2012-07-24 evaluation report 63000sq ict building

7/25/2019 2012-07-24 Evaluation Report 63000SQ ICT Building

1/18

Evaluation ReportDESIGN CONSULTANCY SERVICES 63,000 SQ. FT. ICT BUILDING MONTEGO

BAY FREEZONE

BACK GROUND/INTRODUCTION

The Montego Bay Free Zone (MBFZ) operates within the legal framework of the Jamaica Eport

Free Zone !ct of "#$%& MBFZ a su'siiary of the ort !uthority of Jamaica (!J) operates the

Free Zone on 'ehalf the !J& The principal role an function of the MBFZ is to facilitate

investment 'y local an overseas investors engage in eports an 'usiness process outsourcing&

!s a result of its manate the MBFZ planne to construct a two storey *ata Entry Builing

(*EB)+,nformation -ommunication Builing (,-T) approimately ./$.0s&m& (10/222s&f&)& ,t is

propose that the 'uiling will have a footprint of 1$&$#m (%%13425) 6%&17m ("6234 25)& Each

floor will 'e capa'le of 'eing ivie into multi tenant spaces each with their own sanitary

facilities& The 'uiling must 'e provie with hanicappe frienly facilities on 'oth levels& ,n

aition/ provision must 'e mae for tenants to a etra sanitary facilities if they re8uire& The

purpose of this report is to show the process 'y which each firm3s technical competence an

financial proposal was evaluate an hence the recommenation for an awar&

SCOPE OF SERVICE:

The following is the scope of the assignment that the respective consultants were aske to Bi on

an which will 'e unertaken 'y the successful -onsultant9

The key elements of the work comprise the esign an contract supervision of the

'uiling in accorance to the a'ove mentione foot print&

,n the first instance/ the preliminary esigns shoul inicate+illustrate how well this

facility will meet the current an future nees of the MBFZ+ :takeholers& :econly/ the

contracte firm will manage the process of the esign an construction of the sai *ata

Entry Builing&

Normal Services

"


2/18

The following stages and duties comprise of the Consultants/ designers Normal

Services:

1. Preliminary Design Stage

a) The Consultant shall take the Clients instructions regarding the udget and theapplicale re!uirements necessar" for the various operations# such as those for

pro$ected space# e!uipment# operation procedures# securit" criteria#

communications# relationship and functions# and shall confirm their understandingof such re!uirements and the pro$ect %rief to the Client.

) The Consultant shall prepare preliminar" design la"outs ased on the %rief# as well

as# a list of illustrations designed items re!uested for the &ro$ect# and shall preparean implementation plan for e'ecution for the Clients approval.

c) The Consultant (with the assistance of the !uantit" surve"or# if re!uired) shall

provide the Client with an overall estimate of cost ased on the preliminar" designla"outs# and otain the Clients approval of this udgetar" estimate.

. &rovide a pro$ect schedule (*icrosoft pro$ects)# incorporating oth the proposed design

and construction period.

+. ,etermination of ideal orientation# la"out and si-e of ,% uilding and related facilities.

. ,etermination of parking location and si-e# the traffic flow to and from the e'isting

*%0 road network.

2. ,etermination of energ" conservation design# additional capacit" of power suppl"# waste

water and solid waste treatment if re!uired.

3. 4deall" the re!uirements should include provision for:

a) The space should e capale of eing partitioned into 2#555s! ft to15#555 s!. ft

modules with eas" accessiilit" to scale up to 5#555 s! ft or +5#555 s! ft should a client

wish to e'pand.

) ach module should have separate facilities for electricit" meter# air6conditioning#

athroom and kitchenette

c) There should e elevator and disailit" access to the first floor# etc

d) 7ppropriate fire protection s"stems should e installed with interconnectivit" for eachunit.

8. The uilding design should e aestheticall" pleasing with emphasis on modern energ"

saving conservation features.

%


3/18

2. Final Design Stage

a) The Consultants shall discuss with the Client an" changes re!uired and make suchmodifications# as agreed# to the design la"out and list electrical# fi'tures and

e!uipment.

) %ased on the approved design la"out# the Consultant shall prepare detailed tender

ased on the 9; standard id document/construction drawings# schedules#

specifications# %ill of


4/18

Eight Epressions of ,nterest were receive !ugust %1/ %2"" from the following intereste

firms& The information su'mitte was assesse in accorance with the criteria state in the

invitation& See 7ppendi' 1 for assessment

!. APEC CONSULTANTS LIMITED

". #UE LYE$ C#IN ENGINEERING LIMITED

3. #AROLD MORRISON % $OODSTOCK

&. AD'B CONSULTANT LIMITED

(. T)* DESIGNS

6. C# TOMLINSON LTD. % ASSOCIATES

+. CLIFTON YAP ARC#ITECTS

. KINGSLAND SCOTT BAUER ASSOCIATES

INVITATION

The seven of the eight consultants shortliste were formally invite to su'mit proposals for

proviing consultancy services regaring the esign an supervision of the construction of

the ,nformation/ -ommunication an Technology 'uiling+evelopment&

The -onsultants shortliste were as follows9

!. APEC C-12*2 L42'5

". #' L)' C7 E8''98 L42'53. #*9-15 M-99- % $--52-;

&. AD'B C-12*2 L42'5

(. T)* D'8

6. C1 for Consultants

re!uests)

6


5/18

PROCUREMENT PROCESS

The 'i process was carrie out in accorance with the ?ocal -ompetitive roceures as

set out in volume % of the ;overnment of Jamaica3s @an'ook of u'lic :ector

rocurement& The ta'le 'elow sets out the steps to ate in the procurement process9

T*>1' !: P9-9'4'2 A2?2'

A2?2) D*2'

"& -opy of !vertisement for Epression of,nterest

%& Recor of the


6/18

T*>1' ": A55'5*

,tem *ate *escription

!enum " %2""4"%4"% Etension of the 'i su'mission ate from *ecem'er %#/ %2""to January "0/ %2"%

!enum % %2"%42"4"2 Etension of the 'i su'mission ate from January "0/ %2"% to

January %./ %2"%!enum 0 %2"%42"4"1 Revise :ite ?ocation lan (Electronic email)

Copies of the addenda are enclosed at 7ppendi' ?&OPENING OF PROPOSALS


7/18

T)* D'8 registere sole proprietor in association/ a group of 8ualifie

consultants+firms&

C*91 C. C7' % A-*2' C1


8/18

EVALUATION

-riteria/ su'4criteria/ an point system for the evaluation of Full Technical roposals were asfollows9

oints

(i) :pecific eperience of the -onsultants relevant to the assignment9 10

(ii) !e8uacy of the propose methoology an work planin responing to the Terms of Reference9

a) Technical approach an methoology %2') Cork plan "2c)


9/18

ursuant to -lause .&7 of the ,nstructions to -onsultants states that Kin case of H-B:#& the firm

achieving the highest com'ine technical an financial score will 'e invite for negotiations5&

:ee !ppeni 1 etaile evaluation of the technical an financial proposals&

The technical evaluation took in consieration 'ase on the criteria a'ove the consultants3

specific years of eperience as an operating entity/ ae8uacy of the propose methoology an

work plan with special consierations with respect to the propose organiGation an staffing/

work plan if consistent with propose activities/ technical approach an methoology which

shoul 'e reflective of the unerstaning of the pro>ect3s Terms of Reference& The evaluation

also aresse the propose pro>ect teams3 general 8ualification/ ae8uacy of this 8ualification to

the assignment/ years of eperience an eperience in the region&

!s a conse8uence the Technical Evaluation results an ranking of the consultants3 proposals areas inicate in the Ta'le . 'elow9

TABLE (

CONSULTANT NAME APEC ADeB Tya CARL CHENKINGSLANDSCOTT

EVALUATOR1 105 91 107 102 9

EVALUATOR2 107 93 104 101 9EVALUATOR3 9 9 104 102 9

EVALUATOR4 105 92 105 102 9

TOTAL AVERAGE SCORE 104 91 105 102 9

RANK 2 5 1 3 4

The minimum technical score re8uire to pass is $. points&

Evience 'y the results state in Ta'le " a'ove all firm technical proposals met the minimum

re8uirement an as a conse8uence were notifie in accorance to -lause .&6 of the ,nstruction to

-onsultants in the Re8uest for roposals (RF)&

#


10/18

The evaluation matri at !ppeni 1 sets out the evaluation criteria an scoring regime that were

use to conuct the evaluation incluing the average an iniviual scores sheet of each

evaluator& The results inicate that all firms have the technical capacity an competence to

provie the services state in the scope of work an therefore the final outcome will 'e

contingent on the 8uality an magnitue of their financial proposals&

!s previously inicate the technical scores were sent to the consultants isclosing all results 'ut

only ientifying the score of the specific recipient& See 7ppendi' > for letter of notification on

evaluation result.

Ta'le 1 'elow provie the results of the weighte technical scores for all five proposals&

TABLE 6

Te!"#$!a% &'(a%$)y* +e$,")e-

C.#/(%)a#)Te!" S!.e +e$,")e- '(a%$)y S!.e

Tya De/$,#105 105 x 60

110573

APEC C.#/(%)a#)/104 104 x 60

11057

Ca% C"e# A//.!$a)e/102 102 x 60

110554

K$#,/%a#- S!.)) Ba(e A//.!/9 98 x 60

110534

ADeB C.#/(%)a#)/ 91 91 x 60110497

Each firm was sent invitation letter avising them of the score aware for technical

competence/ the ate/ time an place for opening of the financial proposals& The financial

proposals which were in the possession of the ;roup ,nternal !uit for safe keeping were

retrieve an presente to all present at the opening for inspection in orer to verify the integrity

of the seale envelopes prior to opening&

T*>1'+ F**1 P9-=-*1 O='8 C-4422''

N*4' D'=*924'2

"2


11/18

!insworth @aughton ;roup ,nternal !uit/ !ssurance = Risk Management:ervices

Ra8uel For'es ?egal/ Regulatory = -orporate !ffairs

imara :imms Finance = ,nformation :ervices

*aniel Evans Engineering = ort *evelopment?eonar Bailey Engineering = ort *evelopment

T*>1' L2 -< C-12*2 R'=9''2*2?'

R'=9''2*2?' N*4' -< C-12*2

-hristopher ?ue Tya De/$,#

-hristopher :haw APEC C.#/(%)a#)/

hilmore APEC C.#/(%)a#)/

-arl -& -henCa% C"e# A//.!$a)e/

Aone K$#,/%a#- S!.)) Ba(e A//.!/

Aone ADeB C.#/(%)a#)/

The following financial proposal were opene an rea out from the respective firms+consultantsincluing the announcement of the !J3s engineer3s estimate9

1. Tya Design$88,526,250.00

2. APEC Consultants $46,000,000.00

3. Cal C!en Asso"iates$51,350,000.00

4. #ingslan %"ott &aue Asso"s. '%$4(1,(5(.00 o )$40,939,0(2.46

5. ADe& Consultants$49,909,016.00

T"e P.) A()".$)y'%$550,000.00 o )$48,950,000.00

*ex"!ange ate '%$1+)$89.00

The !J3s estimate was later revise using the B


12/18

TABLE

C./) S!.e +e$,")$#,

$#a#!$a% S!.e

$#a#!$a% Oe +e$,")e-$#a#!$a%

S!.e

Tya De/$,#88,526,250.00 40,939,0(2.46x40

88526250150

APEC C.#/(%)a#)/

46,000,000.00 40,939,0(2.46x40

46000000

350

Ca% C"e# A//.!$a)e/51,350,000.00 40,939,0(2.46x40

51530000319

K$#,/%a#- S!.)) Ba(eA//.!/

'%$4(1,(5(.00o

)$40,939,0(2.46

40,939,0(2.46x4040,939,0(2

4000

ADeB C.#/(%)a#)/49,909,016.00 40,939,0(2.46x40

49,909,016321

Ta'le $ 'elow provie the results of the weighte com'ine technical an financial scores for

all five proposals&

TABLE !0

CONSULTANT NAME+e$,")e-

'(a%$)y S!.e+e$,")e-

$#a#!$a% S!.eT.)a% S!.e

Tya De/$,# 573 150 75

APEC C.#/(%)a#)/ 57 350 923

Ca% C"e# A//.!$a)e/ 554 319 73

K$#,/%a#- S!.)) Ba(e A//.!/ 534 4000 934

ADeB C.#/(%)a#)/ 497 321 25

AD'B CONSULTANT LTD

"%


13/18

The firm is a registere Jamaican engineering firm whose history 'egan in January "#16 with a

staff compliment of thirty persons& The firm specialiGe in the area of civil/ structural/ electrical/

mechanical an other technical activities such as construction supervision/ pro>ect planning etc&

!fter careful assessment of the roposals :u'mitte 'y !*eB -onsultants they were aware a

com'ine weighte score of $%&. points& The firm was aware an average score of #" points out

of maimum of ""2 points an was ranke .th for their technical proposal out of the five

proposals receive&

The roposal from !*eB -onsultants faile to supply specific information as follows9

The organiGational chart presente i not inicate a civil+structural engineer for

the pro>ect& Aotwithstaning an assumption was mae 'ase on the Tech . Form

presente& (See 7ppendi' 8)


14/18

! registere sole proprietor in association with Future -ities ,nternational/ a registere -anaian

multiisciplinary firm of ur'an planners/ architects an interior esigners/ A&< Chyte an !ssociates

with epertise in -ivil Engineering/ :tructural Engineering an ro>ect Management& !ll cost associate

activities will 'e overseen 'y *avison an @anna a chartere 8uantity surveying consulting firm&

!nalysis of the roposals :u'mitte 'y Tya *esigns earne them a com'ine

weighte score of 7.&$ points which is ue su'stantially to the price offere to

eecute the services& The firm was aware an average score of "2. points out of

maimum of ""2 points& The roposal su'mitte 'y Tya *esigns was very

etaile/ comprehensive an compliant to the RF& The firm was ranke " th for

their technical proposal out of the five proposals receive& The offer su'mitte 'y

Tya *esigns was the highest an ecee the !J3s engineering estimate 'y $.&6I&

For further etail on the technical evaluationsee 7ppendi' 3.

CARL C. C#EN % ASSOCIATES CLIFTON YAP ARC#ITECTSH

-lifton ap !rchitects was initially shortliste as a result of meeting the criteria outline in a call for

Epression of ,nterest& The firm su'se8uently re8ueste permission to withraw from the team ofconsultants shortliste an >oint with another shortliste firm& The re8uest was consiere 'y the !J an

permission grante& The remaining consultants from that group le 'y -arl -& -hen = !ssociates were

eeme 8ualifie an were allowe to su'mit roposals for the eecution of the assignment&

The proposal was su'mitte in association with the following times9

-orner :tone/ *esign ?t (Registere !rchitect)

Michael Ro'inson an !ssociates (-hartere H:)

:M!*! -onsultants (-onsulting Engineering)

"6


15/18

,nformation gleane from the proposal inicate that -arl -& -hen an !ssociates is a registere

architectural firm practicing in Jamaica since "#1. with a wie range of eperience working in

Jamaica an oversea&

-arl -hen = !ssociates was aware a weighte com'ine score of $7&0I an as result was ranke 0 r

among the list of consultants which su'mitte proposals& !lso this firm was aware an average score

of "2% points out of maimum of ""2 points following etail assessment+ evaluation of the

information furnishe in their proposal& The proposal emonstrate that the firm has clear an

comprehensive unerstaning of the terms of reference an that the team mem'ers have

significant eperiences in the esign an supervision of pro>ect of this magnitue an

compleity& The offer su'mitte 'y this firm was the secon highest an ecee the !J3s

engineering estimate 'y 7&1 I& For further etail on the technical evaluation see 7ppendi' 3.

Aotwithstaning the ranking of this firm proposal they faile to su'mit other cost 'reakown as

re8uire in the RF that woul 'e etremely critical for negotiation an forme the 'asis on

which aitional services coul 'e re8ueste 'y the !J& There the proposal su'mitte 'y -arl

-hen = !ssociates will not 'e consiere for negotiation&

APEC CONSULTANTS LIMITED

!E- -onsultants ?imite is a registere multiisciplinary firm offering professional services in

the fiels of planning/ architecture/ engineering/ 8uantity surveying/ interior esign an property

management& The firm propose to unertake the assignment in association with @ue ?yew

-hin Engineering -onsultant a registere civil an structural engineers which was previously

shortliste an was grante permission to >oin with another shortliste firm/ :toppi -aimey

Bloomfiel -hartere Huantity :urveying an


16/18


17/18


18/18

RECOMMENDATION

Base on the foregoing/ it is recommene that the ort !uthority of Jamaica invite K81*5

S-22 B*'9 A-*2' for negotiation to provie consultancy services in keeping with the

terms of reference as outline in the Re8uest for roposal incluing any other arrive positions

resulting from those talks for the 'i amount of D:L67"/7.7&22 or its e8uivalent of

JL62/#0#/27%&61&

"$

2012-07-24 evaluation report 63000sq ict building

Documents