REVISED – RFP expected to be issued in April 2017
Pending RFP for Design-Build Services For Covered Aerated Static Pile Composting System, Stormwater Improvements and Sorting Facility Roof Extension Project at City’s Materials Diversion Facility
**Please note: This is not a request for bids/proposals. It is information only for a future request.**
The City of Napa Public Works Department intends to issue a Request for Proposal for Design-Build Services for Improvements at the Materials Diversion Facility in early April 2017. The project consists of the following elements:
1. Covered Compost System – concrete bunkers, roof structure, processing equipment
2. Stormwater Improvements
3. Roof Extension on Materials Sorting Building
4. Concrete Slab in Recycling Storage Area
The City is issuing this announcement of the pending RFP so that qualified and proactive design-build teams can begin planning to provide a proposal for the project. The project is design-build and requires an experienced team of engineers and construction professionals to take preliminary designs and layouts prepared by the City and prepare final construction plans and then complete construction.
The City has completed CEQA for the improvements and has secured bond financing for the project. The City plans to select a design-build contractor by June 2017 and expects all design and construction to be complete on the project by October 2018. The City expects to enter into a lump sum/maximum guaranteed price design-build agreement for the project.
For additional project information, click Pending RFP for Design Build Services.
Civic Center Project
December 5, 2017 - PROJECT UPDATE
Community meetings will be held on December 12 and 13 for the community to hear about the project and give feedback on design.
May 30, 2017 - PROJECT UPDATE
At their May 30th, 2017 meeting, City Council selected Plenary Group Napa, LLC as the preferred development proposal and directed City staff to negotiate the terms of an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement (ENA) with Plenary Group Napa, LLC. Once negotiated, the ENA will be brought back to City Council for consideration at a subsequent public meeting.
To view the items presented for City Council consideration on May 30, 2017, click on the links below:
May 30, 2017 Special City Council Meeting details – Agenda, Minutes, supplemental information, and Video
Presentations – City Staff Recommendation Slides, Plenary Slides & Flythrough video, Strada/Scannell Slides & Flythrough video
May 22, 2017 - PROJECT UPDATE
During a Special Meeting on May 30, 2017, at 2:00PM, the City Council will consider proposals submitted by two proposers for a proposed project to “Design and Build a New Public Safety and City Administration Building, as well as to Develop Excess Land with Private Uses.”
To view the May 30th City Council Agenda, visit www.cityofnapa.org and click on “Agendas and Minutes” under the Quick Links Menu.
View Developer’s Proposal Documents below:
Over the past several years, beginning as early as 2009, the City Council has been publicly discussing alternative methods of addressing the costly inefficiencies of serving the community from undersized and aging buildings. The City outgrew its facilities many years ago, which has led to City services being spread out into multiple facilities throughout the City. This is an inefficient way for our employees to provide services to the community, and it makes it difficult for members of the public who are required to visit multiple buildings to obtain City services. It is also costly, as the City is paying for the costs of leasing buildings not owned by the City, and the City will be facing maintenance costs on aging facilities with a backlog of deferred maintenance. Lastly, there is a need to upgrade the City’s Public Safety facilities to comply with state-required seismic standards.
Essentially, there are two options available to the City to address these concerns, either of which will require the City to incur significant costs. The City could undertake the cost of continuing to use and maintain existing facilities, but that is likely to cost tens of millions of dollars due to the need to create additional space for undersized facilities and meet minimum building safety requirements, as well as the ongoing costs of leasing buildings. Alternatively, the City could consolidate all City services into a new facility (based on one of the two proposals to be considered by Council on May 30), which would provide the City with an opportunity to free up valuable City property for private development, which in turn would generate revenue to offset project costs based on the sale of land as well as tax revenue flowing from subsequent economic development. These options will be presented to City Council for consideration on May 30 in order to identify a path for moving forward to determine how the City can best serve the community.
About the Project
The New Public Safety and City Administration Building involves the financing, design, construction, operation and maintenance of a Public Safety Building and City Hall and also provides opportunities for private development.
The City’s objectives related to the project include:
1) Develop an efficient and modern Police & Fire and City Administration Building that:
a. Provides modern and efficient Public Safety Facilities;
b. Co-locates City functions for operational, energy and cost efficiencies;
c. Provides spaces designed for collaboration and engagement with the public;
d. Provides customer-oriented service counters and space;
e. Provides a modern City Council Chamber and new public meeting and reception space;
f. Achieves workflow efficiencies and allow flexible design layouts;
g. Fully integrates technology in work areas; and
h. Avoids expensive maintenance and renewal work required to maintain current facilities.
2) Repurpose excess City property to free-up valuable downtown real estate for development in order to:
a. Contribute to the revitalization of downtown and create jobs;
b. Provide offsetting revenues to pay for some of the cost associated with the new City facilities; and
c. Enhance the gateway to downtown on First Street
On March 17, 2009, the City Council received a presentation on the “Napa Consolidated City hall and Asset Analysis Study,” (Study) and provided direction to incorporate the Study into the Downtown Specific Plan Process and to bring back consolidation recommendations as opportunities present themselves. (see Agenda Item 5A)
On April 7, 2015, the City Council received a presentation on the update for the City Hall Consolidation Project including preliminary finical analysis. (See Agenda Item 24A)
On August 18, 2015, City Council reviewed the draft Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for the City Buildings Consolidation Project, provided input and direction to staff for incorporation into the final RFQ document, and approved the issuance of RFQ. (See Agenda Item 14B).
On October 30, 2015 – a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for a public-private partnership to take on this project was issued.
On May 10, 2016, the City Council reviewed the RFQ Evaluations, approved the issuance of a Request for Proposals (RFP) to three qualified teams, provided direction to staff on policy items to be incorporated into the final RFP document, and approve issuance of the RFP. (see Agenda Item 4A).
On September 20, 2016, the City Council provided direction to City Staff regarding the relative weighting and evaluation criteria to be included in the RFP. (see Agenda Item 6B).
On October 4, 2016, staff received authorization to transfer properties related to the RFP City title.
On November 7, 2016, an RFP titled “Opportunity to Design & Build a Public Safety and City Administration Building as well as to Develop Excess City Land with Private Uses" was released to the three pre-qualified teams.
For More information contact:
Request For Proposals (RFP)
The primary purpose of this RFP is to request proposals from the three development teams qualified through the RFQ process. In the RFP, respondents are asked to provide their proposal for the construction of: new Public Facilities which will consolidate the City’s City Administration and Public Safety functions; and the private development of any excess City land not required on the existing Community Services Building site, the Superblock site (City Hall, Police & Fire Administration and Fire Station No. 1) or the Housing Authority Building site.
Through this Request for Proposals (RFP), the City of Napa seeks to select and contract with a Respondent from the teams shortlisted from the prior Request for Qualification (“RFQ”) process in order to accomplish the following outcomes:
1) Design, build, finance, operate and maintain a new, combined City Administration and Public Safety Building; and
2) The City will sell at fair market value, to the successful respondent, any excess land resulting from the development of the Public Facilities for private development, which could include the Community Services Building and all, or portions of, the super block site currently housing City Hall and Police and Fire Administration, Fire Station #1, and the Housing Authority Building site.
The RFP will enable the City to identify the most qualified Respondents and will be indicative of the level of the Respondents’ experience and commitment to the proposed project. Respondents must demonstrate their project concept, design and supporting financing plan necessary to successfully design, develop and deliver the proposed project.
RFP responses are due in February 2016. Following the submittals, the proposals will be reviewed, evaluated and the recommended team presented for City Council selection.
Request For Qualifications (RFQ)
The primary purpose of this RFQ is to qualify and select a short list of highly qualified development teams, who will then be requested to participate in the Phase II RFP. In the RFQ, respondents are asked to provide their basic project concept to address the City’s objectives and requirements and qualify firms and their key personnel with regards to their ability to provide the experience, capacity and financial resources necessary to successfully execute each of the two project components. Only those development teams short-listed will move forward and participate in Phase II. The response requirements can be found in Section 4 of this RFQ.
Although it is the City’s preference to enter into a single contract with one development entity for the entire project, the RFQ contains separate qualification criteria for the Public Building development and the proposed Private Development. At this time, development teams may either propose qualifications for both the Public Building development and the Private Development, or can choose to submit qualifications for only one of the development components. Informed by the RFQ process and prior to releasing the RFP, the City will make a determination whether it will require short-listed teams to propose on both project components, or if teams may pursue either the City development or the Private Development independently. This decision will determine if one or two RFP’s will be issued in Phase II.
Appendix A-1: Private Site Map
Appendix A-2: Public Building Map
Appendix A-3: Regional Map
Appendix A-4: Hotel Feasibility Analysis
Appendix B: Forms A-B (Word file) - File Coming Soon
Appendix B: Forms C-E (Excel file) - File Coming Soon
Follow this link for Q&A from the Pre-Submittal Meeting: Nov 16., 2015 - File Coming Soon
• Issuance of the RFQ October 30, 2015
• Pre-Submittal Conference November 16, 2015
• Deadline for Submittal of Questions regarding the RFQ December 21, 2015 (Revised Dec. 3, 2015, from earlier due date of Nov. 27)
• Submittal Due Date for RFQ February 19, 2016 (Revised by Second Addendum from earlier due date of Jan. 8)
• Interviews of teams March 2016
• Shortlisting of qualified teams to participate in RFP March 2016
• Three Qualified teams selected to participate in RFP May 10, 2016
City of Napa Pre-Submittal Meeting – Question Log as of 11/16/15
Q: How many parking spaces are envisioned for the Public Building? How are they shared with proposed private development site?
A: Per RFQ, 225 spaces, but will most likely fall within 200 – 250 spaces. Exact number has not been determined as of yet. Space allocation still to be determined between the Public and Private sites.
Q: Is there more detailed programming available for the space required for Public Safety at the Public Building?
A: Yes, more so for the Public Safety portion and City will have more detailed information for the Administration portion prior to the issuance of the RFP. Big picture numbers will be uploaded to the website as well as the current Public Safety programming that has been done to date.
Q: Has City done any architectural test fits to confirm that City can meet requirements on the Public site?
A: Yes, City has done a test fit to confirm the requirements are achievable. City was hoping to get ideas from the proposing architects prior to issuing the City’s test fit as the City did not want to sway the answer.
Q: Beyond the 2.97 acres that are to be sold to development team, is there any other financial participation the City is looking at that the respondent should be considering?
A: City is open to creative financing packages that respondent may propose. Jones Lang LaSalle analyzed the opportunity as an outright disposition but City is open to any alternative financing solutions that will help the City provide offsetting revenues to construct the Public Building. City has hired a financial advisor to review respondents’ financing solutions. The City urges respondents to be creative in their financial solutions (i.e., what might have worked in past projects that can be applicable to this project). Any questions for the financial advisor should be directed through Julie Lucido.
Q: For RFP phase, City has indicated they will require detailed design drawings. Will a stipend be available to partially cover these costs for respondent teams?
A: Yes, City is expecting to have a stipend for shortlist members but amount has not yet been determined.
Q: Does the City of Napa have a Credit Rating?
A: The City has no debt to speak of but it has been several years since the City received a credit rating. However, the City expects to have a credit rating completed during the RFQ/P process.
Q: Are finances for respondent firms considered confidential?
A: Please refer to RFQ Section 1.6 for instructions on how to submit confidential information.
City of Napa Essential Services Bldg. & Re-Development RFQ – Q&A Log as of 12/15/15*
(*not inclusive of the Q&A from the Pre-Submittal meeting on 11/16/15. The Q&A document from the Pre-Submittal meeting can be found at www.cityofnapa.org - select Essential Services Building RFQ from the “Quick Links” Menu)
Question Received – Monday, 12/9/2015
Q: Given that submittal teams will include development firms, general contractors, architects, structural engineers, financing partners, etc., we’re a bit confused on which team members need to complete Form B in Appendix B.2. The RFQ seems to indicate that each firm involved should complete Form B in Appendix B.2, but questions 10-12 specifically seem aimed at the Development firms. Can you please clarify? Along the same lines, which firms need to complete Forms C, D & E? And provide financials?
A: Per Section 4.1.6 of the RFQ, each firm involved with the development team should fill out a separate Form B (Appendix B.2). For those associated firms that are not developers, Questions 10-12 on Form B (Appendix B.2) should be marked “N/A” as those questions will not apply to them. Only development firms are required to fill out Forms C, D & E (Appendix B.3 – B.5). Each participating firm on the Respondent team should provide the required financial documents as requested in Section 4.1.11.
Question Received – Monday, 11/30/2015
QUESTION – Is there any requirement for open space, public plaza space or public park space for this project? Will there be any requirement for these for when City Hall holds public events?
ANSWER – There is open space envisioned for the Civic Building but no specific requirements set forth in the RFQ. Additional details will be provided during the RFP phase.
Question Received – Friday, 11/27/2015
Q: The following question refers to both the public and public development opportunities: Sections 2.7 and 3.4 (“Project Personnel Minimum Requirements), and section 4.2.1.C (Technical Pass/Fail Criteria) of the RFQ do not mention several design professional roles that will likely be needed to complete the project, such as MEP engineers and civil engineers. If a responding team proposes specific firms for these roles and if that team is awarded the project, please verify that the firms proposed in these roles (which are currently excluded from the RFQ) will be engaged by the City as part of the winning team. Conversely, please confirm that the City will not dismiss responding teams who do not explicitly designate a singular firm to each of the roles stated in the aforementioned sections.
A: It would be the responsibility of the selected developer to obtain the services of any sub-contractors necessary to complete the project, and is expected that these sub-consultants would fall under the general contract made with the winning firm, not as separate contracts with the City.
The proposer must, however, propose individuals / firms to handle the specific responsibilities as requested in Sections 2.7, 3.4 and 4.2.1.C. If the respondent feels other key firms/personnel should be represented in the RFQ, responding firms are welcome to include those other key firms/personnel so long as the response does not exceed the stated page limit.
Question Received – Friday, 11/27/2015
Q: Please confirm that the City does not consider attendance at the November 16 Pre-Submittal Conference as requisite for consideration of the responding teams.
A: Correct, attendance at the November 16 Pre-Submittal Conference was not required to be considered for the project.
Question Received – Friday, 11/27/2015
Q: Given the City’s objectives identified in Section 1.0 of the RFQ and varying alternates and options available to the City for consideration at this preliminary state of the solicitation process, respondents are permitted to exercise discretion on the composition of their respective teams at this time. Please confirm the City of Napa will accept responses from “Private Development team” and/or “Developer” entities and permit entities to submit responses relying on their qualifications as a “Private Development team” and/or “Developer” for either the public development opportunity, the private development opportunity, or both. The recommended criteria for such evaluation would be the following consistent with the City’s RFQ dated 10/30/15.
A: Yes, respondents may propose for the public development opportunity, the private development opportunity or both. However, per Section 1.1, it is the City’s preference for a single development team to propose on both components, but it is not a prerequisite for consideration.
Question Received – Friday, 11/20/2015
Q: Do you have a list of what hotels are either under construction, in planning or that you know are proposed for development in Napa or in the County?
ANSWER – Please refer to the “Lodging & Conference Space Inventory-City of Napa & South County” document that is posted to the RFQ website at: http://www.cityofnapa.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2048:essential-services-building-rfq-rfq-and-attachments&catid=60:uncategorised&highlight=WyJyZnEiXQ==&Itemid=104
Due to inclement weather, the Napa Fire Department’s Open House, scheduled for this Saturday, October 15, has been cancelled. We will bring this great event back next year, even better than ever! In the meantime, stay safe and dry this weekend, and...
Don’t Wait, Check the Date! Replace smoke alarms every 10 years.