The dropbox folder includes the initial sketches and documents prior to the March 2020 bond vote. There is another folder (4- Updated Design…) that contains a sub-folder with today’s date. That sub-folder includes the current floor plans as well as a narrative about the overall progress and a few upcoming design decision items.
FAQ’s and Answers:
Q. Must the two red barns remain on site? Can they be moved on site? If they need not remain must the new buildings include storage to accommodate the contents? If so, what are the contents?
A. The Town feels that the feasibility study should include these questions, as answers will involve other organizations (Town, Fair Association, and Haynes Trust). Contents are storage for equipment, such as snowmobiles, trailer and other Fair Association equipment.
Q. Will the architectural program for the new building(s) be substantially the same as that included in Bread Loaf’s 2014 study?
A. The Town anticipates that each RFP submission will consider this question when making a proposal. It is expected that over time some needs have changed, so a needs assessment should be considered with two new chiefs (Police and Fire).
Q. Please confirm that the cost of a site survey is to be carried in the proposal as the provided site plan has “issues.”
A. Yes, a site survey should be included in your proposal.
Q. Although the RFP indicates that “consideration” should be given to achieving net-zero, there is no expectation or requirement that this or any other certification is to be achieved.
Q. Phase 1, the feasibility study, does not include the schematic design (this is included in phase 2.) I believe that both a programming effort and schematic design effort will have to be part of the feasibility study in order to present to the board and town how the site plan will be organized and what the building(s) will look like. Is it unreasonable to move the schematic design work from phase 2 to phase 1? This will almost certainly increase the phase 1 cost (and lower the phase 2 cost) but it will make less likely that there will be a determination of feasibility that will disappoint the town with a building or site that either doesn’t address all the needs or does not meet aesthetic or other standards.
A. You may decide to show both approaches in your proposal.
Q. There is no indication that Wilmington has determined a goal for a price for this project. Bread Loaf’s estimated $4.78 Million. As there is no requirement for an opinion of cost as part of the feasibility study is it fair to understand that feasibility is to be determined independent of project cost?
A. See section II. 5. Construction Cost Estimate. The Town expects to see a proposed estimate of cost.
Q. Has there been consideration of using the Construction Management method of project delivery rather than Design – Bid – Build (General Contractor?)
A. Consideration has been given to Construction Management; however, the Town prefers the design-bid-build to ensure competitiveness to the entire process.
Q. The schedule allows approximately six months for the feasibility study but only 2 months for schematic design, design development and construction documents. Is this schedule flexible?
A. While the schedule is based on budget cycle and Town Meeting, you may propose to move the Feasibility Study to an earlier due date in your proposal to allow for more time in the Schematic Design.
Q. Is there a proposal page limit? While not explicitly identified in the RFP, please confirm it is acceptable to submit examples of experience in similar projects.
A. There is no page limit. Yes, you may submit examples.
Q. Are there any sustainable design targets, certifications being pursued?
Q. Are site and building construction costs developed in the 2014 study consistent with committee assumptions? Is it reasonable to escalate $3.7M combined site and bldg construction to 2022 dollars as a reference for current project budget?
A. Realistic cost is important. The Town is looking for possibilities as you propose, keeping in mind our Selectboard and voters’ preference for efficiencies, including cost efficiencies.
Q. Verify construction cost estimating is to be included in A/E scope of work, not by owner or owner’s independent estimator.
A. See section II, 5. We would expect a realistic cost estimate as part of your proposal (i.e. per square foot cost).
Q. Is there a format or common form for itemizing fees?
Q. Has the site program been quantified? E.g. capacity of the impound lot, exterior training spaces, tower, exterior personnel and operations parking, generator, electric vehicle charging, training hydrant, fueling station?
A. No, the Town would expect these items to be addressed as work product (i.e. needs assessment to include meetings with both chiefs).
Q. The posted plot plan notes “this is NOT A SURVEY”. Has a formal survey of the site been completed?
A. No, the Town expects this work to be included in section I your proposal.
Q. Is there a geotech soils report for the site?
A. ANR issued a UST Closure Report in 2013; see attached letter.
Q. Are there any known changes to the 2014 WPD, WFD programs?
A. None of note; however, this information should be covered in a needs assessment with both chiefs.
Q. Confirm 4 bays anticipated for WFD. Indoor apparatus needs for WPD? My guess is 3. With 5 cruisers assuming 2 are taken home ie Chief and Sergeant
A. This information should be covered in a needs assessment with both chiefs.
Q. Schemes suggest buildings are two stories. Anticipate a basement? Elevator/lift access to all levels? Two floors. I think we will need an elevator for ADA.
A. While the BreadLoaf schematic is available and may/may not form the basis of your proposal, the Town has not developed any expectations and believe each proposal may outline possible approaches.
Q. Emergency power – full back up or partial (prioritized) service for facility. Partial prioritized.
A. Full back-up is required, as it is likely to be used as an Emergency Operations Center during emergencies.
Q. What is the Town’s debt retirement schedule?
|Debt||Orig. Amt.||Annual Pmt.||No. Yrs.||Last Pmt.|
|Look Rd Bridge||444,000||97,680||5||Apr-22|
The Wastewater Bond required the Town voters to approve, however it is paid by Sewer customers as it is an enterprise business.