Loading...
2004-01-07 CCPD PacketSOUTHLAKE CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT 1/2% SALES TAX REPORT 2003-04 Collected Budget Balance Budget to Date Balance Percent $ 2,166,155 $ 201,663 1,964,492 90.69% MONTH Fiscal Year 2001-02 Actual Percent Increase/ (Decrease) Fiscal Year 2002-03 Actual Percent Increase/ (Decrease) Fiscal Year 2003-04 Actual Percent Increase/ (Decrease) October $192,022 21.62% $180,396 -6.05% $201,663 11.79% November 190,845 17.53% 185,174 -2.97% - -100.00% December 281,020 18.23% 283,333 0.82% - -100.00% January 159,364 1.09% 176,353 10.66% - -100.00% February 158,580 7.49% 156,983 -1.01% - -100.00% March 210,042 1.51% 219,395 4.45% - -100.00% April 201,261 8.46% 204,622 1.67% - -100.00% May 196,725 -7.95% 221,992 12.84% - -100.00% June 224,631 0.51% 231,224 2.94% - -100.00% July 190,257 0.06% 205,270 7.89% - -100.00% August 181,522 0.75% 195,235 7.55% - -100.00% September 216,716 8.78% 226,477 4.50% - -100.00% TOTALI $2,402,985 $2,486,454 $201,663 $300,000 , $250,000 $200,000 - $150,000 1 $100,000 $50,000 $0 Three Year Revenue Comparison by Month 03 03 0o Off` Off` Off` OI` O� O� O� O� Off` O°� ��, pe° �a� ��� mac PQM aA ��� �J� �A �Q �` P 5 ■ Fiscal Year 2001-02 Actual ❑ Fiscal Year 2002-03 Actual ❑ Fiscal Year 2003-041 Actual Budget Actual Estimated (budget -est.) % 2002-03 2003-04 2003-04 2003-04 Difference Change October $ 180,396 $ 184,004 $ November 185,174 170,360 December 283,333 240,833 January 176,353 156,954 February 156,983 139,715 March 219,395 195,262 April 204,622 182,114 May 221,992 197,573 June 231,224 205,789 July 205,270 182,690 August 195,235 173,759 September 226,477 137,102 _ TOTAL $ 2,486,454 $ 2,166,155 $ 201,663 $ 201,663 $ 17,659 9.20% - 170,360 - 0.00% - 240,833 - 0.00% - 156,954 - 0.00% - 139,715 - 0.00% - 195,262 - 0.00% - 182,114 - 0.00% - 197,573 - 0.00% - 205,789 - 0.00% - 182,690 - 0.00% - 173,759 - 0.00% - 137,102 - 0.00% 201,663 $ 2,183,814 $ 17,659 -12.17% %-Ity oI 3outniaKe, 1 eXaS MEMORANDUM December 30, 2003 TO: Southlake Crime Control and Prevention District Board of Directors FROM: Rick Black, Director of Public Safety (Ext. 2421) SUBJECT: Approve Funding for RPGA as Architect for North DPS Facility Action Requested: Approve funding, thereby authorizing staff to enter into negations with RPGA, for architectural services of the North DPS Facility. Background Information: In August of this year, the Board appointed an architect selection committee and staff produced a Request for Qualification (RFQ) document. The committee convened on three different occasions, reviewing all the proposals submitted by the invited architectural firms and conducting interviews with the initial short list of three firms. After the initial interviews, the committee developed a second short list of two firms; Phillips Swagger and Associates and RPGA, Inc. Additional research and background checks were conducted on both firms, leading to a final recommendation from the committee to the Board. Financial Considerations: The approved CIP allots thirteen million dollars for the North DPS Project. The estimated amount for architectural services is $600,000. Financial Impact: The approved CIP incorporates the cost for architectural services. Citizen Input/ Board Review: As a result of the committee's work towards creating a "short list" of architectural firms, the Board will receive presentations from the top two selected firms. Legal Review: Legal Review is not applicable at this point. Legal Review will be provided to the Professional Services Agreement. Alternatives: The board may reject the committee's recommendation and ask for further review of other architectural firms. Supporting Documents: Rick Black; Architect Reference Review; December 19, 2003 Copy of the RFQ advertised to firms Southlake Crime Control and Prevention District Board of Directors December 30, 2003 Page 2 Staff Recommendation: Given the vision of this facility and after review of the firms and their recent project history, the committee recommends RPGA, Inc. as the lead architect of the North DPS Facility. If approved as recommended, the negotiated contract for architectural services will be on the Board's March agenda as an action item. %,fly Of 0UUL111dRC, 1 t::JCdb MEMORANDUM December 19, 2003 TO: Martin Schelling, CCPD Board President Bob Mundlin, CCPD Board Vice -President FROM: Rick Black, Director of Public Safety SUBJECT: Architect Reference Review The architect selection committee narrowed the search down to PSA and RPGA. I immediately asked my staff to begin reviewing the references listed by each firm. The holiday season was going to prevent this committee from meeting again until the day of the next Crime Control meeting so I shortened the allowable time to conduct the review. The following information was collected and is presented for your review. I. Phillips Swagger Associates A. Jack Evans Police Headquarters — Dallas, Texas Chief Price and I were able to tour this new facility. While the Dallas Public Works Department was part of the problem with the outcome of this construction, PSA did fail to ensure proper construction in a number of areas. These included improper vents in interrogation rooms, rooms, improper lighting in juvenile holding rooms, failure to provide detailed construction documents that included electrical outlets in the wall, (we saw that everywhere on the lower floors), etc. While the overall building design appeared to be very good, the detail work and construction drawings as well as follow through to get these things fixed were lacking. B. Department of Public Safety — Highland Park, Texas We contacted Detective Randy Milligan. Public Safety portion of City Hall was expanded and renovated after a partial collapse. Detective Milligan stated they had an excellent experience with PSA and would not hesitate to use them again. Originally John Main made all meetings and then project was turned over to Tim Craft. Highland Park hired a structural engineer, then an Architect, then Beck as a construction manager. Detective Milligan stated it was difficult working with three major egos but it eventually worked out great. Highland Park is happy with the results. C. Police, Jail and Municipal Courts — Euless, Texas We contacted Chief Leonard Carmack. Chief Carmack is fairly satisfied with PSA and the building. He states that the biggest problem is the flat roof and the number of leaks. The building opened in 2002 and they are still fixing leaks in the roof. Hired Jim McMeans as Project Manager and he handled all contacts with PSA however several minor performance issues were raised. They have had difficulty with the electronic locks and locking systems and there are no manual overrides on the doors. They have had consistent problems with loud noises in the CID offices. While they Martin Schelling & Bob Mundlin Architect Reference Review 12/19/2003 Page 2 of 4 believe it is a girder popping, the noise has been explained as periodic Water hammers in the plumbing. The lack of tinted glass in the building leads to increased heat in the summer and the HVAC appears underpowered for many of the offices. D. Police Station — Deer Park, Texas We contacted Acting Chief Ken Finley. This project is about 4 months away from completion. Chief Finley states that, to date, the quality appears good and all change orders have been smooth. Chief Finley stated that it was necessary to conduct a two day meeting to discuss changes to the building and that PSA was receptive during this meeting. E. Department of Public Safety — Glendale, Arizona We spoke with Commander Scott Smith. Commander Smith described the design of the building as "good". He stated that they have been in the building for six months and are still working out the bugs with the General Contractor. Overall, they are pleased with the final building. F. Department of Public Safety — Gilbert, Arizona Left 2 messages with no call back G. City of Coppell We contacted Captain Wade Goolsby, project director. PSA contracted with a Structural Engineering Firm Merritt, Barnett and Pitt. The facility has been open for five years and they have significant foundation movement and cracking in the building. There were some of what Capt. Goolsby considered to be major design flaws including no surveillance of juvenile holding areas, no parent waiting area, property room too small as well as evidence processing area too small and no venting. Lack of any form of wainscoating makes maintenance difficult (This was also an issue with our West DPS facility). He also indicated that Highland Village had major structural problems with their facility. He doubts he would use them again. Coppell encouraged us to talk to Highland Village. H. City of Highland Village We contacted Chief Ed O'Bara. This project was not listed in their references but was listed in their litigation section. See attached article. The Highland Village facility is four years old and they have had major structural problems due to what they believe is improper drainage. The combined companies responsible have settled for $950,000. Martin Schelling & Bob Mundlin Architect Reference Review 12/19/2003 Page 3 of 4 II. RPGA A. Police Headquarters and 911 Center - Garland, Texas Chief's Price and Finn had an opportunity to tour this facility. Garland representatives had nothing but accolades for the process and design. We were able to meet David Wilson, the primary design architect from McClaren Wilson who is also planned as the design architect for our facility. McClaren and Wilson come highly recommended by Paul Schuster from the Dallas Police Department. Garland facility was excellent with no significant design or construction errors causing repairs or corrections. Firm is still working to complete the jail facility. B. Police Headquarters - Frisco, Texas We Contacted Chief Todd Renshaw from Frisco. He is in design process and is also using RPGA and McClaren Wilson. He is very pleased with their work and speaks very highly of their responsiveness and creative ability. Not yet in construction phase but attention to detail has been impressive, according to Chief Renshaw. C. Fire Department - Grapevine Texas We contacted Assistant Chief Chuck Jones. Chief Jones said the building quality is very good, but the department has outgrown the location. Chief Jones does not remember any problems with the architect but was not greatly involved in the construction. He remembers everything seemed to go smooth. D. Police Headquarters and 911/Communications Center - Gastonia, North Carolina We contacted retired Captain Danny Cochran, the Police Project Manager. They have been in their facility for 7 years and because of the excellence in design, have not had to change, repair, or renovate anything because of design or construction flaws. Designed by Wilson, the building won the AIA National Exhibition of Justice Architecture in 1998. It is well designed and functional and the nearby Charlotte Police are envious of their facility. Eight foot corridors, functional units close to each other, and future planning for electrical needs have made their facility a showplace. Their Architect selection committee reviewed 15 firms, interviewed three and selected Wilson unanimously. E. Public Safety Campus — Yuma, Arizona We contacted Captain Shaw. Captain Shaw described the building quality as very good and was happy with the building design and how it functions for the agency. Captain Shaw stated that every interaction with RPGA went smooth and that "They were very easy to work with." Captain Shaw stated that they conducted weekly and bi-weekly meetings with minor change orders submitted. Captain Shaw said that he would highly recommend this firm. Martin Schelling & Bob Mundlin Architect Reference Review 12/10/2003 Page 4 of 4 F. Police Headquarters and Municipal Courts - Mission, Texas We contacted Chief Leo Longoria. Chief Longoria was very pleased with RPGA and McClaren Wilson as overall design team. The building has had no major problems but did have to have redundant AC for Dispatch installed after original AC systems failed several times. Design team worked well with staff and changed items that staff needed changed. Would highly recommend them and would use them again. G. Police Headquarters - Bothell, Washington We contacted Mark Ericks, former Chief and Project Officer. Chief Ericks conducted research for two years prior to contracting with Jim McClaren. They hired Jim McClarn as the designer and hired local architects to do the drawings and supervise the work. Chief Ericks is very happy with McClarens work. It was designed around function. Today, the facility functions better than any he has seen anywhere. Highly recommends McClaren Wilson. H. Police Headquarters - Chula Vista, California We contacted Project Manager Sergeant Dan Hardman. They are two months from move in. He highly recommends Jim McClaren and their firm. He stated they are the experts in the design for function process and not just make it look pretty. He has no negative and all positive comments about McClaren Wilson. I. Police Substation — Austin, Texas We contacted Lieutenant Kevin Kornfeurh. Lt. Kornfeurch is very happy with the building design and how it functions. He states that the building was very well constructed and change orders were all handled smoothly. The only post construction problem surrounds plumbing. RPGA has stepped in and withheld payment to the subcontractor until the problem is corrected. I. Fire Department —Fort Worth Left 2 messages with no call back Sent e-mail with no reply I am available for any comments or questions. REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ) FOR ARCHITECTURAL TEAM(S) FOR THE PROPOSED CIVIC BUILDING CITY OF SOUTHLAKE October 6, 2003 CITY OF SOUTHLAKE REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ) Page 1 of 10 REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ) FOR ARCHITECTURAL TEAM(S) FOR THE PROPOSED SOUTHLAKE NORTH DPS FACILITY TABLE OF CONTENTS I. PURPOSE OF RFQ 4 II. LOCATIONS 4 III. OBJECTIVES 4 W. SCOPE OF WORK 4 V. FUNDING 5 VI. PROJECT DURATION 5 VII. SELECTION PROCESS 5 VIII. EVALUATION CRITERIA 6 IX. ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS, NOTIFICATIONS, AND INFORMATION 6 X. PRE -SUBMITTAL MEETING 7 XI. SUBMITTAL INSTRUCTIONS 7 XII. CONTENT OF SUBMITTAL 8 CITY OF SOUTHLAKE REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ) Page 2 of 10 CITY OF SOUTHLAKE REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ) FOR ARCHITECTURAL TEAM(S) FOR THE PROPOSED NORTH DPS FACILITY The City of Southlake invites the submittal of responses to this RFQ from qualified firms (or teams) interested in providing architectural services in connection with the design and construction of the Southlake North DPS Facility which will serve as the main headquarters of three facilities. This facility will house police, fire, dispatch and detention areas as well as house the emergency operations center (EOC) in Southlake, Texas. Responses are solicited for this service in accordance with the terms, conditions, and instructions set forth in the RFQ guidelines. The City will receive responses to this RFQ at the offices of the City Secretary, City of Southlake, 1400 Main Street, Suite 270, Southlake, Texas 76092, until 3:00 p.m. on Friday, November 7, 2003. The guidelines, as well as packets, may be obtained from the City Secretary's office or on the City of Southlake website, www.ci.southlake.tx.us. The guidelines will not be faxed or mailed. There will be a pre -submittal conference from 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. on Tuesday, October 23, 2003 at the Southlake East DPS Facility Training Room at 667 N. Carroll Ave., Southlake, Texas 76092. Receipt of responses does not bind the City to any contract for said services, nor does it give any guarantee that a contract for the Project will be awarded. Rick Black Director of Public Safety Southlake, Texas CITY OF SOUTHLAKE REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ) Page 3 of 10 REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ) FOR ARCHITECTURAL TEAM(S) FOR THE PROPOSED NORTH DPS FACILITY 1. PURPOSE OF RFQ The City of Southlake ("City") invites the submittal of responses to this "Request for Qualifications" (RFQ) from qualified firm(s) interested in providing "Architectural" services in. connection with the design and construction of the Southlake North DPS Facility project. This building will facilitate multiple departments, divisions and services including Police, Fire, and Dispatch, and will include detention facilities and serve as the Emergency Operations Center (EOC) for the City of Southlake. H. LOCATIONS The City is proceeding with the development of the Southlake North DPS Facility project that will be located on a twelve (12) acre tract at the northeast corner of East Dove Road and North White Chapel Road. Packet information regarding this facility is available on-line at www.ci.southdake.tx.us or by request from the City Secretary's Office. M. OBJECTIVES The City proposes to retain a highly qualified, capable firm(s) to act as the Architect during the design and construction of the Project for a fixed price. Firms who participate in this RFQ process are referred to as "Respondents" and/or "Architects" within this RFQ. The City will give prime consideration to Architects with significant and/or current experience with the development, design and construction of projects similar to the Southlake North DPS Facility. The City reserves the right to negotiate with one or more parties and shall not be obligated to enter into any contract with any Respondent on any terms or conditions. IV. SCOPE OF WORK A. The selected Architect(s) will be required to perform the basic architectural and engineering services for the project from schematic design through contract administration phases as per an AIA B141/Owner-Architect Standard Document Agreement (latest edition). Under an AIA B727/Owner-Architect Standard Agreement for the pre-design/programming phase, the Architect will work with the City to develop a scope of work that meets the City's expectations and project budget. The Architect will also be responsible for interior design services. The Architect is required to retain and be responsible for all basic engineering disciplines such as civil. mechanical, electrical, plumbing, fire protection, landscape architecture, and structural engineering. The Architect may also be required to identify and select the appropriate sub - consultants. CITY OF SOUTHLAKE REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ) Page 4 of 10 B. The City anticipates selection of a contractor to serve under a contract with the City as Construction Manager (CM) -Agent. The CM -Agent will serve as an integral team member from the inception of the programming and design efforts. Furthermore, the Construction Manager -Agent may be used, in conjunction with the design team, as the cost estimator and project scheduler for the project. The Architect will aid in the selection process of the (CM) - Agent and will coordinate and cooperate with the (CM) -Agent. V. PROJECT FUNDING On September 2, 2003, the City Council approved the Crime Control and Prevention District Budget and Multi-year CIP which included funding for the planning, design and construction of the North DPS Facility. Bonds for the construction will be sold in Fiscal Year 04-05. The preliminary cost projection for this facility is estimated at $13,000,000 including site work, FF&E, architectural fees, CM -Agent fees and soft costs. VI. PROJECT DURATION It is anticipated that bonds to fund the North DPS Facility will be sold in Fiscal Year 04-05, allowing construction to begin in 2004. The City will look to the chosen Architect(s) and (CM) -Agent for assistance in making the determination of project duration. VII. SELECTION PROCESS Selection of firms will follow the proposal -interview process. From a review of the statements of qualifications received, the City of Southlake intends to invite several Respondents to be interviewed prior to making any final selection of a firm for this project. The City of Southlake will notify all firms chosen for the interview process, in writing, of the date, time and location of the interview The City will use an Evaluation Panel to evaluate the statement of qualifications submittals and the interviews. The statements of qualifications, together with the interview, will be integral in determining if a consulting contract shall be pursued with a particular firm(s). The preferred team will then negotiate with the City on fee and contract conditions. If a reasonable fee cannot be achieved with the team of choice, in the opinion of the City, negotiations will proceed with the second choice team until a mutually agreed fee and contract can be negotiated. CITY OF SOUTHLAKE REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ) Page 5 of 10 VIII. EVALUATION CRITERIA The criteria used to evaluate the RFQ responses will include, but not be limited to, the following (items listed below are not listed in order of importance): A. Qualifications of Firm(s) Qualifications of firm(s), including a separate discussion on the qualifications of all sub -contract firms that are to be used on the Project, as they relate to this Project, specifically. B. Firm Experience on Similar Projects Related project experience of the firm(s) and the individuals who would be assigned to this Project. C. Available Resources to Complete Project Includes the analytical and design tools available to the firm(s), available personnel and resources or methodologies commonly used that may be applicable, or specific, to this Project. D. Responsiveness to the RFQ E. Professional References References from other professional Firms, clients, suppliers, consultants, etc., as they relate to the Architect's capability of successfully meeting the City's objectives. Include current contact information. The City reserves the right to contact these references to substantiate and verify the accuracy of information provided in the statement of qualifications, the interview and/or any following negotiations. IX. ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS, NOTIFICATIONS, AND INFORMATION A. No Gratuities - Respondents shall not offer any gratuities, favors, or anything of monetary value to any official or employee of the City of Southlake for the purpose of influencing this selection. Any attempt by the Respondent to influence the selection process by any means, other than disclosure of qualifications and credentials through the proper channels, shall be grounds for exclusion from the selection process. B. All Information True - Respondent represents and warrants to the City of Southlake that all information provided in the response shall be true, correct and complete. Respondents who provide false, misleading, or incomplete information, whether intentional or not, in any of the documents presented to the City of Southlake for consideration in the selection process shall be excluded. CITY OF SOUTHLAKE REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ) Page 6 of 10 C. Interviews - After the initial evaluation of the statements of qualifications, the Evaluation Panel will develop a "short list" of the most favorable teams. Respondents who are included on this list will be notified of such, in writing. Short-listed Respondents will be required to participate in subsequent interviews. The interview will focus, primarily, on the Respondent's program approach to this Project and an appraisal of the personnel who will be directly involved with the Project. D. Inquiries - Do not contact the City of Southlake or any of its agents regarding the selection process or to make inquiries about the progress of this selection process. Information will be made available or Respondents will be contacted when it is appropriate to do so. E. Cost of Responses - The City of Southlake will not be responsible for any costs incurred by anyone as a result of responding to this RFQ. F. Contract Negotiations - This RFQ is not to be construed as a contract or as a commitment of any kind. If this RFQ results in a contract offer by the City, the specific scope of work, associated fees, and other contractual matters will be determined during contract negotiations. To ensure that the appropriate staff is assigned to the Project, the City intends to make the inclusion of a `key persons" clause a part of the contract negotiations. G. No Obligation - The City reserves the sole right to (1) evaluate the responses submitted; (2) waive any irregularities therein; (3) select candidates for the submittal of more detailed or alternate proposals; (4) accept any submittal or portion of submittal; (5) reject any or all Respondents submitting responses, should it be deemed in the City's best interest; and/or (6) cancel the entire process. H. Professional Liability Insurance - The respondent shall procure and retain the appropriate liability insurance written by an insurer authorized to transact insurance in the State of Texas. X. PRE -SUBMITTAL MEETING A Pre -Submittal Conference will be held on Thursday, October 23, 2003 from 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. at the City of Southlake East DPS Facility Training Room, 667 N. Carroll Ave., Southlake, Texas 76092. The purpose of the meeting will be to discuss this solicitation and answer any questions. Attendance is not mandatory; it is however, recommended. XI. SUBMITTAL INSTRUCTIONS Sealed submittals are required. Submittals shall be delivered to the office of the City Secretary, City of Southlake, at the address set forth below at or before 3:00 p.m. on Friday, November 7, 2003. All submittals must be labeled on the outside with the Respondent's name and the name of the Project. Late submittals will not be considered. CITY OF SOUTHLAKE REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ) Page 7 of 10 Six (6) copies of the response are to be addressed to: City of Southlake C/O City Secretary 1400 Main Street, Suite 270 Southlake, Texas 76092 To enable the City to efficiently evaluate the responses, it is IMPORTANT that respondents follow the required format in preparing their responses. RESPONSES THAT DO NOT CONFORM TO THE PRESCRIBED FORMAT MAY NOT BE EVALUATED. Each copy of the response shall be bound using a semi-permanent binding method, to ensure that pages are not lost. Pages shall be no larger than letter -size (8%" by 11") or, if folded to that dimension, twice letter size (11" by 17") each section (defined below) shall be separated by a tabbed divider. Elaborate covers, binding, dividers, etc. are not required. XII. CONTENT OF SUBMITTAL Each response shall be submitted as outlined in this section. Please include an outside cover and/or first page, containing the name of the Project ("Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for Architectural Services for the Proposed Southlake North DPS Facility"), the name of the Respondent, and the submittal date. A table of contents should be next, followed by tabbed dividers separating each of the following 6 sections: Divider #1: Letters The first page following the divider shall be a letter transmitting the response to the City and stating that the proposal set forth in it remains effective for a period of 60 calendar days. If the Respondent intends to subcontract for any of the services, the transmittal letter shall contain the names of all such proposed subcontractors. At least one copy of the transmittal letter shall contain the original signature of a partner, principal, or officer of the Respondent. Divider #2: Firm Information a. Firm name, addresses, and telephone numbers of all firm offices. b. Structure of firm, i.e., sole proprietorship, partnership, corporation, and size of firm. c. Years firm has been in business. d. Names of principals in firm. e. Primary contact. f. Organizational description. g. Description of firm's philosophy. • . Divider #3: General Company History/Qualifications a. A brief history of the Architect and the services routinely provided in-house on Public Safety building projects. b. An organization chart that explains team member responsibilities. c. The resumes of all persons to be assigned to the project with their prospective roles identified. CITY OF SOUTHLAKE REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ) Page 8 of 10 d. List of all related design awards and recognition that the Architect or key team members of the architectural firm have received. e. Documentation that the firms on the Architect's team (architects and engineers) are registered in the State of Texas. • Divider #4: Financial and Legal Status a. Describe the general financial capability of the Respondent and provide financial references. b. List any actions taken by any regulatory agency against or involving the firm or its agents or employees with respect to any work performed. c. List all litigation against or involving the firm or its agents or employees with respect to any work performed. d. All insurance coverage that the firm has which would be applicable to the work. e. Jurisdictions in which your organization's partnership or trade name is filed. f. Jurisdictions and trade categories in which your organization is legally qualified to do business. (Please indicate registration or license numbers) • Divider #5: Experience and References a. Discussion of Architect's experience in working with Government Agencies. b. List of all comparable Public Safety projects, whether ongoing or completed, including references. Please begin with projects in Texas. For each, please provide: i. Project name and location ii. Year completed iii. Short description of project iv. Names, addresses, and phone numbers of owner and contact person tasked with daily responsibilities of project v. Names, addresses and telephone numbers of general contractor and engineer vi. Design and construction cost and whether or not it was within the project budget vii. Construction time and whether or not it was completed on time. c. List of all projects currently under contract. • Divider #6: Management and Organizational Approach - on two pages or less, please describe your management and organization approach to the Project. The following should be addressed within this description: a. Please describe your firm's understanding of the Project and what specific services the firm is and is not expecting to provide; i.e. civil, mechanical, electrical, geotechnical, structural, architectural, construction phase services, surveying, etc. b. Describe how the firm will organize to perform the services. c. Include an estimated Project Schedule showing dates and duration of the various phases of the Project, e.g. Planning Phase; Detail Design Phase; Advertise, Bid and Award Phase; and Construction Phase. d. In the programming and design phases, describe how the firm will elicit the assistance of interested stakeholders. This includes community residents, city council, staff, and users. CITY OF SOUTHLAKE REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ) Page 9 of 10 e. Provide procedures for assisting in the development of project scheduling, coordination of consultants, quality and cost control. f. Describe the architectural teams' approach to communication with the City and Construction Manager. g. Description of Architect's approach to code analysis and jurisdictional approvals. *In the event that two or more architectural firms are collaborating, dividers 2-6 must be filled out for each companX, with responsibilities clearly delineated between firms. CITY OF SOUTHLAKE REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ) Page 10 of 10