Request for Quotation 2009-103
Engineer for Soccer Field at Lakeland Campus
Overview of Services: Engineering services associated with the design, specifications, surveying (if needed), bidding phase, preparation and submittal of appropriate regulatory permits, and contract administration for the installation of a practice soccer field on PSC’s Lakeland Campus.
RFQuotation 2009-103 has been awarded to Moduss, who submitted the low quote of $9,830.
Click here for the Quote Tabulation
Quotes were received from:
- Chastain Skillman
- Dao Consultants
- Envisors
- JSK Consulting
- Keith & Schnars
- LP Engineering
- Moduss
- PBS&J
- Ridge Profesional Group
- Woolpert
Questions & Answers:
Q: What is your SWFWMD permit number? A: Water use permit #2007590.002
Q: Is the field proposed to be irrigated? A: Yes
Q: What type of sod cover is proposed? A: Nothing has been decided as yet. The Athletic Department has a preference, and they will share with the awarded engineer. We would also expect the awarded engineer will provide suggestion(s) based on experience gained from prior projects.
Q: On the location plan attached to the RFQuote, what is the SWFWMD boundary line referring to? A: Boundary area based SWFWMD permit for the recently completed Lakeland Technology Building.
Q: Are the existing stakes located in the field representative of the field corners? A: No. The Athletic Department and awarded engineer will settle on a final location
Q: Is there any type of lighting proposed? A: No lighting at this time. We have discussed showing and installing empty conduit runs from the technology building to the field for future lighting and power.
Q: On the location plan attached to the RFQuote, there is a conceptual future building located within the soccer field boundaries. What is the timing of this future building? A: Designation of “future building” is for planning purposes. Construction is not anticipated in the foreseeable future.
Q: Is the College under the local jurisdiction of Polk County or the City of Lakeland? A: Neither.
Q: You have shown SWFWMD permit issuance on or before March 31, 2010. What ERP is actively applicable to this site? A: Several are active
Q: Is it correct to assume that a Modification to the ERP is the proper permitting procedure? A: Documentation from SWFMWD indicates a new General Use Permit is required. We can share that information with the awarded consulting firm.
Q: Are there any outstanding compliance issues with SWFWMD? A: We are not aware of any compliance issues, however, the consulting engineer should investigate.
Q: Is it correct to assume that March 31, 2010 is a target and not a guaranteed data? A: The date is based on the best information available when the SOW was prepared, and will serve as the baseline.
Q: In Section 2. Quotation Submittals: Item #1 you note that the Professional Fee “to be paid upon completion of services”. The sample Contract is checked to indicate “Payment to be made in accordance with the attached Schedule of Payments.” Is it correct to assume that the Engineer is responsible for submitting a Schedule of Payments (progress payments) based upon completed phases or tasks at the time of the bid submittal? A: Yes, the consulting engineer should include a schedule of payments.
Q: In Section 4.2 you requested Reference information on the “form provided”. No form was provided in the electronic transmittal. A: The 
form was EMailed to separately.
Q: In the Task Order Item 1.5 you mention “regulatory agency having jurisdiction”. Other than SWFWMD what other agencies have jurisdiction?.A: We believe SWFWMD has jurisdiction. However, the consulting engineer will be responsible to assure PSC is in compliance with all agencies.
Q: In the Task Order Items 1.7 and 1.8 you mention both a stand-alone well pump and an existing pump verification.
1. If the Engineer is to verify the sufficiency of the existing pump what data including permit information will be furnished to the Engineer? A: Existing pump data, line sizes and current timing of emitters
2. Are you considering a new stand-alone pump? A: Yes, if the consulting engineer can demonstrate the existing pump capacity and timing schedules are insufficient to support the requirements for the soccer field. Permitting will probably be required for a new pump. The awarded engineer will need to guide and provide professional support to PSC.
Q: Is the soil and site suitable for soccer field? A: We believe so, enhancement may be necessary. However, that discussion can occur during initial meeting with the athletic department.
Q: Does PSC have any design standards for soccer fields, fences, irrigation and turf? A: PSC has relied on the information and experience from staff of Leisure Services, City of Winter Haven, and recommendations from local contractors.