HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/21/1990, C-12 - REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR THE RODRIGUEZ ADOBE. MEETING DATE:
� n111�Ipn ��11i city of sar, .dI S OBISPO - - o
Oft A COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUMBMCqZ
FROM: Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director a
By: Jeanette Di Leo, Long Range Planner
SUBJECT: Request for proposals for the Rodriguez Adobe.
CAO RECOMMENDATION:
Direct staff to issue the Rodriguez Adobe request for
proposal.
DISCUSSION:
The Capital Impovement Plan includes $25,000 to restore the
Rodriguez Adobe for re-use. It is anticipated that
restoration of the adobe will be in the range of $300,000.
Under the 1989-1991 Financial Plan the City Council allocated
$25,000 towards restoration of the Rodriguez Adobe. It was
anticipated that the $25,000 would be used to augment
restoration funds received from grants, public donations, and
monies from the Edna-Islay developer. The city was
unsuccessful in obtaining a state grant for adobe restoration.
At this time staff is requesting that the $25,000 allocated
for construction and restoration be used to study the
potential uses of the Rodriguez Adobe and restoration costs
associated with proposed uses. Once the study is completed
the City will have information available to determine what
costs are associated with restoration and what uses within the
abode are feasible. After the study is completed staff
anticipates again applying for grants for restoration in
addition to obtaining monies from the Edna-Islay developer and
public donations.
City staff has worked with the Park and Recreation Commission
and the Cultural Heritage Committee to prepare the attached
request for consultant proposal (RFP) . Staff anticipates
releasing the RFP within a week after council approval.
Screening and preliminary consultant selection would occur
during October, 1990. A request for contract authorization
should come to the City Council in November, 1990, with the
consultant beginning work in late November or early December,
1990.
The study will be administered by the Community Development
Department's Long Range Planner. The scope of work includes
evaluating the degree of restoration, reinforcement, and
renovation necessary for the structure to conform with safety
and code requirements, a use assessment, and cost estimates
for renovation scenarios.
The RFP does not include a park design for that area
OW City of San LUIS OBISPO
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Page 2 -- Rodriguez Adobe
surrounding the adobe (e.g. , the one acre lot the adobe would
be located on) . Since it was not known how the facility would
be used a design for the park appeared premature. In
addition, the budget for the project would need to be
augmented if a design for the park is included.
FISCAL MALT:
- Under the Capital Improvement Plan $25,000 has been budgeted
for renovation of the Rodriguez Adobe (see page E-10 of the
1989-1991 Financial Plan and Approved 1989-1990 Budget) . In
the RFP, consultant fees are limited to $18,000; staff will
reserve the remaining budget funds for contingencies and city
expenses for administration of the study. If options
identified in the Rodriguez Adobe study are implemented,
additional monies will need to be budgeted for environmental
review. The consultant's preliminary analysis is exempt from
environmental review requirements.
ALTERNATIVES:
Other options are available to the council in addition to the
recommended action:
A. Direct staff to revise the Rodriguez Adobe RFP to include
a design for the proposed paik surrounding the adobe
(covering roughly 1 acre) . Additional monies would
need to be budgeted if this option is pursued.
B. If changes to the scope of work are proposed, staff
recommends that proposed changes be referred to the Parks
and Recreation Commission and the Cultural Heritage
Committee for their comments.
C. Maintain the $25,000 appropriated under the Capital
Improvement Plan for construction purposes and have staff
pursue state grants for renovation without completing a
study of the adobe's potential uses and the costs
associated with renovation.
Attachments: Rodriguez Adobe RFP
1
a
O
August 24; 1990
REQUEST FOR CONS TANT OUALMCAIJON4 AND pROPOSAi_S
RODRIGUEZ ADOBE RESTORATION
O
CONTACT PERSON: Jeanette Di Leo, Long Range Planner
(805) 549-7162
O
L- -3
I \
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
L INTRODUCTION 1
II. BACKGROUND 1
M. SCOPE OF WORK 2
IV. BUDGET 6
V. QUALIFICATIONS/PROPOSALS EVALUATION
AND SELECTION PROCEDURES 6
VI. PROPOSAL AND REVIEW SCHEDULE 7
VII. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS 7
SUBJECT: Request for Qualifications and Proposals to conduct a restoration
and rehabilitation study of the Rodriguez Adobe.
L DURODUCTION
The City of San Luis Obispo requests consultants to submit their qualifications and
proposals to conduct a restoration and rehabilitation study of the Rodriguez Adobe. The
work covered by this Request for Qualifications and Proposals (RFQ/RFP) will include:
1) Public use alternatives;
2) An engineering feasibility study; and
3) Conceptual cost estimates.
Consultants with qualifications in structural civil engineering, architectural design and
historic restoration (adobe specialty) are required. The City prefers a team approach
with the fewest number of individuals necessary to accomplish this work.
H. BACKGROUND
THE RODRIGUEZ ADOBE
The Rodriguez Adobe is located within the Edna-Islay Specific Plan area adjacent to the
Southern Pacific Railroad tracks near the base of Islay Hill in the City of San Luis
Obispo. The adobe is clearly visible from Highway 227 (lower Broad Street) across from
the entrance to the county airport. It is the only remaining adobe in the Edna Valley
region and one of only!about.a dozen adobes that have survived locally. The Rodriquez
Adobe is believed to have been built about 1856 at the northeastern edge of the Corral
de Piedra Rancho. The walls are one foot, ten inches thick, and the building retains all
of its original door and window locations and dimensions. The roof is a latemission
style hip roof, but quite high and steep compared to others.
The Rodriguez Adobe appears to have been occupied as a residence continuously since
its construction almost one hundred and forty years ago. For its age, the seven room,
rectangular (23 by 60 feet) structure is in good condition, especially compared to the fate
of most adobes where roof and wall protection was lost at an earlier date. Its weathered
wood siding gives an appearance of advancing deterioration, but in fact this siding is
credited with protecting the highly erosive adobe beneath. The walls in other areas, both
inside and out, have a plaster layer which has also afforded protection.
The proposed restoration would restore the adobe walls where they have deteriorated and
give them permanent protection from future weathering. . The roof would be fully
restored in a manner determined by architectural historians to be appropriate and
consistent with its original appearance. Windows, doors and the surrounding porch would
O1
likewise be restored as appropriate. Care would be taken to assure that the restoration
is (1) consistent with the guidelines of the Secretary of the Interior, (2) compatible with
and complementary to the developing residential area nearby, and (3) done in a manner
that can be readily and economically maintained.
It is proposed that the building be located on a landscaped site of one acre. A tentative
tract map depicting the areas subdivision and the creation of the adobe site has been
submitted for city review (see Figure 2). For study purposes, this map should be used
to evaluate the adobe's future setting and neighborhood context. Views of the adobe
from Highway 227 and surrounding areas (e.g, Islay Hdl and the more distant Santa
Lucia Range) should be protected. The site and restored adobe could be used for low
intensity uses such as educational, reading and relaxation, or fairly high intensity uses
such as weddings, receptions, recreation, or a meeting hall. The restoration itself could
become a educational activity for the local community and/or students who may
participate and observe traditional adobe construction techniques on site during the
restoration.
III. SCOPE. OF WORK
Phasing of Work
The City intends for this work to start in November, 1990. The tentative phasing and
schedule is
mak_ Time Allowed Work Period
Kick-off Meeting 1 - 2 days November, 1990
Review existing information 2 weeks December, 1990
Evaluate public use
alternatives 2 weeks December, 1990
Meeting to discuss
alternatives 1 - 2 days December, 1990
Draft restoration
report, conceptual
cost estimates,
and recommendations 1 month January, 1991
City/public review 1 month February, 1991
Meeting to discuss
draft report 1 - 2 days February, 1991
Final report 2 weeks March, 1991
2
fv rim , ,Fri
� A
J
1
City or FIGURE
i�
i
\
w
lea
all
,a a
d
10
cu
LLI
rr^^
cc
U3
L� \ CW.V t U ttYtttTtiP:i
11 \
f � !
•a f'7 � • , '� ���;' ill t �r ', l yt �• 'i'' ,
��ll►'hlHl'F�;1111 Illuil i1c I��e ••S�//.
KITCHEN Li
annm�NmrgNllnU�ilfh!! IIIUIIIIIIlIIIIIIIIlIIIIIIUPIPIGIIIIIIIIRIIUIIUIy��l�
e • i •/'
,
_ Innnnummnn� G SijTftiQ MAI�7rER
KOOM SEPIZoom
-' BEOR Roo
Qnlmun Ni1u911 mlil�IUllllnllf IInq�IWIU01NACflf�NUllglIlll►I AWIDIItC
e
d.y a�^,'�'J�' 11 _ •f ...moi 7. � )-•
•ice� �1.. )y.:� y \ •, �. �.t - ♦. ..'
�_ �. J.r.i to •'- 1- `�� :'ri 1!_ s � � ,-� > � 'w
The City reserves the right 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.
The City desires that the project be completed in a professional and thorough manner,
rather than within a specific time frame. Nonetheless, it is expected that final documents
will be completed within four months of the award of an agreement for services so as
to permit timely public review, approvals, and application for grants.
TASK 1: En 'veering Feasibility Study
Subtask 1: Review 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 required for the restoration.
Subtask 2: Evaluate Public Use Alternatives
The consultant will evaluate and discuss the degree of restoration/reinforcement and
renovation necessary to conform with safety and code requirements (seismic, fire, etc.)
for various levels of public use. The city, with input from the consultant, shall --
determine what uses will be evaluated.
The consultant would evaluate the degree of restoration and renovation that would
be required for proposed uses. The following are examples of the type of uses that
would be evaluated.
1. A child care center for the local community;
2. A public facility for meetings, weddings, or receptions;
3. A local recreation or educational facility;
4. An information center or museum; or,
5. A storage facility for the neighborhood 'and/or neighborhood park.
Subtask 3: Restoration Criteria
The consultant will at a minimum assess restoration and renovation in terms of the
following:
i
3
Ca. Removal of non-historic elements and additions;
b. Stabilization required to resist seismic forces and to correct structural
deficiencies;
c. Isolation of the walls and footings from contact with the soil and the
capillary action of ground water;
d. Repair, restoration, and protection of interior and exterior walls;
e. Protection and stabilization of the upper portions of the walls (perimeter
at roof line);
L Complete restoration of the roof;
g. Replacement of floors and ceilings as necessary, and,
h. The addition of .necessary mechanical systems (e.g., electrical, plumbing,
etc.).
TASK 2: Conccptual Cost estimates.
The consultant will provide conceptual cost estimates. The estimates shall address the
n work required and cost associated with:
�J a. Basic restoration and rehabilitation; and,
b. Any supplemental code/safety renovation requirements for various use
alternatives.
TASK 3: Work Product
Subtask 1: Draft Re9ort
The draft report shall include, but is not limited to:
a. Documentation of.the adobe's existing condition (e.g., site environment and
structural condition). Conditions would include documentation of the
structure's roofs, walls, ceilings, foundations, chimneys, windows and doors,
hardware, woodwork, porch, and mechanical systems. This analysis would
also include a report of fabric analysis, including, but not limited to, paint
analysis and adobe brick and mortar analysis. Photography, measured
drawings, or other appropriate means of documentation will be used.
b. Identification and analysis of significant material,. structural, natural,
environmental, human factors, or other constraints/concerns affecting
Opreservation of the structure. Constraints would be assessed in terms of
4
structural as well as use constraints. This section would include
recommended measures and estimated cost to mitigate said
constraints/concerns.
C. Recommended steps, cost estimates, and priorities/phasing for stabilization,
preservation, and restoration, and a discussion of the -basis for such
recommendations.
d. Recommendations for future care and use of the adobe, further studies that
should be conducted. The recommendations should include required
maintenance, landscaping limitations, and other requirements.
Recommendations regarding the future use of the adobe would be based
on the renovation and maintenance required for that use, the cost involved,
and the use's general compatibility with the Edna Islay neighborhood.
The draft report shall be submitted to the City for review prior to proceeding to the
final report. The consultant shall submit 5 (five) copies of the report in draft form
for City staff review and comment. The consultant shall amend the draft report as
may be necessitated.
Subtask 2: Final RcRort
One camera-ready, fully reproducible copy of the final approved report shall be
submitted within 10 (ten) working days of the consultant receiving the city's comments
on the draft report. —
TASK 4: OPTIONAL TASK Participation in Advisory Forums
The City will have a continuing series of advisory meetings. Meetings may include
representatives from the Community Development Department, Cultural Heritage
Committee, Parks and Recreation Department, and historical preservation advocates
and interest groups. At the City's option and direction, on a time and materials basis,
the consultant would participate in these meetings. Topics would be relevant to the
project's development.
After completion of the study, the consultant may be required to present aspects of
the report to the City Council, Planning Commission, Architectural Review
Commission, Cultural Heritage Committee, and/or the Parks and Recreation
Commission. Although this is identified as an optional task, consultant proposals
should include cost estimates for at least two public hearings.
IV. BUDGET
Services will be billed on the basis of actual time and materials expended. In no event
shall the maximum total charges exceed $18,000 (eighteen thousand dollars). The
5
contractor shall submit invoices monthly and inform the Project Manager for the City
C 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 maximum of
seventy-five percent of the maximum charges shall be payable upon delivery of the draft
report, the remaining 25 percent of the maximum charges shall not be payable until a
final report has been delivered to the city. A budget should be included 'in the proposal
which itemizes fee schedules and expected hours of work with the completion of project
phases.
V. OUAi_TFICATIONMOPOSA S EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCED 1RES
Initial Screenin¢
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.
I. Qualifications/Proposals must comply with the submission requirements set
forth in Section VII of this RFQ/RFP.
2. At least one responsible principal member of the consultant team must have
current professional registration which allows the practice of structural engineering
in the State of California.
3. At least one member of the consultant team must be qualified as an Architectural
Historian.
Preliminary Evaluation of Oualifications4R=osals
Qualifications/Proposals which pass the foregoing initial review will be evaluated by City
staff. Staff will score each of the consultant's qualifications and the scores of the panel
will then be totaled. 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 20
2) Consultant Team Experience 20
3) Team's ability to carry out required work 20
4) Understanding of the project 20
5) Project Approach and Organization _20
Total Points 100
6
Final_ Evaluation of Oualifications4E o=als
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.
VI. PROPOSAL AND REVIEW SCHEDULE
L
Issuance of RFQ/RFP August 24, 1990
Proposal submission deadline - 5 p.m. September 24, 1990
Preliminary Qualifications October.5, 1990
and Proposal Evaluations
Final Evaluation October 19, 1990
Consultant selection November, 1990
VII. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS
Qualification/Proposals should be addressed to:
Jeanette Di Leo, 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, P.O. Box 8100, San Luis Obispo, CA 934039 by
September 24. 1990.
Number of Copies Required
Five copies, numbered from 1 to 5 on cover.
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 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 17".
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 paginated with 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.).
Inilusions: 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
O 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 renovation estimates. 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. 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
�I person named as the reference.
�J
8
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.
L Fee schedules for each firm on the team and all job classes proposed to be
involved in the work
I The City of San Luis Obispo has other adobes that may need to be evaluated for
specific structural concerns (e.g., cracks, eta) outside the confines of this RFP.
Please provide an hourly consulting rate that the City may use to contract for
services. This fee would be based on availability of the consultant and would be
outside the workscope of this RFP. This fee will not be evaluated as a part of
the ranking for the Rodriquez Adobe proposal.
9
L'-IN-14