Tuesday, October 9, 2012

Industrial Park Site

The Lacon City Council voted to restrict the use of property in the industrial park for industrial purposes only.  Business owners  within the Industrial Park expressed apprehension about locating a school in that area due to safety concerns to children.  Their concerns were valid.  I also informed the city council and business members in attendance that the district is not interested in locating in an area that we are not welcome.  This narrows are options considerably.  We now have the following options:

1.       Build a school across the street from the current location.
2.       Launch a site acquisition project.
3.       Repair the current building.
4.       Construct an addition to an existing facility.
5.       Do nothing.

The board will probably discuss this on the 15th and determine what scope of services they would like Farnsworth to complete.  I would encourage all to attend the meeting on the 15th

Friday, September 28, 2012

Pre Referendum Services

The Midland School Board conducted a special meeting last night to discuss pre-referendum costs with Farnsworth Group.  Farnsworth distributed a services list with projected costs.  You may find the document HERE.

Friday, September 7, 2012

Farnsworth Link

This is a link to the Statement of Qualifications that Farnsworth submitted. It discussed exactly what their engagement process will look like.  http://www.midland-7.org/website_district/page28.html

Previous links to Life Safety Documents

This is a link to the life safety documents that were generated during the facility committee.  Links to Life Safety Documents

Thursday, August 23, 2012

Midland Completes Final Ranking of Architects

On August 22, 2012 Midland completed the final ranking of Architects.  The final rank is as follows:

1. Farnsworth
2. CBJ
3. Larson & Darby

Monday, August 6, 2012

Short List Statement of Qualifications

The following link will provide the community with copies of the Statement of Qualifications of Short List firms.
http://www.midland-7.org/website_district/page28.html

Tuesday, July 24, 2012

Short List Selection

The following firms have been selected for further interviews and short listed:
1. Dewberry
2. Farnsworth
3. Wold
4. PCM
5. CBJ
6. Larson & Darby

The selected firms will recieve letters in the next few days informing them of the time and place for their presentations. 

The presentations/interviews will take place over 3 days - two firms per night.  Each firm will have 45 minutes for their presentation.  After the presentation the board will discuss the presentation in an open board meeting.  Each firm will be rated as stipulated in the Professional Services Selection Act. The highest rated firm will then enter negotiations with the Districts Attorney.  If a satisfactory agreement is reached the district will enter into an agreement.  If not the district will go to the second highest rated firm etc.    

Thursday, June 28, 2012

Applying Firms

The following firms have submitted qualifications:

Basalay, Cary  & Alstadt
Richard L. Johnson & Assoc.
Craig Wright & Assoc.
Wold Arch & Eng.
Larson & Darby Group
FGM Arch.
Bailey Edward
TRI
Wight
PCM
Healy & Bender
Green Assoc.
Cordogan, Clark & Assoc.
Dewberry
Farnsworth Group
CBJ Arch.
SPM Arch.

Thursday, June 14, 2012

The following questions were submitted by Stephan Nelson from Studio GC.

1.      Will this be a referendum based project?
Yes

2.      Does the District have a project site in mind?...If so can you share that information and is a site survey available?
Yes on both questions

3.      Does the District own the green park space to the North of the Elementary Building or does the town or park district own it?
 The district owns the green property north of the elementary building

4.      Is the District interested in trying to build the potentrial New Elementary School on the existing school site?
No.

5.      Are copies of the plan of the existig building and site available for distribution?
No.  they are available, but not for distribution at this time.

6.      Is the District in favor or opposed to multi-story buildings?
The district is open to any design as long as the design if fiscally conservative and meets all the needs of the community.

7.      Is the district considering any grade level adjustments or realignments in conjunction with this potential project?
This is open to grade level adjustments to complete the project.

8.      Are there any specific portions of the existing facility that the District or Community wishes to save or salvage?
No

Monday, June 11, 2012

More Questions

From Clifford A. Bender of  Healy, Bender & Associates

Section 6.3 is Relevant K-8 experience.  I understand the RFP is for remodeling/replacement of your existing PK-4 elementary school.  With the 30 page limitation (also criteria), should our response to Section 6.3 include only PK-4 facilities, or is the existing grades 5-8 Midland Middle School affected by this project? If so, is that the reason for the request for K-8 education projects?

The response should be for PK-4 facilities.  The Midland Middle School is not affected by this project. 

Friday, June 1, 2012

Questions from Responding Firms

The following questions have been submitted so far:
1.       Is there funding in place for the project or will it require a referendum?
This project will require a referendum

2.       Is there a budget for the project?
We are hoping the selected firm will consult with us to develop a budget

3.       Will the school be designed as a 3 Classroom/grade level facility?
I am not sure what you are referring to.

4.       Is there a new site or will it be part of the existing elementary school site?
The district will be negotiating with the City of Lacon for a transfer of property for a new site.

5.       Will the project be a replacement school or additions/remodeling to the present elementary school?
At this point it will be a replacement.

6. Is the CDB Form 255 subject to the limit of 30 pages for the proposal or may it be submitted as an addendum?
The CDB 255 Form is exempt from the 30 page restriction.  It may be submitted as an addendum.

7. May questions be submitted via email?
No. All questions must be submitted in writing and mailed to the district office.

8. What do you consider local?
Within the State of Illinois.  During a construction project meetings will be necessary between contractors, managers, and architects.  It is our expectation that the selected architect will be physically available for any necessary meetings.  We are expecting the selected firm to form a meaningful partnership with our district and community for the benefit of our taxpayers and children.   

9. May a pre qualification letter from the CDB be submitted in place of the Form 255?
No.

10. Are you accepting visits from responding firms to tour the building of visit the district?
No.  Not at this time.  Responding firms may not meet with any district officials or employees nor tour any facilities.  It is important to remember there is a lobbying restriction in place. 
     
11. Is this request for qualifications open to all firms who meet the requirements described therein, or is it limited to thos firms shown on the Architect's List that has been posted to the District's blog for this RFQ?
All firms are welcome to apply

12. Page 2 of the RFQ mentions a student capacity for the new school, but there is a blank where that number would be located.  What will be the student capacity for the new school?
We are hoping the selected firm will help us ascertain what the capacity should be. 
13. Will there be a pre-proposal walk-thru ?
No. This is simply a request for an RFQ. 
14. Does the District currently have any consultants on-board, with which the selected firm will consult with.
No
15. Are there multiple potential sites for the new elementary school?
No
16. The response to the District's RF can be no longer than 30 pages.  Can that be 30 sheets of paper or does it need to not exceed 30 faces (15 sheets).
30 Faces.  The CDB 255 Form is exempt from the 30 Faces.
17. Under the 6.4.3, are we to submit Client references who can speak to the experiences with teh specific fourn Architect/Engineer individual team members listed; or Client references who can speak to their experiences with the ARchitect/Engineer firm?
The Firm

Wednesday, May 23, 2012

RFQ for Architectural Services

The Midland Board of Education has issued an RFQ for Architectural Services relating to the replacement of its Lacon facility.  The RFQ and a list of solicited firms are linked to this blog below.  All responding firms are informed that restrictions to lobbying apply.  Any questions should be submitted in writing to:

Midland Schools
ATTN: Rolf Sivertsen, Superintendent
1830 St. Rt. 17
Varna, IL 61375

Responses will be posted on this blog after review.

Link to Solicited Architects
http://www.midland-7.org/rfq/architect%20list.pdf
Link to RFQ
http://www.midland-7.org/rfq/RFQ%20-%20Elementary.pdf