Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/06/1990, 6 - REQUESTS FOR PROPOSALS (RFP'S) FOR LAGUNA LAKE PARK MASTER PLAN AND COMMUNITY/SENIOR CENTER STUDY. MEETING DATE: MINIp`i U City o� San WIS OBISp0 2-6-90 COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUMBER: FROM: Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director ° By: Greg Smith, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Requests for proposals (RFD's) for Laguna Lake Park Master Plan and Community/Senior Center Study. CAO RECOMMENDATION: Approve preliminary work scope and release of RFP's prepared by staff, and direct staff to proceed with preliminary consultant selection. DISCUSSION: The Council Work Program includes these two planning studies to be performed by consultants (Work Program excerpts attached). City staff has worked with the Park and Recreation Commission to prepare the attached requests for consultant proposals for the studies. The RFP's include a preliminary description of the work to be performed, and an outline of the method the city will use to select a consultant (or consultants). The RFP's make it clear that the studies are to be coordinated with each other, and with staff work on the update of the Parks and Recreation Element, to avoid duplication of effort. Consultants are encouraged to make proposals to perform both studies, for optimal coordination. Staff anticipates releasing the RFP's within a week after council approval, with screening and preliminary consultant selection by April 3, 1990. The contract would come to the council for final approval on April 17, with work to begin before May 1. The studies will be administered by the Community Development Department Senior Planner for open space and parks programs. There will also be policy guidance exercised by a steering committee for each study. Various public hearings will be scheduled before the consultants' recommendations are adopted as official city policy. SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS: An initial study of environmental impact will be done for each project after consultant work is completed. The consultants' preliminary studies are exempt I from environmental review requirements. The council has budgeted $50,000 for each study. In the RFPs, consultant fees are limited to $40,000; staff will reserve the remaining budgeted funds for contingencies and city expenses for administration of the studies. Attachments: Work Program Excerpts, Requests for Proposals /gtsd:comsr00/2.wp CO POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES COUNCIL WORK PROGRAM - LAGUNA LAKE MASTER PLAN (D-4) OBJECTIVE Develop a master plan to guide the future development and use of Laguna Lake property, including recommendations about appropriate uses, possible expansion, trail links, and environmental management of its land and water areas. PROGRAM SUMMARY .v The City wants to develop a plan for the future of Laguna Lake Park by working through the Parks and Recreation Commission, Planning Commission; and interested public. The plan should address appropriate uses (active versus passive), amount of ultimate development, possible expansion and/or buffer areas, trail links, and environmental management (for instance of hillside areas that support rare and endangered plants). The plan would also establish priorities for refurbishments, improvements and maintenance as necessary.. 1 KEY MILESTONES TIME REQUIREMENTS BUDGET 1. Establish baseline 2 months (1) data on what presently exists _ and user profile. 2. Hire consultant. 3 months S 50,000 -� 3. Establish program for future use. 4 months i a 4. Develop concept plan, including 4 months phasing and cost estimate. 5. Adopt Laguna Lake Master Plan 2-4 months as a part of the update of the Parks and Recreation Element. .j 15-17 months S 50,000 STAFF WORK HOURS: 200 hours NOTES e f 1. The Community Development Department is presently preparing an update of the Parks and a Recreation Element and a new Open Space/Conservation element. This work program includes an inventory of all current City park facilities. A needs assessment is also being updated from the 1980 citywide survey that was completed as a part of the 1982 Parks and Recreation element. Addition of a detailed master plan for Laguna Lake is a logical part of this work program. OTHER FINANCIAL PLAN REFERENCES Management Team Objectives - Completion of General Plan Update (page B-50) Operating Programs - Community Development (pages D-71 through D-73) Capital Improvement Plan - Leisure, Cultural, and Social Services (page E-10) B-43 4 -V POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES n COUNCIL WORK PROGRAM - SENIOR CENTER/COMMUNITY BUILDING (D-2) `✓ • OBJECTIVE ® Prepare a demographic, siting and programming study to determine most appropriate site for a i. full service Senior Citizen Center. J Complete a needs assessment analysis to determine use patterns and compatibility of a Senior j Center within a general-use Community Center. J PROGRAM SUMMARY Study phase of a project to determine the most appropriate site for a full-service Senior Citizen Center and to determine if such a center is compatible within a general-use Community Center. This project will require inpur from the public as well as numerous Council Advisory { Bodies. This site determination study is included within the work scope of developing a Park and Recreation/Open Space Element for the General Plan update. To implement this study in a timely manner, a consultant should be hired to help with the effort. KEY MILESTONESTIME REQUIREMENTS BUDGET 1. Prepare work program and hire 2-3 months S 50,000 planning consultant. 2. Prepare, distribute, gather and 4-6 months tabulate community center needs F assessment questionnaire. 3. Solicit public input. 4-6 months 4. Prepare draft plan and exhibit for Park and Recreation Element 1-2 months i 11-17 months S 50,000 (1) STAFF WORK HOURS: 250 hours NOTES 1. This level of analysis was not included when a contract planner was hired to prepare the Park, Recreation and Open Space Element for the General Plan update. In that we have subsequently found that the Senior Citizen Center cannot be expanded at its current site and that the Recreation Center is programmed to maximum holding capacity, this study project would greatly enhance the final General Plan update product. OTHER FINANCIAL PLAN REFERENCES Managment Team Objectives - Completion of General Plan Update (page B-50) Operating Programs - Community Development (pages D-71 through D-73) Capitla Improvement Plan - Leisure, Cultural, and Social Services (page E-10) _i B-41 i ��illillllllllllllllllllll���������� ' � I III► city of sAn Ills OBISPO 990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo, CA 93403.8100 January 19, 1989 REQUEST-FOR CONSULTANT QUALIFICATIONS AND PROPOSALS fJ LAGUNA LAKE MASTER PLAN CONTACT PERSON: Randy Rossi (805) ' 549-7162 C� l� TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE I. INTRODUCTION 1 II. BACKGROUND 2 III. KEY POLICY ISSUES 4 IV. SCOPE OF WORK 5 V. BUDGET 7 VI. EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCEDURES 8 VII. PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE 9 VIII. PROPOSAL AND REVIEW SCHEDULE 9 IX. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS 9 �. I. INTRODUCTION The City of San Luis Obispo requests consultants to submit their qualifications and proposals to provide a plan for the future development and use of Laguna Lake property. The work covered by this Request for Qualifications and Proposals (RFQ/RFP) is: 1) Preparation of an preliminary study to determine the most appropriate uses for the Laguna Lake property. 2) Preparation of a Laguna Lake master plan which addresses: a. appropriate active .and passive recreational uses, landscaping, parking and associated uses b. amount of ultimate development c. possible expansion and/or buffer areas d. trail links e. environmental management (e.g. hillside areas that support rare and endangered plants) f. commercial development potential C' 3) Preparation of preliminary cost estimates Coordination with Concurrent Studies The Community Development Department is presently preparing an update of the Parks and Recreation Element and a new Open Space/Conservation element. The Laguna Lake Master Plan Study will be coordinated with these efforts. Particular emphasis will be placed on coordination with a concurrent study of City Community/Senior Center facilities as outlined in this RFP/RFQ package. The City will consider selecting the same consultant for both studies. Consultants should review the Community/Senior Center Study prior to submitting proposals for the Laguna Lake Master Plan. In the event that more than one consultant is chosen, coordination of efforts will be required. The intent of this study is to be an interactive process. Consultants are expected to be closely involved with the City in the development of policies which will help guide planning strategies. This will be accomplished thru a series of review �imeetings with a Steering Committee. c - ----- ------ Recreation Center CAL POLY i ' Senior Citizen Center Laguna Lake Park ; LAGUNA`ARE 1 R - - .f, .t Alnvom ' SCALE I'.3500, tl�f CITY LIMIT LINE------ city of san tUIS OBISPO VICINITY MAP 990 Palm Street/Post office Box Bt00•San Luis Obispo,CA 93403.9tt10 r T2d6 LAGUNA LAKE PARK O 1/Q MILE \ 0 \ \ \ \ %>> \\ - 17 , 1 PG&E TRANSMISSION LINES----4\q Kilk% ts I l l \ \ 1 \ 9\ \ I \ 1 r. ,♦ \ \ fit\ \\ \ \\ \ \ % L 1 t �. t ♦� \ ♦ \ \ \ \ J .'t \ \ . LrAGUNA.. LAKE ' .r•. `,--RESIDEN- `♦ \ \ \ \moi ♦ \ \ OPEN SPACE \\C TIALQom , PARKING \\ JR HI oso ti9 100 ♦♦♦ s 19! ELEM !� SC \ t LAGU GOLF C � o GOLF COQ IRSE N- CI Cv Of San IuIS OBISPO / p (Q -Q MITCHELL PARK CRIZEN S�CTR. 0 1020 40 80 J SANTA ROSA STREET MINI- THE INI- THE E ::•:..:..::=::= SENIOR'S PATIO TOT LOT OUTDOOR GAMES UJ . ^ i W W \ W V1 N L O p f!7 _ a v m FLAGPOLE O l I OSOS STREET SOP G1LV Of sari LUIS OBISPO ClrJ RECREATION - CENTER o ,is zs so RESIDENTIAL CITY EQUIPMENT YARD H _Q W U Ir F- ��. W y :�:'fie K•% :: :::;: SANTA ROSA STREET � Q� �0 CC.Ity o �m sari Luis oalspo -2- II. 2-II. BACKGROUND PARKS AND RECREATION ELEMENT In 1980, the City of San Luis Obispo began the first of a three part program in the development of a Parks and Recreation Element for the. City's General Plan. Part one (Technical Report I) , adopted August, 1980, was the first step toward developing a parks and recreation plan. It provided an inventory of all existing parks and recreation facilities in the city and set standards and means of application to accomplish the planning phase of the plan. It defined the needs for parks and recreation space, and facilities to satisfy current and projected demands. Part two (Technical Report II) , adopted March, 1981, applied the findings and standards from Technical Report I and proposed actions necessary for meeting parks and recreation needs within the city's growth boundaries for the future. LAGUNA LAKE PARK Laguna Lake Park is approximately 315 acres (including 176 acre lake) . The property was acquired in 1926, however most of the . current improvements were done in the early 19701s. The park is a large, semi-natural open space area emphasizing passive recreational activity.. Major activities include fishing, boating, picnicing, and passive strolling and duck feeding. The park also includes a fitness/par coursefor more active recreation. The area is commonly very windy and little wind screening exists. Through its history, Laguna Lake has served primarily as a wildlife habitat with little human interference. During the last several decades, the lake has rapidly undergone a transition. Currently, it is used for a combination of purposes. The northerly shore at its eastern end is used for relatively intense recreational activity. The remaining west half of the northerly shore is a relatively undisturbed wildlife habitat area.. The northwest end, which is primarily marsh, is a wildlife habitat area only slightly disturbed by coexisting cattle grazing. A boat launch ramp and pier were installed some years ago by the City for row boating, sailing,, windsurfing etc. . water is pumped from the lake by adjacent ranchers to irrigate pasture land during summer months. Despite these foreign incursions, Laguna_Lake's value as a wildlife preserve remains relatively undiminished. �% -3- According to conclusions developed in Technical Report One, a deficiency of district type park facilities exists within the Laguna Lake area and possible future annexations in the area would intensify the need for a developed district park. Based on existing development within the park, the ratio of passive to active space was 6:1 '(commonly accepted standards are (3 :1) ) . In addition to these ratios, other multiplier values such as population and landscape character were calculated in order to determine the most appropriate action in• the planning process of Laguna Lake Park. It was determined that a six to one ratio park of this size could provide ample active uses without - compromising its open character and intent. Technical Report Two recommended the development of more active facilities, but concentrated in defined areas so as to retain and develop large areas of natural and passive use areas. Among the various uses proposed included: 1. community building 2. tennis courts 3 . new park entry and parking along northeastern edge of park near Madonna Road 4. support games (e.g. , horseshoes, volleyball) S. swimming pool 6. ballfield (possibly lighted) 7. playground, path and picnic area redevelopment 8. develop lakeshore fishing and boat docks 9. explore purchaseof additional park land. 10. encourage private development of recreation facilities on adjacent property or parkland (e.g. , racquetball, rollerskating, RV park) There has been an on-going interest with the City and its residents as to how to best develop Laguna Lake Park. Recommendations from multi-purpose sports complexes to open space wildlife preserves have been debated throughout the Park's history. -4- �} III. KEY POLICY ISSUES U' Appropriate Uses The design will incorporate uses of the Laguna Lake property consistent with current community needs and preferences. In addition, the design should reflect uses compatible with existing physical/natural features (i.e. , habitat, topography, drainage, etc. ) . A proper balance of. active to passive recreational facilities should be maintained. The consultant will use, but not be limited to, existing information and recommendations. Ultimate Development The design may be illustrated in "phases" if necessary to show the optimum development of the facility. Expansion or Buffer Areas The -consultant will make recommendations for possible expansion and/or buffer areas for the park. For example, it may be determined that the acquisition of property around the east and north end of the lake is necessary to establish natural area for passive recreation use. In addition, it may be found that due to the windy conditions in this area, windrows of trees would be required to buffer ballfields. Trail Links The update of the Parks and Recreation Element will include a comprehensive trail network. Proposed and existing trails will connect neighborhoods, business districts, _parks, historic sites and open space preserves. For example, a proposal exists linking Laguna Lake Park to San Luis Obispo Creek via a Prefumo Creek trail. Trail access routes to and from Laguna Lake Park should be reflected in the final design of the Master Plan. Environmental Management Laguna Lake is a valued asset of the City, a valuable source of scenic -beauty and wildlife habitat. However, it is a fragile and intricate system of competing forces which could be destroyed or impaired if conscientious action is not taken to protect and enhance the lake. The Laguna Lake Management Program, adopted in 1982, identified common objectives for the long-term preservation and enhancement of the lake. The consultant will be required to use recommendations outlined in the Program in an effort to retain the natural qualities of Laguna Lake Commercial Development , The consultant will make recommendations for possible commercial support centers within or adjacent to the park. Consideration for public versus private alternatives should be addressed. �-l3 -5- IV. SCOPE OF WORK In summary, the work covered by this RFP/RFQ is: Lacuna ..Lake-Master- Plan: a) Preparation of an preliminary study to determine thei most appropriate use of the Laguna Lake Property. b) Complete Master Plan design work. c) Prepare an itemized preliminary cost estimate for the proposed facility.. Steering Group The City will establish a steering group who will be available for regular consultation by the design team, and the design consultant shall consult and review important design decisions with them regularly and, as necessary, with the City Council and/or it's advisory bodies. Phasinc of -work OThe City intends for this work to start in April. The tentative phasing and schedule is: Task Time -Allowed Work-Period Review/forum 1 - 2 days April 1990 Preliminary Study/Survey 2 months April-June 1990 and recommendations Review/forum 1 - 2 days June 1990 Draft Designs and 2 months June-August 1990 Preliminary Cost Estimates Review/forum 1 - 2 days August 1990 Final Design and 2 months August-Oct. 1990 Cost Estimates However, if it is not possible to firmly set a schedule for this work, the pre-proposal conference must proceed on the schedule C highlighted in section VIII. The City intends to. then complete the design and recommendations for the Laguna Lake Master Plan, Community/senior Center and Recreation Center as rapidly as is feasible. -6- 1 i The actual sequence and timing of the work tasks, except as specifically stated in this Scope of Work, shall be determined by the City as the work progresses. The design consultant shall not ' begin work on any task or subtask in this Scope of Work without prior authorization by the City. The City reserves the authority , to revise the sequence of any task or subtask, and/or delete any task or subtask at any time prior to authorizing the consultant to proceed on those tasks and subtasks. REQUIRED TASK: Participation in Advisory Forums The City will have a continuing series of review/forums which may include a number of Advisory Bodies that helped develop the concept plan. The steering committee may include representatives from the Community Development Department, Parks and Recreation Department, Parks and Recreation Commission, Planning Commission, Public Works Department, and park and recreation advocate and interest groups. Conference topics would be selected to be relevant to the project development. At individual design phases, the consultant maybe required to present their proposals to the City Council, Planning Commission, and/or Parks and Recreation Commission for review. At the City's option and direction, on a time and materials basis, the design consultant would participate in these • conferences at the onset of contract work and/or an individual design phase to review the concept plan .and design assumptions and, in consultation with the City, would refine the concept before proceeding with the design Work. TASK 1: Preliminary Study of Community Needs and. Preferences SUBTASK 1: Review of Adopted Plans and .Existing .Information The City will provide the consultant with any available information; however, the City does not warrant the accuracy or reliability of the existing information made available for review. The design consultant shall provide all necessary investigations and studies of the site and existing facilities required .for the final design. SUBTASK 2: Park User Survey An update of the 1980 Park User Survey shall be developed, distributed and evaluated to determine current community preferences. Results shall be submitted for the City's review prior to proceeding to the preliminary design. _/r' 0 SUBTASK 3 : Draft Policy Proposals The consultant shall develop a list of policy recommendations based on conclusions derived in subtasks 1 & 2, which shall be submitted for the City's review prior to proceeding to the preliminary design. TASK 2: Desian of Laguna Lake Master Plan .and Cost Estimates SUBTASK 1: Preliminary -Design, Preliminary design shall consist of approximately .35% completion of design, which shall be submitted for the City's review and approval prior to proceeding to final design, including any further information gathering required, and preparation of preliminary drawing showing current and proposed recreational facilities, buffer areas/acquisition areas, layout of utilities. SUBTASK 2: Preliminary Cost. Estimates The design consultant shall prepare preliminary approximate cost estimates showing construction and/or acquisition costs for Gimplementation of the plan. SUBTASK 3: Final Design Final design shall consist of the preparation of detailed working drawings of the proposed facility. These drawings and specifications shall cover, as a minimum, comprehensive requirements for site features, habitat enhancement, grading and drainage, plantings, utilities and lighting. Drawings and specifications shall be in sufficient detail for requesting public bids for the construction. The Design Consultant shall provide the City with a complete original set of contract drawings, drafted on standard City size drawing paper (mylar) . V. BUDGET Services will be billed on the basis of actual time and materials. In no event shall the maximum total charges exceed $40,000.00 (forty thousand dollars) . The contractor shall submit invoices monthly and inform the Project Manager for the City when 75% (seventy-five percent) of the maximum total charges are reached in order to give the City advanced notice of approaching C the maximum budget. A budget should be included in the proposal which itemizes fee schedules and expected hours of work with the completion of project phases. 6/6 -s- J VI. OUALIFICATIONS/PROPOSALS EVALUATION. AND SELECTION PROCEDURES Initial Screening To be eligible for further consideration, consultant's qualifications and proposals must meet the following criteria upon submission. Failure to meet these will result in disqualification. 1) Qualifications/Proposals must comply with the submission requirements set forth in Section IX of this RFP/RFQ. 2) At least one responsible principal member or the consultant team must have current professional registration which allows the practice of landscape architecture in the State of California. Preliminary Evaluation of Oualifications/Proposals Qualifications/Proposals which pass the foregoing initial review will be evaluated by a panel of City staff. The members of the evaluation panel will be announced at the pre-proposal conference. Each panel member will score each of the consultant's qualifications. The scores of each panel member J will then be totaled. The consultants with the three highest scores will be selected for further evaluation. Consultant's Qualifications will be evaluated on the following criteria: Distribution of Points 1) Proposal Quality & Responsiveness to RFP 10 2) Consultant Team Experience 20 3) Team's ability to carry out required work 20 4) . Understanding of the project 25 5) Project Approach and Organization 25 Total Points 100 Final Evaluation- of Oualifications/Proposals The consultants with the three highest scores will be invited to present their qualifications/proposals for final review by City staff. The consultant's qualifications will be re-ranked with a point distribution as highlighted in the Preliminary Evaluation. Contract Award The City anticipates negotiating a time and materials contract with the consultant scoring the highest in the foregoing interview process. If the parties cannot reach agreement, the City will negotiate with the second highest. scoring consultant, and may proceed in succession to the third finalist on the same basis. M -9- VII. PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE & PROJECT REPORTS Questions pertaining .to this. request for qualifications/proposals will be answered at a pre--proposal conference to be held from 3:00 to 5:00 p.m. , March 5, 1990, in the Community Development Department Conference Room, City Hall, San Luis Obispo. At this meeting the City staff will have available maps, staff reports and other background documents relevant to this project. Any questions arising after the conference should- be directed to Randy Rossi, Long Range Planner (805) 549-7162 VIII. PROPOSAL AND REVIEW SCHEDULE Task Date. Issuance of RFP/RFQ February 12 Pre-proposal conference, 3 - 5 p.m. March 5 Conference Room, Community Development Proposal submission deadline 5 p.m. March 23 Preliminary Qualifications March 26-30 and Proposal Evaluations Final Evaluation/Interviews April 2 Consultant selection April 3 IX. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS Qualification/Proposals should be_ addressed to: Randy Rossi, Long Range Planner Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo P.O. Box 8100 San Luis Obispo, CA 93403 Submission Deadline In order to be considered, qualifications and proposals must be received in the Community Development Department office, P.O. Box 8100, 990 Palm St. , San Luis Obispo, CA 93403., by .5:00 p.m. , Friday, March 23, 1990. _10- Number of Conies Required Five copies, numbered from 1 to 5 on cover sheet. Format An 8-1/2" x 11" format is prefer-red and- should not be greatly exceeded in any case. Letter format is quite acceptable. Elaborate firm brochures are not encouraged. Where readability dictates,. diagrams such as organization charts, work schedules, and flow charts may be larger, but they should 'be- submitted as fold-outs not exceeding 11" x 171l. Clarity and conciseness are desired and will be considered in evaluating submissions. Materials should be in the order set below for the inclusions, the first page of each section being titled ( Item A Item B , etc. ) at the top center. Documents should either: (1) be fully paged and contain as the first sheet a table of contents that identifies the location of each inclusion, or (2) be tab-indexed by the corresponding letters used below ("A", "B", etc. ) . Inclusions: Qualifications/Proposals must include the following: A. A complete list of the firms and individuals comprising the team, with the prime consultant listed first, and the balance of team members listed by discipline. Each entry should name the firm or individuals as they exist as •legal business entities, the business address where the work would be done, name and phone number of a contact person, and the relevant California professional license(s) held by the firm or individual. B. A summary of the team's capabilities, including specifically stating the size of each firm on the team and listing the services that each member provides. that may be needed for this project. C. A comparison of final cost estimates and actual contract bids for projects similar to the proposed development in which the prime consultant had primary or significant responsibility, for the design. Include the relevant estimate and bid dates. D. A team organization chart for the proposed work and a list of the individuals proposed to carry out the work, their titles, specific roles, and time availability during the work. E. A description of the experience of the key individuals proposed to do the work for each team firm on: initial study of park requirements, design of park facilities, preliminary cost estimates, and other projects or aspects you believe relevant to the proposed work.. Identify the project manager's experience and i �-' interaction with advisory groups (Resumes may be included, but should follow th' s focused. description) . F. A list of the related projects cited in Item E, above, identifying the client, naming a reference for each project, and stating the phone number and address of the person named as the reference. G. A preliminary plan and schedule for providing the services called for in the Scope of Work. These should. be based on the tentative schedule stated in the Scope of Work. This item should also describe work plan adjustments that would be required if the City changes the work phasing as discussed in the Scope of Work. H. A general estimate of person-hours, correlated to discipline, general activities identified in your proposed work plan, and job classification for each task and subtask in the Scope of Work. I. Fee schedules for each firm on the team and all job classes proposed to be involved. in the work: C st:rfplag.wp �p-a10 C ��IIdIIIII�IIIIIII8111111II������������IIIIIIIillll l�� II cityo san lolls OBISPO ,­­,, 990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo, CA 93403.8100 January 19, 1990 REQUEST FOR CONSULTANT QUALIFICATIONS AND PROPOSALS COMMUNITY/SENIOR CENTER STUDY CONTACT PERSON: Randy Rossi, Long Range Planner (805) 549-7162 I. INTRODUCTION A. SUMMARY The City of. San Luis Obispo requests consultants to submit their qualifications and proposals to conduct a study which evaluates the need for an expanded program of one or more community centers and one or more full-service senior citizens' centers. The study will address at least_ the following issues.: . 1. Indoor Recreation Program Needs Assessment (Including demographic studies and surveys) 2. Central vs. Neighborhood Centers 3. Feasibility of Joint Use Community/Senior Center 4. I.nterrelationship with Other Planning Studies 5. Alternative Site Evaluation B. COORDINATION WITH OTHER STUDIES The Community Development Department is presently preparing an update of the Parks and Recreation Element and a new Open Space/Conservation Element. The Community/Senior Center Study will be included within the overall work program for the update, and will involve input from thp- public as well as numerous Council Advisory Bodies. The Community/Senior Center Study will be prepared concurrently with the preparation of a master plan for the City's Laguna Lake Park. The two projects will be closely coordinated, and the city will consider selecting one consultant to perform both studies. Consultants should review the RFP/RFQ for the Laguna Lake Park Master Plan prior to submitting proposals for the Community/Senior Center, and proposals should specifically address coordination of items land 5 above with the park plan. . C -----' -------` � 1 Recreation Center ---- .•I ` eK rwr I I Sefiior Citizen Cent( f Laguna Lake Park LAM • I . ... ' 1 �aagllf © I I � I I fN SCALE t,.35W II w CITY LIMIT LINE:----- City o f ill`I,, VICINITY MAP san lues oslspo 990 Palm Street/Post Office SOS 8100•San Luis Obispo.CA 93403.8100 �72. MITCHELL PARK CIITIZEN'SIOCTR. 0 10 M 40 so SANTA ROSA STREET ` MINI- THE E ....................::: .•. ..... ........ SENIOR'S PATIO TOT LOT • OUTDOOR GAMES zA ' r I- • ^ i W ILI ILI 1 W N � N 0 N ' U a � In 4D FLAGPOLE. 0 OSOS STREET o OP city Of San hits OBISp0 �-z9 C (ITL-1 RECREATION CENTER 0 ILS 25 50 RESIDENTIAL CITY EOUIPMENT YARD cc uj C ;:.!..���:.:.:X:X11::•: O UX. ............... SANTA ROSA STREET ®P P� �O C.ILV Of ea%:L San LUIS 0131SpO MILE LAGUNA LAKE PARK 0 1/4I I i t I \ '•\ \\ '?mac$. \ � 000 PG&E TRANSMISSION LINES-4q / \\ If N \ts 1 1 1 1 1 \ \ \ ` JTb \ RESIDEN- TIAL `OJPEN SPACE \/ O79i'-_t'TiSii W�'Ai?51.�'T�y,�.....L�.9"'_:. �1 ♦ , \ / ei•_�r �T. PARKING \ / JR HI \ S � \ L '�l 1 9�1 SC LEM C GOOLFLFLAGUCO'IRSE N® CI[yO A•. s Xn Luis 0131spo I'rli Page 2 II. BACKGROUND A._ PARKS AND RECREATION ELEMENT The city's current Parks and Recreation Element was adopted in 1982. However, the element does not indoor recreation programs or facilities. A detailed parks and recreation survey was completed in conjunction with the current element, and data from that survey is still available. The survey was compiled in 1980, however, and it will be necessary to obtain new data to accurately represent current community needs and Preferences. B. EXISTING FACILITIES The city currently owns and operates three indoor recreation O facilities, and leases numerous others from the local school district for various programs. Santa Rosa Street Recreation Center: 12,776 square- foot wood frame building originally constructed as a USO facility in the 1940s. This facility includes a small gymnasium/multipurpose room and several smaller meeting -rooms. Plans for a $410,000 renovation of this facility have been put on hold pending completion of the Community/Senior Center study. Mitchell Park Senior Center: 4,878 square-foot senior center with a .1,600 square-foot assembly area (103 occupant capacity) and smaller meeting rooms. The city is completing a remodeling project on this facility.. The facility appears inadequate to serve more senior users, or to accommodate any type of senior meal program. Meadow Park Community Center: 3,281 square-foot center located in a neighborhood park. The multi- purpose assembly room has a maximum occupancy of 78 persons. i� Page 3 II. THE COM (UNITY San Luis Obispo is a distinct community of about 41,000 people. It is the County Seat and the. focus of government employment within the county. California Polytechnic State University is the community's largest employer and the university student population of approximately 18,000 has a strong influence. According to the most recent U.S. Census information (1980) , population ages of 65. and over account for 11.4 percent of the total population. III. REY .POLICY ISSUES 1. INDOOR RECREATIONNEEDSASSESSMENT C'! Are existing facilities adequate to meet the needs of the city's current and future population? What level of additional facilities will beneeded to provide for population growth and/or new programs? What additional demographic or survey information, if any, is needed to make an accurate assessment? 2. CENTRAL VS. NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS Should the city focus efforts on expanding the existing recreation center (or establishing a new, large center) , or on providing one or more additional neighborhood centers? 3. FEASIBILITY OF JOINT USE CENTER Will it be feasible to operate programs for seniors using a multi-purpose center, or will a single purpose center be needed? 4. INTERRELATIONSHIP WITH OTHER STUDIES Can meaningful recommendations regarding recreation centers be made prior to decisions on city growth limits and annexation proposals which are currently pending? O 6-az Page 4 5. ALTERNATIVE SITE EVALUATION Which sites, including Laguna Lake Park and other city- owned sites, might be suitable_ locations for new recreation center facilities? IV. SCOPE OF WORK In summary, the scope of work covered by this RFP/RFQ is: a) Preparation of recommendations. for appropriate types of senior and/or community recreation facilities. b) Evaluation of appropriate sites for the facilities recommended. Steering Group The City will establish a steering group who will be available for regular consultation by the design team, and the design consultant shall consult and review important design decisions with them regularly and, as necessary, with the City Council and/or it's advisory bodies. Phasind of Work The City intends for this work to start in April. The tentative phasing and schedule is: Task Time Allowed Work Period Review/forum 1 - 2 days April 1990 Detailed workscope, study/ 2 months April-June 1990 survey and recommendations Review/forum 1 - 2 days June 1990 Preliminary policy 2 months June-August 1990 recommendations Review/forum 1 - 2 days August 1990 Final recommendations 2 months August-Oct. 1990 and site evaluations Page 5 However, if it is not possible to firmly set a schedule for this work, the pre-proposal conference must proceed on the schedule highlighted in section VIII. The City intends to then complete the recommendations for the Community/Senior Center study and design for the Laguna Lake MasterPlan as rapidly as is feasible.. Tasks and subtasks listed below are representative ones. The proposals submitted by consultants may provide for additional tasks, or for a different sequence or organization of the work indicated. The proposals must indicate in detail how the work included in Phase I will be accomplished, and provide a general indication of how the work in subsequent phases will be accomplished. The actual sequence and timing of the work tasks, except as specifically stated in this Scope of Work, shall be determined by the City as the work progresses. The design consultant shall not begin work on any task or subtask in this Scope of Work without prior authorization by the City. The City reserves the authority to revise the sequence of any task or subtask, and/or delete any task or subtask at any time prior to authorizing the consultant to proceed on those tasks and subtasks. REQUIRED TASK: Participation in Advisory Forums The City will have a continuing series of advisory conferences which may include a number of Advisory Bodies that helped develop the concept plan. The steering committee may include representatives from the Community Development Department, Parks and Recreation Department, Parks and Recreation Commission, Public Works, and park and recreation advocate and interest groups. Conference topics would be selected to be relevant to the project development. The consultant may be required to present their policy recommendations to the City Council, Planning Commission, and/or Parks and Recreation Commission for review. At the City's option and direction, on a time and materials basis, the design consultant would participate in these conferences at the onset of contract work and/or an individual design phase to review the: concept plan and design assumptions and, in consultation with the City, would refine the concept C, before proceeding with the design work. Page 6 A. PHASE I TASK 1: Preliminary Research Subtasks: -Review existing adopted policy documents provided by city. -Direct city staff in compilation of indoor facilities and use level inventory. -Compile preliminary assessment of indoor recreation programs and facilities which would be needed for senior and general recreation programs. TASK 2: Sensitivity Analysis Subtasks: U -Evaluate sensitivity of decision making processes to various demographic scenarios (e.g. , annexation alternatives, population growth assumptions) . -Determine which critical policy decisions, if any, can be made by the city without significant additional demographic and/or cost information. -Identify policy decisions which must be made -by the city in order to complete or expedite future phases of the studies. -Evaluate the extent to which the Laguna Lake Park Master Plan and Senior/Community Center Study are interdependent upon each other. -Evaluate the extent to which the Laguna and Senior/Community Center studies are interdependent with pending revisions to the General Plan Land Use Element and Parks and Open Space Element. -Preliminary evaluation of feasibility of operating senior programs from one or more multi-purpose centers. i s 0 Page 7 TASK 3: Information Needs Analysis Subtasks: -What additional demographic data is needed for the studies? -How can needed data be obtained (user surveys, State Department of Finance estimates, etc._) ? -Is it necessary or desirable to coordinate surveys or special demographic research with similar studies of a broader scope, in conjunction with the Parks and. Open Space Element revisions? TASK 4 : Detailed Workscope \l Subtasks• �J -Prepare a detailed work program for all phases. B. PHASE II TASK 1: Demographic Studies, Surveys -Design and conduct . TASK 2: Detailed Research and Analysis -Detailed evaluation of alternatives for senior/multi- use center or centers. -Recommend type and number of centers needed to meet community needs. -Prepare site selection criteria. -Prepare preliminary estimates of acquisition, construction, and operation costs. TASK 3: Coordinate and Review Preliminary Recommendations with City Council and Staff. 0 J Page 8 C. PHASE III TASK 1: Final Recommendations and .Products Subtasks: -Final recommendations and products. -Site inventory, ranking. -Cost estimates for acquisition, construction, operation. -Policy statement and exhibits for inclusion in revised Parks and Open Space Element. V. BUDGET Services will be billed on the basis of actual time and materials. In no event shall the maximum total charges exceed $40,000. 00 (forty thousand dollars) . The contractor shall submit invoices monthly and inform the Project Manager for the City when 75% (seventy-five percent) of the maximum total charges are reached in order to give the City advanced notice of approaching the maximum budget. A budget should be included in the proposal which itemizes fee schedules and expected hours of work with the completion of project phases. VI. OUALIFICATIONS/PROPOSALS EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCEDURES Initial Screening To be eligible for further consideration, consultant's qualifications and proposals must meet the following criteria upon submission. Failure to meet these will result in disqualification. 1) Qualifications/Proposals must comply with the submission requirements set forth in Section IX of this RFP/RFQ. L-� 0 Page 9 Preliminary Evaluation of Oualifications/Proposals Qualifications/Proposals which pass the foregoing initial review will be evaluated by a panel of City staff. The members of the evaluation panel will be announced at the pre-proposal conference. Each panel member will score each. of the consultant's qualifications. The scores of each panel member will then be totaled. The consultants with the three highest scores will be selected for further evaluation. Consultant's Qualifications will be evaluated on the following criteria: Distribution of Points 1) .Proposal Quality & Responsiveness to RFP 10 2) Consultant Team Experience 20 3) Team's ability to carry out required work 20 4) Understanding of the project 25 5) Project Approach and Organization 25_ Total Points 100 Final Evaluation of Oualifications/Proposals The consultants with the three highest scores will be invited to present their qualifications/proposals for final review by City staff. The consultant's qualifications will be re-ranked with a point distribution as highlighted in the Preliminary Evaluation. Contract Award The City anticipates negotiating a time and materials contract with the consultant scoring the highest in the foregoing interview process. If the parties cannot reach agreement, the City will negotiate with the second highest scoring consultant, and may proceed in succession to the third finalist on the same basis. G (o•3� Page 10 VII. PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE 6 PROJECT REPORTS Questions pertaining to this request for qualifications/proposals will be answered at a pre-proposal conference to be held from 3 : 00 to 5:00 p.m. , March 5, 1989, in the Community Development Department Conference Room, City Hall, San Luis Obispo. At this meeting the City staff will have available maps, staff reports and other background documents relevant to this project. Any questions arising after the conference should be directed to Randy Rossi, Long Range Planner (805) 549-7170 VIII. PROPOSAL AND REVIEW SCHEDULE Task Date Issuance of RFP/RFQ February 12 �5 Pre-proposal conference, 3 - 5 p.m. March 5 Conference Room, Community Development Proposal submission deadline - 5 p.m. March 23 Preliminary Qualifications March 26-30 and Proposal Evaluations Final. Evaluation April 2 Consultant selection April 3 I%. SUBMISSION REOUIREI�IENTS Qualification/Proposals should be addressed to: Randy Rossi, Long Range Planner Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo P.O. Box 8100 San Luis Obispo, CA 93403 �o'3S 0 Page 11 Submission .Deadline In order to be considered, qualifications and proposals must be received in the Community Development Department office, P.O. Box 8100, 990 Palm St. , .San Luis Obispo, CA 93403 , by 5: 00 Friday. March 23 , 1989.. Number of Copies Required Five copies, numbered from 1 to 5 on cover sheet. Format An 8-1/2" x 11" format is preferred and should not be greatly exceeded in any case. Letter format is quite acceptable. Elaborate firm brochures are not encouraged. Where readability O dictates, diagrams such as organization charts, work schedules, and flow charts may be larger, but they should be submitted as fold-outs not exceeding ill' x 1711 . Clarity and conciseness are desired and will be considered in evaluating submissions. Materials should be in the order set below for the inclusions, the first page of each section being titled ("Item All, "Item B", etc. ) at the top center. Documents should either: (1) be fully paged and contain as the first sheet a table of contents that identifies the location of each inclusion, or (2) be tab-indexed by the corresponding letters used below ("A", "B", etc. ) . Inclusions: Qualifications/Proposals must include the following: A. A complete list of the firms and individuals comprising the team, with the prime consultant listed first, and the balance of team members listed by discipline. Each entry should name the firm or individuals as they exist as legal business entities, the business address where the work would be done, name and phone number of a contact person, and the relevant California professional license(s) held by the firm or individual. B. A summary of the team's capabilities, including specifically stating the size of each firm on the team and listing the services that each member provides that may be needed for this project. �-jG Page 12 C. A comparison of final cost estimates and actual contract bids for projects similar to the proposed development in which the prime consultant had primary or significant responsibility for the design. Include the relevant estimate and bid dates. D. A team organization chart for the proposed work and a list of the individuals proposed to carry out the work, their titles, specific roles, and time availability during the work. E. A description of the experience of the key individuals proposed to do the work for each team firm on the tasks and subtasks, and other projects or aspects you believe. relevant to the proposed work. Identify the project manager's experience and interaction with advisory groups (Resumes may be included, but should follow this focused description) . F. A list of the related projects cited in Item E, above, identifying the client, naming a reference for each project, and stating the phone number and address of the person named as the reference. G. A preliminary plan and schedule for providing the services called for in the Scope of Work. These should be based on the tentative schedule stated in the Scope of Work. This item should also describe work plan adjustments that would be required if the City changes the work phasing as discussed in the Scope of Work. H. A general estimate of person-hours, correlated to discipline, general activities identified in your proposed work plan, and job classification for each task and subtask in the Scope of Work. I. Fee schedules for each firm on the team and all job classes proposed to be involved in the work. gtsd:srlag001.wp