, in an amount not to exceed an
aggregate value of $1.5 million;
a) Agreement No. 17-33-029-00 to Braughton Construction, Inc.;
b) Agreement No. 17-33-030-00 to Carry All;
c) Agreement No. 17-33-031-00 to DeAngelo Brothers, LLC; and
RCTC WRC Programs and Projects Committee Minutes
February 27, 2017
Page 4
d) Agreement No. 17-33-032-00 to Real Estate Consulting &
Services, Inc.
2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel
review, to execute the agreements, including option years, on behalf of
the Commission;
3) Authorize the Executive Director, or designee, to execute task orders
awarded to contractors under the terms of the agreements; and
4) Forward to the Commission for final action.
9. REQUEST TO DECLARE REAL PROPERTY AS SURPLUS
Mark Lancaster presented the request to declare real property as surplus.
Commissioner Kevin Jeffries introduced his Chief of Staff, Jeff Green, to illustrate one of
the proposed trails in the city of Corona that goes through one of the parcels the
Commission is proposing to surplus. He then requested the Commission put aside a
portion of the parcel for the proposed trail.
Anne Mayer proposed staff review the request and determine the necessary steps to
accommodate the request, if feasible.
Jeff Green clarified the trail design plan has not been adopted and is only conceptual.
At Commissioner Jeffries' request, Anne Mayer clarified staff will evaluate the options
and bring a proposal to the Commission at its next meeting. If an evaluation cannot be
completed by that time, staff will suspend action on this parcel until an evaluation is
completed.
At this time, Commissioner Andrew Kotyuk left the meeting.
M/S/C (Baca/Spiegel) to:
1) Declare as surplus the real property in the areas of the State Route 91
high occupancy vehicle lanes (SR-91 HOV) project and former alignment
of the Mid County Parkway (MCP) near Cajalco Road, as specifically
identified in this report and attached maps;
2) Authorize the Executive Director to notify public agencies pursuant to
Government Code 54220 et.seq. the properties are available;
3) If no response is received, authorize the Executive Director to offer the
surplus properties for sale to the public; and
4) Forward to the Commission for final action.
RCTC WRC Programs and Projects Committee Minutes
February 27, 2017
Page 5
10. AMENDMENTS TO FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL AGREEMENT
Brian Cunanan, Commuter and Motorist Assistance Manager, presented the scope of
the amendments to the Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) agreement.
M/S/C (Spiegel/Rush) to:
1) Approve Agreement No. 12-45-045-04, Amendment No. 3 to Agreement
No. 12-45-045-00, with Pepe's Towing, Inc. (Pepe's) to provide Freeway
Service Patrol (FSP) services on Beat No. 18 for an additional amount of
$38,000, for a total amount not to exceed $1,558,000;
2) Approve Agreement No. 12-45-046-05, Amendment No. 4 to Agreement
No. 12-45-046-00, with Pepe's to provide FSP services on Beat No. 19
for an additional amount of $70,000, for a total amount not to exceed
$1, 571,000;
3) Approve Agreement No. 14-45-009-06, Amendment No. 4 to Agreement
No. 14-45-009-00, with Steve's Towing (Steve's) to provide FSP services
on Beat No. 1, Beat No. 2, and State Route 91 Corridor Improvement
Project (91 Project) Beat No. 1 and 91 Project Beat No. 2 for an
additional amount of $197,000 and a total amount not to exceed
$2,852,057;
4) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel
review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission; and
5) Forward to the Commission for final action.
11. FUNDING AGREEMENT WITH THE CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL FOR FREEWAY
SERVICE PATROL SUPERVISION
Brian Cunanan presented the scope of the agreement with CHP for FSP supervision.
At Commissioner Spiegel's request, Brian Cunanan clarified construction FSP is funded
through a separate agreement.
Anne Mayer added construction FSP is monitored and provides significantly different
services.
M/S/C (Vargas/Berkson) to:
1) Approve Agreement No. 16-45-094-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement
No. 16-45-094-00, with the California Highway Patrol (CHP) to provide
supervision and operation of the Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) program
in Riverside County for an additional amount of $731,115, and a total
amount not to exceed $1,524,296;
RCTC WRC Programs and Projects Committee Minutes
February 27, 2017
Page 6
2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel
review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and
3) Forward to the Commission for final action.
12. IE COMMUTER SYSTEM ENHANCEMENTS
Brian Cunanan presented the scope of the agreement for the programming
enhancements and website administration services for the Commuter Assistance
Program.
In response to Vice Chair Franklin's question regarding using these enhancements to
assist with first -mile and last -mile trips, Brian Cunanan concurred the application will
support multimodal trips.
M/S/C (Hanna/Benoit) to:
1) Approve Agreement No. 14-41-156-02, Amendment No. 2 to Agreement
No. 14-41-156-00, with Media Beef, Inc. for programming
enhancements and website administration services for the Commuter
Assistance Program (CAP) in the amount of $193,700, plus a
contingency amount of $19,370, for an additional amount of $213,070,
and a total amount not to exceed $1,151,670;
2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel
review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission;
3) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve the use of
contingency amount as may be required for these services; and
4) Forward to the Commission for final action.
13. ELECTION OF OFFICERS FOR THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND
PROJECTS COMMITTEE
Jennifer Harmon stated this item is for the Western Riverside County Programs and
Projects Committee to conduct an election of the officers for 2017.
At this time, Vice Chair Franklin opened nominations for the Chair position.
Chair Benoit, seconded by Commissioner Adam Rush, nominated Vice Chair Franklin for
the Chair position for 2017.
No other nominations were received. The Chair closed the nominations. Commissioner
Deborah Franklin was elected as the Western Riverside County Programs and Projects
Committee's Chair for 2017.
The Chair then opened nominations for the Vice Chair position for 2017.
RCTC WRC Programs and Projects Committee Minutes
February 27, 2017
Page 7
Commissioner Spiegel, seconded by Commissioner Jeffries, nominated Commissioner
Rush for the Vice Chair position for 2017.
No other nominations were received. The Chair closed the nominations. Commissioner
Adam Rush was elected as the Western Riverside County Programs and Projects
Committee's Vice Chair for 2017.
14. COMMISSIONERS / STAFF REPORT
14A. Commissioner Spiegel announced the dedication ceremony for the Commission's
91 Project is scheduled for Friday, March 31, at 11 a.m. at the North Main
Corona Parking Structure.
15. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business for consideration by the Western Riverside County
Programs and Projects Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 2:48 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
O \-\ 0.JLrriavy---
Jennifer Harmon
Clerk of the Board
AGENDA ITEM 6
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE:
March 27, 2017
TO:
Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee
FROM:
Michael Blomquist, Toll Program Director
THROUGH:
Anne Mayer, Executive Director
SUBJECT:
Agreement for Interstate 15 Express Lanes Project Design -Build Services
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Award Agreement No. 16-31-057-00 to Skanska-Ames, a Joint Venture (Skanska-Ames) as
the design -builder to design and construct the Interstate 15 Express Lanes project in the
amount of $243,900,000, plus a contingency amount of $19,512,000, for a total amount
not to exceed $263,412,000;
2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute
the agreement on behalf of the Commission;
3) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve the use of the contingency
amount as may be required by the project;
4) Authorize staff to issue a Notice to Proceed No. 1 under the agreement in an amount not
to exceed $5,250,000 after execution of the agreement;
5) Authorize staff to issue a Notice to Proceed No. 2 for the remainder of the agreement
work after financial close including the successful sale of bonds and funding of the U.S.
Department of Transportation (USDOT) Transportation Investment Finance and
Innovation Act (TIFIA) loan and design -builder compliance with the agreement
requirements; and
6) Forward to the Commission for final action.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Project Description
The 1-15 Express Lanes project is part of the Commission's 10-Year Western Riverside County
Highway Delivery Plan and will improve 1-15 in northern Riverside County. The project includes
the construction of what generally is described as two tolled express lanes in each direction
between the I-15/Cajalco Road interchange in Corona and the I-15/State Route 60 interchange
just south of the Riverside/San Bernardino County line — approximately 14.6 miles. Proposed
roadway improvements are anticipated to be constructed within the existing Caltrans right of
way with the majority of the improvements occurring within the existing 1-15 median. The
Agenda Item 6
1
Commission will operate and maintain the tolled express lanes after opening for a period of 50
years.
Procurement
On August 24, 2015, staff issued a request for expressions of interest (RFEI) inviting firms or teams
of firms interested in the 1-15 Express Lanes project to submit an expression of interest including
comments on various procurement packaging strategies, tolling technical requirements,
opportunities for innovation, and potential risks. The RFEI was a due diligence effort and not part
of the formal procurement process. One of the key goals of this due diligence step was to obtain
industry feedback and input allowing staff to assess the various approaches to procure the
required work in order to provide the best value to the Commission. The packaging of the various
required work elements was critical in order to utilize the best-value/competitively negotiated
procurement method that considers and evaluates both the price of a proposal and its qualitative
technical merits.
As presented to the Commission at its December 9, 2015 meeting, the most advantageous
procurement packaging option consisted of two separate procurements, one for the toll services
and one for design -build civil work, with the toll services to be procured first.
Subsequently, at its January 26, 2017 meeting, the Commission approved award of an agreement
with Kapsch TrafficCom Transportation NA Inc. as the toll services provider to design, implement,
operate and maintain a toll collection system on the project.
This staff report relates to the design -build civil work procurement in support of the project.
DISCUSSION:
Design -Build Procurement
Selection Process
The design -builder for the 1-15 Express Lanes project was procured using the competitively
negotiated procurement method to obtain the best -value for the Commission. The competitively
negotiated procurement method considers and evaluates the proposal price and its qualitative
technical merits. Staff determined the competitively negotiated procurement method was most
advantageous for this procurement as it allows the Commission to obtain the best value by using
any one or a combination of selection approaches wherein the relative importance of price may
vary with other non -price factors.
The best -value design -builder was selected using a two-step procurement process, as allowed by
federal regulations and Public Contract Code 6820 (Design -Build Law). The first step consisted of
shortlisting the proposers and determination of a competitive range based on a request for
qualifications (RFQ). The second step consisted of the receipt and evaluation of price and
technical proposals in response to the request for proposals (RFP). As allowed by the Design -
Agenda Item 6
2
Build Law, the recommended award is based upon a best -value determination using criteria
established in the RFP.
Request for Qualifications
Staff issued RFQ No. 16-31-048-00 for design -build services on January 8, 2016. On February 18
the Commission received five statements of qualifications (SOQs) in response to the RFQ. A
selection team of staff and project management personnel reviewed the SOQs and performed a
comprehensive evaluation. On March 25 the Commission announced the shortlisting of the
following three design -builders:
• Express Lane Builders
• Flatiron West, Inc.
• Skanska-Ames, a Joint Venture
Request for Proposals
The three short-listed proposers were issued a RFP and each submitted price and technical
proposals. The proposals were evaluated and scored on two factors: 1) proposal price; and 2)
technical concepts and approach. The weighting of both factors was determined by staff and
listed in the RFP. The factors were then combined using the predetermined weighting to derive
the highest score and the best -value proposer.
The selection process commenced once the Commission received the proposals from the three
short-listed proposers on January 10, 2017. Attachment 1 generally illustrates the proposal
evaluation and selection organization structure used including the price and technical
subcommittees, advisory groups, and pass/fail and proposal responsiveness subcommittees. The
steps leading up to selection of the best -value proposer and this recommendation for award of
a design -build agreement were as follows:
• The proposals were received from the three short-listed proposers and were logged in
and stored in a secure location;
• The proposals were then separated into two components — price proposals and technical
proposals — and provided to the Price Proposal Evaluation Committee (PPEC) and
Technical Proposal Evaluation Committee (TPEC), respectively, for evaluation. The TPEC
and PPEC were made up of staff with the appropriate experience who made independent
and confidential evaluations. The two evaluation committees were assisted by financial,
legal, and project management professionals;
• The two evaluation committees then performed a pass/fail and responsiveness review of
their respective proposals to ensure the proposers satisfied the pass/fail and
responsiveness requirements of the RFP, including organization, format, inclusion of
forms, business organization, proposal security, Disadvantaged Business Enterprise
certification, and adherence to the maximum time for schedule completion;
Agenda Item 6
3
" T h e t w o e v a l u a t i o n c o m m i t t e e s s u b m i t t e d r e q u e s t s f o r c l a r i f i c a t i o n r e l a t e d t o t h e
p a s s / f a i l r e v i e w a n d r e s p o n s i v e n e s s t o e a c h o f t h e p r o p o s e r s a n d r e v i e w e d a l l r e s p o n s e s
t o t h e c l a r i f i c a t i o n r e q u e s t s ;
" T h e C o m m i s s i o n a n d F l a t i r o n W e s t , I n c . h a d a d i s p u t e r e l a t e d t o i t s p r o p o s a l . A s a r e s u l t
o f t h e d i s p u t e , t h e C o m m i s s i o n a n d F l a t i r o n W e s t , I n c . m u t u a l l y a g r e e d t o a s e t t l e m e n t
a n d t h e p r o p o s a l w a s n o t e v a l u a t e d .
" T h e T P E C m e m b e r s r e c e i v e d i n p u t a n d r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s f r o m a t e c h n i c a l a d v i s o r y g r o u p
m a d e u p o f p r o j e c t m a n a g e m e n t p e r s o n n e l c o n c e r n i n g t h e t e c h n i c a l p r o p o s a l s ;
" A f t e r h a v i n g i n d i v i d u a l l y r e v i e w e d t h e t e c h n i c a l p r o p o s a l s a n d t h e i n p u t a n d
r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s f r o m t h e t e c h n i c a l a d v i s o r y g r o u p , t h e T P E C m e t t o f o r m c o n s e n s u s
a n d t o s c o r e t h e t e c h n i c a l p r o p o s a l s b a s e d o n t h e p r e d e t e r m i n e d c r i t e r i a a n d w e i g h t i n g
o f t h e t e c h n i c a l c o n c e p t s a n d a p p r o a c h ;
" T h e P P E C c o m p l e t e d i t s s c o r i n g b a s e d o n t h e p r e d e t e r m i n e d w e i g h t i n g o f t h e p r o p o s a l
p r i c e ;
" A f t e r t h e c o m p l e t i o n o f t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e e v a l u a t i o n r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s a n d s c o r i n g , t h e P P E C
a n d T P E C m e t t o c o m b i n e t h e p r o p o s a l s c o r e , b a s e d o n t h e p r e d e t e r m i n e d w e i g h t i n g o f
t h e t e c h n i c a l p r o p o s a l s c o r e a n d p r i c e s c o r e ;
" T h e P P E C a n d T P E C c h a i r s p r e s e n t e d t h e i r r e c o m m e n d e d s c o r i n g a n d t h e s u p p o r t i n g
r a t i o n a l e t o t h e E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r . T h e E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r a c c e p t e d t h e
r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s o f t h e P P E C a n d T P E C , w h i c h m a r k e d t h e c o m p l e t i o n o f t h e e v a l u a t i o n
p r o c e s s ; a n d
" T h e p r o p o s e r w i t h t h e h i g h e s t s c o r e w a s s e l e c t e d f o r l i m i t e d n e g o t i a t i o n s o n F e b r u a r y 1 7 ,
2 0 1 7 , a n d a l l s h o r t l i s t e d t e a m s w e r e n o t i f i e d o f t h e r e s u l t s .
A p p a r e n t B e s t V a l u e ( A B V ) D e t e r m i n a t i o n
T h e b e s t - v a l u e d e t e r m i n a t i o n w a s b a s e d o n a 1 0 0 p o i n t s c a l e . T h e p r i c e s c o r e r e p r e s e n t e d u p t o
8 0 p o i n t s o f t h e t o t a l s c o r e , a n d t h e t e c h n i c a l s c o r e r e p r e s e n t e d u p t o 2 0 p o i n t s o f t h e t o t a l s c o r e .
T h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f A B V w a s b a s e d o n t h e h i g h e s t t o t a l p r o p o s a l s c o r e ( T P S ) c o m p u t e d b a s e d
o n t h e f o l l o w i n g f o r m u l a :
T o t a l P r o p o s a l S c o r e ( m a x . 1 0 0 ) = P r i c e S c o r e ( m a x . 8 0 ) + T e c h n i c a l S c o r e ( m a x . 2 0 )
1 . T h e P r i c e S c o r e
P r i c e S c o r e w a s b a s e d o n t h e f o l l o w i n g f o r m u l a :
P r i c e S c o r e = ( P P V L o w / P P V ) * 8 0 , w h e r e ;
P P V L o w = L o w e s t P r o p o s a l P r e s e n t V a l u e s u b m i t t e d b y a n y P r o p o s e r , a s d e t e r m i n e d
p u r s u a n t t o I n s t r u c t i o n s t o P r o p o s e r s ( I T P ) S e c t i o n 5 . 6
P P V = P r o p o s e r '