CITY OF HOBOKEN ADDENDUM TO RFP DOCUMENTS
RFP – 21 – 36 - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR 800 MONROE – RESILIENCY PARK CONCEPT DESIGN This Addendum # 1 dated January 4, 2022, is issued to modify the above-mentioned RFP, and is hereby made part of the RFP documents. Please attach this Addendum #1 to the original documents in your possession and ensure same is included in your proposal. This addendum includes:
EXTENSION-PROPOSALS SUBMISSION DATE: JANUARY 19, 2022, AT 2:00 P.M.
Please see attached Individual Firm Qualifications form that needs to be added to the RFP package.
Questions and Answers:
Q1. While the project site and context portion of the RFP mention geotechnical and environmental analysis, we are wondering if you could clarify exactly what geotechnical and environmental scope is expected to include on our team?
A. A geotechnical report was prepared for the City of Hoboken by Michael Baker International. The environmental consultant for the Applied Parties (the former property owner/responsible party), Potomac-Hudson Environmental, Inc. (PHE), prepared two 2012 Vapor Intrusion Indoor Air Sampling Results letters, a 2012 Remedial Investigation Report (RIR)/Remedial Action Workplan (RAW) a 2020 Supplemental RIR/Remedial Action Report (RAR) and a 2021 Preliminary Assessment Report (PAR). Excel Environmental Resources prepared for the City of Hoboken (the current property owner) a Preliminary Assessment (PA)/Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (Phase I) and Focused Site Investigation (SI) Report as well as a detailed evaluation and description of the remaining investigation and/or remediation activities to be conducted at the 800 Monroe Street property in order establish compliance with the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) rules and regulations. These documents will be provided to the selected consultant. The consultant shall consider the findings and recommendations of these documents in the concept design process.
Q2. In regard to qualification requirements, the RFP mentions a limit of two work samples. Is this an overall limit for the team (2 total), or 2 work samples per consultant firm?
A. This is a limit for the team (2 total).
Q3. For submitted qualifications, can you please clarify what is expected from teams from this statement?
A. The consultant shall complete the Individual Qualifications form (attached to this addendum) as well as provide the following information:
i. Whether the individual is now or has ever been included in any bankruptcy or re-organization proceedings or have operated under a different name. If so, explain.
ii. Minimum of four (4) references from clients for whom similar projects have been completed.
Include the following information for each project:
1. Name of contracting company or government agency
2. Contact person’s name, position, and current telephone number
3. Scope of services performed
4. Commencement and termination dates of services
5. Approximate rates / fees earned from the contracting company
6. Status and comments
iii. Comprehensive list of the individual’s active relationships with other government entities and/or law firms.
Q4. Two (2) samples of the work product prepared within the past 24 months. Are project case studies applicable/acceptable? Or is something technical expected?
A. The City seeks conceptual design plans for two similar projects completed within the past 24 months. Conceptual design plans may be provided as site plans, renderings, and/or a design report.
Q5. Are the following forms required at proposal stage, or to be supplied at execution of contract to the awardee? Evidence of Affirmative Action Compliance, Proof of Business Registration Certificate (BRC) and copy of W9
A. These documents are required before contract award.
Q6. Please advise where the Individual Qualifications Form referenced on page 25 of the RFP can be found/downloaded as it is required for submission.
A. The Individual Qualifications Form is attached to this addendum.
Q7. Please advise if a due date extension may be granted for this proposal response.
A. Submit all proposals as 1 original, 1 copy, and USB/CD/DVD document to the
City of Hoboken
94 Washington St
Hoboken, NJ 07030
by 2 PM on January 19, 2022
Q8. Please advise if submissions should adhere strictly to the Submissions Requirements prescribed list on page 29 or if teams have agency to, while fulfilling all requirements, deviate accordingly.
A. The Submission Requirements on pg. 29 must be met. Consultants are permitted to provide additional information beyond these minimum submission requirements, but not more than two work samples per team.
Q9. Regarding current conditions, what, if any, contaminants and/or toxic materials have been found on, or adjacent to, the site?
A. See response to Question 1. Based on the findings of Excel’s PA/Phase I and SI Report, observations made at the time of Excel’s site inspection, and other information provided subsequent to Excel’s PA/Phase I and SI Report, additional investigation was recommended for the following
AOC 1 – PH Env Historic Fill Material and AOC 2 – PH Env Soil: As of Excel’s PA/Phase I and SI Report, the investigation and remediation of these AOCs was complete. However, subsequent to that report, and based on the amended settlement agreement between the City of Hoboken and the Applied Parties, the Applied Parties agreed to modify the current Engineering Controls at the Site to install a clean soil/stone cap and will also be responsible for filing the appropriate paperwork to terminate the existing Deed Notice (DN), file a new DN, and modify the existing Soil RAP.
AOC 3 – PH Env Groundwater: PHEn is in the process of revising the current Classification Exception Area (CEA) for Chlorinated Volatile Organic Compounds (CVOCs). PHEn and the Applied Parties are responsible for completing the necessary investigation activities and filing the appropriate paperwork to revise the CEA, obtain a Groundwater Remedial Action Permit (RAP) and ultimately closing out the groundwater CVOC impacts with a Response Action Outcome (RAO). PHE completed Vapor
Intrusion (VI) investigations in 2012 based on the elevated CVOC groundwater concentrations. No VI concerns were identified at adjacent properties and a VI investigation was not conducted at the subject property since no buildings were located at the subject property. Should any future use of the Site include construction of an onsite building, a VI evaluation would be recommended to verify
the potential for the CVOC groundwater concentrations to be adversely affecting indoor air within the structure. Verification of 1,4-dioxane groundwater quality at the Site was not previously conducted. As part of a Focused SI implemented by Excel at the Site, a groundwater quality investigation was recommended to verify groundwater quality with respect to 1,4-dioxane. Based on the findings of the Focused SI, the verification groundwater samples confirmed that 1,4-dioxane at concentrations above its 0.4 micrograms per liter (ug/L) Groundwater Quality Standard (GWQS) are documented at onsite, upgradient monitoring well MW-13S and at similar concentrations at onsite wells MW-10S and MW-2S located downgradient of the former treatment zone. As part of their final compliance
activities, the Applied Parties and their consultant will be responsible to address these 1,4-dioxane groundwater concentrations in addition to the other
groundwater compounds currently being investigated and remediated at the Site.
AOC 8 – Historic Site Operations and Discharges: The former use of the subject property by a furniture manufacturer as well as a large fire which occurred at the Site in 1985 are potential sources of Pre- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) impacts at the Site. As part of a Focused SI at the Site, a groundwater quality investigation was recommended to determine if PFAS impacts exist. Based on the findings of the Focused SI, verification groundwater samples confirmed that PFAS compounds above their respective GWQS are documented at onsite upgradient monitoring well MW-13S and at similar concentrations at onsite wells MW-10S and MW-2S located downgradient of the former treatment zone. As part of their final compliance activities, the Applied Parties and their consultant will be responsible to address these PFAS groundwater concentrations in addition to the other groundwater compounds currently being investigated and remediated at the Site.
Q10. Given the Holiday schedule, we were wondering if there was any chance the January 11th deadline could be extended.
A. See response to Question 7.
Q11. Is testing information related to the Groundwater Classification Exception Areas (CEAs) available for this site (800 Monroe)? And if so, will it be provided to the design team or will the design team need to conduct separate environmental testing? Here is the ID information from NJ-Geoweb. Preferred ID 670384. Subject Item ID 151,338. Activity Name: PFR980001. Case Tracking Number: 11,085.
A. All available CEA sampling information will be provided to the selected consultant.
Q12. What is the status of the infrastructure improvements that were announced in 2019 along Madison and Monroe Street to help alleviate the urban flooding in this area?
A. Construction was originally anticipated to begin in summer 2019. Since then, issues with underground utility infrastructure conflicts have delayed the schedule. All agencies are working collaboratively to resolve these issues and advance the project toward construction as soon as possible.
Q13. Are there any M/WBE and/or SDVOB requirements for this proposal?
A. There are no diversity preference requirements; however, diverse business entities (certified M/WBE, LGBT, Veteran, or Disabled person -owned businesses) are eligible for 3 additional points in the evaluation criteria, in accordance with EO #6, issued October 24, 2018.
Q14. Should Jersey City be considered one of the collaborators/stakeholders for this project?
A. All potential stakeholders shall be considered, including Jersey City.
Q15. Can the proposal due date for 800 Monroe – Resiliency Park Concept Design be extended to allow additional time for teaming and proposal preparation in response to the questions and answers?
A. See response to Question 7.
Q16. Will site specific soil, groundwater, vapor, waste classification data be provided prior to submission of the RFP?
A. See responses to Questions 1, 9, and 11. All available environmental documents will be provided to the selected consultant.
Q17. After the NJDEP’s approval of the Soil and Groundwater Remedial Action Permits for the property, if applicable, will any offsite vapor intrusion, soil and/or groundwater remediation continue to be the responsibility of the “Applied Parties” LSRP?
A. After the remedial action permits have been issued by NJDEP and the RAOs have been issued by PHE, the City will assume permit compliance. Offsite vapor intrusion has already been addressed.
Q18. The RFP calls for a team to “provide professional Planning, LSRP, Engineering, Urban Design, and Landscape Architecture services”. Can you confirm that architecture is not desired as part of the project team?
A. The City does not envision buildings in the park beyond restrooms. However, stakeholder engagement through the concept design process may recommend buildings in the park. If so, architecture services would be included in future design phases.
Q19. Can you confirm that buildings are not desired in this park?
A. See response to Question 18.
Q20. Can you confirm that “community space” as noted in the project description on page 19 will not be an architectural/interior space?
A. See response to Question 18.
Q21. What is the desired scale for the physical models noted in Task 4A?
A. The selected consultant and the City shall discuss the best scale for the physical models to determine a mutually agreed upon scale.
Q22. May firms submit more than two project examples?
A. The consultant shall provide a minimum of four (4) project references, but a maximum of two (2) work examples. See response to Question 2.
Q23. Do both project examples need to be from the prime?
Q24. Is there performance of a site survey part of the base scope of should it be included as a potential additional item?
A. See Task 4 in the scope of work. Field Survey and Topographical Mapping: The Consultant shall provide a topographic survey for park site at a scale not to exceed 1” = 20’. Survey limits shall extend a minimum of 50 feet beyond the perimeter of the required project area. Horizontal and vertical datum to be an assumed system with a benchmark properly identified within the project limits and tied to physical features. Mapping must adequately depict existing surface features, drainage facilities, underground utility services, and existing surface treatments. Contours should be established at two-feet contour intervals for design purposes with spot grades at high
points, low points, and breaks in grade. A digital copy of the topographical survey should be provided in a commonly used format (i.e., AutoCAD, etc.).
Q25. Does the request for the “number of licensed professionals and staff available to contribute to the project” refer to staff selected for the project time availability for the project, or does it refer to the total number of licensed professionals and staff at the firm available for the project?
A. The “number of licensed professionals and staff available to contribute to the project” refers to the number of staff who will work on the project.
Q26. Will a team be disqualified if a respondent does not provide Errors and Omissions Liability Insurance in the proposal? Can respondents provide proof of additional insurance requirements upon award of the contract?
A. It is imperative that the Respondents provide Professional Liability and or Errors and Omission coverages.
The complete addendum is posted on the City of Hoboken website to ensure compliance.
There are no other changes to the RFP documents as part of this addendum.
ATTEST: Date: January 4, 2022
QPA Purchasing Agent
(Attach additional sheets if necessary)
Company Locations (If more than one, list principal location first)
Company Overview, Principal Activities, etc
Number of Employees
Job Classification(s) of Employees (including resumes of Manager and Supervisors as well as those
who will be assigned to provide services)
Year Company was Established
CITY OF HOBOKEN
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT OF ADDENDA
RFP – 21 – 36
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR
800 MONROE – RESILIENCY PARK CONCEPT DESIGN
The undersigned Bidder hereby acknowledges receipt of the following Addenda:
Addendum Number Date
Addendum # 1 January 4, 2022
No addenda were received:
(Name of Bidder)
(Signature of Authorized Representative)
(Print or Type)