JavaScript Disabled

This site requires JavaScript Enabled to function properly. Please enable JavaScript or use a different browser that has JavaScript enabled.

Buying For Victoria
Skip to main content

Online Forum for RFT-PDC-1020 
In order to submit a post you must be logged in, have downloaded specification documents for this tender and the tender must not be closed.

The forum has been closed for posting.
RFx Number Status & Type Details Date
RFT-PDC-1020
Awarded
Request for Tender
Issued by: Melbourne Polytechnic
UNSPSC: 72000000 - Building and Facility Construction and Maintenance Services
opened
Wed, 25 November 2020 5:00 PM
Closed
Thu, 07 January 2021 2:00 PM
25/11/2020 17:00

Posts

Buyer Post #86 - Update on the Evaluation Process for the Principal Design Consultant and Superintendent Collingwood Campus Redevelopment Project This post is publicly visible

Update on the Evaluation Process for the Principal Design Consultant and Superintendent Collingwood Campus Redevelopment Project (RFT Reference Number: RFT-PDC-1020)

Melbourne Polytechnic are currently undertaking the evaluation for the Principal Design Consultant and Superintendent Collingwood Campus Redevelopment Project.  A thorough evaluation of each submission is being undertaken.  As such the indicative timetable is now as follows:

Interviews (of shortlisted Proponents)                       late February 2021

Confirmation of preferred Proponent                         March 2021

Debriefing                                                                      April 2021   

 

Please note these are indicative dates only.  We thank you for your patience.

Posted on 11/02/2021 15:02 by Melbourne Polytechnic

Buyer Post #85 - Structural Assessment This post is publicly visible

Q) Does Melbourne Polytechnic have a specific requirement for an independent structural engineer to assess and provide independent certification of the structural design, or is an in-house dual certification acceptable?

A) Independent certification of the design is required.

Posted on 18/12/2020 17:48 by Melbourne Polytechnic

Buyer Post #84 - PART D – TENDER RESPONSE SCHEDULES This post is publicly visible

Q) In regards to OHS Management (Schedule 12) 

The template provided and it's questions are largely geared to towards construction firms that have different requirements to architecture/design studios for the level of reporting for OHS and safe design. 

We are able to provide our own copies of our Safety in Design Policy and manuals, Integrated Management System (IMS) Policy and all related WH&S policies - is this enough for pre-qualification, or are we expected to answer each of the 12 Criterion questions? 

A) This requirement is as detailed as a mandatory requirement under the Victorian Government Public Construction Instruction 3.7 - Mandatory evaluation criteria for Occupational Health and Safety Management. 

Posted on 18/12/2020 17:34 by Melbourne Polytechnic

Buyer Post #83 - VSBA This post is publicly visible

Q) Could you please clarify the role of the VSBA on the project?

A) VSBA will not have any role in this project. A representative from the Higher Education and Skills Group will be a member of the PCG. At DET’s request, we have adapted VSBA’s templates for the use of MP. 

Posted on 18/12/2020 17:30 by Melbourne Polytechnic

Buyer Post #82 - Social Procurement Clarifications This post is publicly visible

Q) Referring to section 24 of the RFT, could you please clarify the meaning of “one per cent Aboriginal procurement target” and “a 5% technical criteria weighting, based on the 'works' total estimate labour hours”. Does this mean 1% of the total hours on the project need to be performed by Aboriginal enterprises and that there is a 5% weighting to the Social and Sustainable Procurement evaluation criterion?

A) Please refer to Addenda 5–  Victorian Government Aboriginal Economic Strategies 

Posted on 18/12/2020 17:29 by Melbourne Polytechnic

Buyer Post #81 - Tender Response Formatting This post is publicly visible

Q) Could you please advise whether the following documents are expected to be included within the 12 A4 page limit of attachments to the Part D response?  
- ICN aknowledgement letter 
- OHS management documents 
- Supplier code of conduct commitment letter/s 

 

A) As detailed in the RFT proponent’s responses are to include Part D and up to 12, A4 pages of attachments.  Links to other sources of information is allowed. 

- ICN acknowledgement letter 
- OHS management documents 
- Supplier code of conduct commitment letter/s are not counted in the 12 A4 pages. 

Posted on 18/12/2020 17:27 by Melbourne Polytechnic

Buyer Post #80 - Deemed hours ratio and deemed labour rate This post is publicly visible

Q) Could you please confirm with the ICN what the deemed labour ratio and deemed labour rate are for the project? 

A) In accordance with the Local Jobs First Guidelines pg 10, the Collingwood Redevelopment Project is a Building Construction Project and as such the deemed Labour ratio is 35%. 

Posted on 18/12/2020 16:18 by Melbourne Polytechnic

Buyer Post #74 - Briefing Session Presentation This post is publicly visible

The Briefing Session Presentation file has been uploaded to this tender. 

Posted on 11/12/2020 16:40 by Melbourne Polytechnic

Buyer Post #73 - Question asked at Briefing Session This post is publicly visible

Q) Existing structure, do you have any advice to upgrade to meet certain requirements? 

A) We believe that the existing structure is solid and will meet current building standards. 

Posted on 11/12/2020 16:30 by Melbourne Polytechnic

Buyer Post #72 - Question asked at Briefing Session This post is publicly visible

Q) Construction cost of $28 million does this include the cost of the fit-out or exclude? 

A) The construction estimate of $28 million includes the fit-out cost, but not the furniture, equipment, consultant fees or contingencies.  

Posted on 11/12/2020 16:29 by Melbourne Polytechnic

Buyer Post #71 - Question asked at Briefing Session This post is publicly visible

Q) Are there any existing structural drawings are they available to be posted? 

A) Yes

Posted on 11/12/2020 16:28 by Melbourne Polytechnic

Buyer Post #70 - Question asked at Briefing Session This post is publicly visible

Q) Any plans to vertically extend? 

A) No

Posted on 11/12/2020 16:27 by Melbourne Polytechnic

Buyer Post #69 - Question asked at Briefing Session This post is publicly visible

Q) During the course of the construction period is there any limitations on how the building will be made available? 

A) No, vacant possession. The building will be vacant June 2021. 

Posted on 11/12/2020 16:25 by Melbourne Polytechnic

Buyer Post #67 - Question from Briefing Session This post is publicly visible

Q) Given schematic design is due 3 March 2021, would you welcome alternate programs to be delivered after that date? 

A) Yes, if necessary, we can adjust the timeline if that feedback is provided from the market. 

Posted on 11/12/2020 16:23 by Melbourne Polytechnic

Buyer Post #66 - Question asked at Briefing Session This post is publicly visible

Q) Do you expect confirmation of the tender to remain 15 February 2021? 

A) Yes

Posted on 11/12/2020 16:22 by Melbourne Polytechnic

Buyer Post #65 - Question asked at Briefing Session This post is publicly visible

Q) Do you have any master planning or is the appointed architect starting from scratch? 

A) We don’t have anything but recognise the need to work with the architect on appropriate timelines. 

Posted on 11/12/2020 16:21 by Melbourne Polytechnic

Buyer Post #64 - Question asked at the Briefing Session This post is publicly visible

Q) There is a desire to have workshops regarding concept and schematic design, do those workshops already exist and in the calendars? 

A) They do not exist but can be scheduled within a week, with the right people in the room. 

Posted on 11/12/2020 16:19 by Melbourne Polytechnic

Buyer Post #63 - Question from the Briefing Session This post is publicly visible

Q) What kind of access will the successful architect/designer have to MP staff and the Executive team? 

A) Full access when required. 

Posted on 11/12/2020 16:18 by Melbourne Polytechnic

Buyer Post #62 - Question asked at the Briefing Session This post is publicly visible

Q) Are town-planning permits required regarding urban design and so forth. 

A) We have freehold of our title, and we have advice that our projects do not require a planning permit from the Department of Education.  

Posted on 11/12/2020 16:16 by Melbourne Polytechnic

Buyer Post #61 - Question asked at Briefing Session:  This post is publicly visible

Q) In terms of functional brief there is not a huge amount of detail, will any more detail on a brief accommodation schedule be released or should respondents continue on the basis of what has been issued so far? 

A) We are not able to release an accommodation schedule, as we are still working through what we are going to teach. What we would like respondents to think about is how in their experience though the pandemic has changed the way we see infrastructure and the way we see educational spaces. Given the relevancy of a highly connected inner-city campus and that the building currently has all classrooms we have seven floors of classrooms and we are not necessarily sure that this is the way of the future. We will still have a requirement for classrooms, the connection to place and the connection of campus is likely going to be different going forward and what we would like to see is that the successful architect/designer puts in the response that they are willing to work with us to reach that point. 

Posted on 11/12/2020 16:13 by Melbourne Polytechnic

Buyer Post #60 - Tender Enquiries This post is publicly visible

1.         Is it intended to construct the works in one continuous stage or is it envisaged to stage the works according to existing and ongoing accommodation requirements? If staged

a.         What % of the existing site is estimated to be available for development at a time?

b.         How many stages are envisaged?

2.         If the construction works are staged would the contract contain separable portions?

Answer to all questions above: Works are proposed as a single stage. Most of the existing site is available for development, however any new build must take the construction budget into consideration 

3.         Regardless of the way the construction is procured is the design team responsible for working with MP to determine and manage the decanting arrangements?

A) MP will organise the decanting arrangements  

4.         Is the design team responsible for managing the procurement of FF&E items?

A) The design team will have input into the selection of the FF and E 

5.         To what end does the 'Planning Committee' already have an existing Educational Rationale in place or is it still being developed / renewed. If the latter - will this affect the time afforded for the early design phases?

A) MP has arrangements in place to work with the successful PDCS around the education requirements 

6.         The brief mentions the existing building to have a rating of 3. Is there any detailed information around this score?

A) The building was opened in the early 1980’s, with several partial fit outs during the building’s life. Most of the building services however are outmoded and very inefficient and need to be replaced   

Posted on 11/12/2020 16:10 by Melbourne Polytechnic

Buyer Post #59 - Structural Engineering This post is publicly visible

Q1) Is a full set of “For Construction” Structural, Civil, Architectural and Building Services drawings available to be used by the design team as a design reference reflective of the as constructed existing condition?A) The existing PDF drawings for the structure and services are reasonably reflective of the constructed existing conditions, however much of the services will need to be replaced. 

 

Q2) If no existing “as built” drawings are available for the building this will require extensive destructive investigation, concrete testing and scanning of the existing structure which is both costly and time consuming, has this been allowed for in the project budget and programme.

A) Some non-destructive testing will be required. 

 

Q3) Has preliminary advice been sought by a Building Surveyor to determine if the project scope will trigger a full building upgrade to current codes and regulations particularly for seismic and lateral loading, section J compliance etc?

A) The existing building will need to be upgraded to current codes with some possible exemptions. 

 

Q4) Does the scope/brief include vertical extension to the existing building?

A) No, the scope does not include vertical extension to the existing building. 

 

Q5) Have contingency costs been allocated in the project budget to cover the cost of a full building upgrade to current codes and regulations?

A) The existing building will need to be upgraded to current codes with some possible exemptions. 

Posted on 11/12/2020 16:04 by Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #57 - Site Inspection (Building Interior) This post is publicly visible

Referring to Forum Post #42, where reference indicates a site inspection may be possible, please reconfirm if a physical inspection of the interior of the building is going to be available.  

Posted on 11/12/2020 13:52 by Supplier Person

Site visits are not going to be available. A virtual site tour will be provided via an addenda.  Refer to Addendum 4 – Virtual Site Tour. 

Replied on 18/12/2020 17:36 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Buyer Post #55 - Addendum 3 - changes to key RFT dates This post is publicly visible

Given that the Briefing for this RFT was postponed, the key dates for this RFT have also been extended to provide proponents adequate time to compile their submissions. Please refer to Addendum 3 with the updated RFT Closing time and other key dates.

Posted on 09/12/2020 17:13 by Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #52 - Tender closing date This post is publicly visible

Are you able to please confirm the tender closing/submission date? 

The ICN portal lists this as 14.01.2021, contrary to the RFT documentation which states closing date as 2pm, 17.12.2020. 

Thank you for keeping the details of this post confidential.

Posted on 09/12/2020 11:27 by Supplier Person

Refer to Addendum 3 which details a revised closing time and revised key dates. 

Replied on 10/12/2020 11:32 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #51 - Time Extension This post is publicly visible

Given the tenderer briefing will only be carried out on Friday, which may inform how we and our sub-consultants approach this tender, will Melbourne Polytechnic consider a time extension for this tender, particularly given we are likely required to submit the LIDP to ICN on Friday in order to obtain the Acknowledgement Letter in time for our Tender submission on Thursday?

Posted on 08/12/2020 22:48 by Supplier Person

Refer to Addendum 3 which details a revised closing time and revised key dates. 

Replied on 10/12/2020 11:30 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #50 - additional questions relating to the Social and Sustainable Procurement Plan This post is publicly visible

As this is a procurement activity valued at below 20million we are not specifically required to complete a social procurement plan according to the ‘BuyingforVic’ website (https://www.buyingfor.vic.gov.au/social-procurement-planning-requirement-government-buyers). Does MP still require tenderers to submit a completed Social Procurement Plan as part of the submission?

Which social and sustainable procurement objectives would the MP prefer us to address in our response?

Is the prescribed 10% MPSG requirement considered a best-practice target, or a compulsory requirement? The criteria implies that a very ambitious 10% of total labour hours are to be carried out by undergraduate students. Will proponents who fail to achieve this 10% target be disqualified from consideration, or does a marking criteria apply?.  

Posted on 08/12/2020 17:07 by Supplier Person

1) As this is a procurement activity valued at below 20million we are not specifically required to complete a social procurement plan according to the ‘BuyingforVic’ website (https://www.buyingfor.vic.gov.au/social-procurement-planning-requirement-government-buyers). Does MP still require tenderers to submit a completed Social Procurement Plan as part of the submission?

A) MP seeks all proponents to submit a social procurement plan for this procurement as the total project cost is greater than $20million. 

 

2) Which social and sustainable procurement objectives would the MP prefer us to address in our response?

A) MP has not set any specific social or sustainable procurement objectives due to a major part of the construction being refurbishment of an existing building.   

Part B – Project Specification and Scope of Services Clause 2.1 Scope Statement details parameters that need to be addressed in the design of the facilities. 

Part A – RFT Conditions details that the Local Jobs First Policy, Major Projects Skills Guarantee, Social Procurement Framework and Victorian Government Aboriginal Economic Strategies are applicable. The RFT requires proponents provide a response to the requirements of these policies.  The successful supplier will be required to deliver on their commitments made in response to these policies.

 

3) Is the prescribed 10% MPSG requirement considered a best-practice target, or a compulsory requirement? The criteria implies that a very ambitious 10% of total labour hours are to be carried out by undergraduate students. Will proponents who fail to achieve this 10% target be disqualified from consideration, or does a marking criteria apply?.  

A) This requirement is in accordance with the policy requirements. Refer to the website for more information. https://localjobsfirst.vic.gov.au/agency-guidance/major-project-skills-guarantee  

Replied on 10/12/2020 11:28 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #49 - Faculty Group This post is publicly visible

What is the faculty group in the campus?

Posted on 08/12/2020 16:28 by Supplier Person

The campus is expected to cater for our Auslan, Foundation, ESL, Innovation, Design and Precinct Partners. 

Replied on 10/12/2020 11:18 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Buyer Post #48 - Supplier Post #36 Specification This post is publicly visible

Q: Could you please advise whether VSBA volume 2 specification needs to be adopted for this project? 

A: The project will use VSBA volume 2 as a guide for the specification for the project. 

 

Posted on 08/12/2020 16:15 by Melbourne Polytechnic

Buyer Post #47 - Supplier Post #34 - Expected GBA and carparks for new building/s This post is publicly visible

Q: 

  1. Following Supplier Post #19, are you able to provide guidance of MP's expected GBA of the proposed new building/s on the site? 
     
  2. Are you able to provide guidance of MP's expected total carparks on the site? 

A: No further guidance is offered at this time regarding the GFA for the new building. 

Posted on 08/12/2020 16:14 by Melbourne Polytechnic

Buyer Post #46 - Supplier Post #26 - Site Visit Request This post is publicly visible

Q: We would like to review the existing building. Will it be possible to arrange a site visit with a member of the facilities team? If this is not possible do you have any objection to us visiting the site for a walk around?

A: A date for a site visit may be organised shortly, subject to meeting COVID protocols. 

Tenderers are free to inspect the outside of the building, however MP cannot have large numbers of visitors through the building. 

Posted on 08/12/2020 16:03 by Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #45 - MPSG requirement This post is publicly visible

Is the prescribed 10% MPSG requirement considered a best-practice target, or a compulsory requirement? The criteria implies that a very ambitious 10% of total labour hours are to be carried out by undergraduate students. Will proponents who fail to achieve this 10% target be disqualified from consideration, or does a marking criteria apply?.  

Posted on 08/12/2020 15:01 by Supplier Person

This requirement is in accordance with the policy requirements. Refer to the website for more information. https://localjobsfirst.vic.gov.au/agency-guidance/major-project-skills-guarantee  

Replied on 10/12/2020 11:12 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Buyer Post #44 - Eligibility for Submission This post is publicly visible

Q) Can you confirm that this is an open tender for a Principal Design Consultant and Superintendent and not invitation only (which is typically the case for VSBA projects)?

A) This RFT is a public tender. All submissions will be evaluated against the evaluation criteria as detailed in Part A clause 28 of the RFT. 

 

Posted on 08/12/2020 13:59 by Melbourne Polytechnic

Buyer Post #43 - Can you please keep my question confidential? This post is publicly visible

MP has established communication protocols which ensures fairness and equity to all suppliers.  

All questions proposed will be published along with MPs response unless the issue raised applies only to an individual proponent. 

These protocols are detailed in the RFT Part A clause 3 and states “Except where MP is of the opinion that issues raised apply only to an individual Proponent, questions submitted, and answers provided will be made available to all Proponents without identifying the person or organisation having submitted the question.” 

Posted on 08/12/2020 11:46 by Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #42 - Site Visit This post is publicly visible

We were wondering about how to go about arranging a site visit?

Section 29 of the RFT suggests that it might be possible, and that more details could be made available upon request. Thanks!

Posted on 08/12/2020 10:50 by Supplier Person

A date for a site visit may be organised shortly, subject to meeting COVID protocols. 

Tenderers are free to inspect the outside of the building, however MP cannot have large numbers of visitors through the building. 

Replied on 10/12/2020 11:09 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #41 - LIDP + Sub-consultants This post is publicly visible

Understanding the departments requirement for local participation – do you require this commitment across all disciplines and require all subconsultant percentages to be included within the LIDP submission? If so, given the timing of this submission, the requirement for all fees and hours to be submitted as part of the LIDP application and the usual 7-10 day turns to get certification. Would the department accept a copy of the portal submission instead of a copy of the certificate?

Posted on 08/12/2020 10:32 by Supplier Person

The closing time for this RFT has been extended to 2.00pm Thursday 7 January 2021.  This will provide all proponents with adequate time to meet all submission requirements. 

Replied on 10/12/2020 11:07 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #40 - Site Occupied This post is publicly visible

Can you please confirm if the building is currently occupied? Furthermore will the building need to remain functional throughout the construction phase? 

Posted on 08/12/2020 08:39 by Supplier Person

The building will not be occupied as of 1 July 2021 and will be closed through the construction phase. 

Replied on 10/12/2020 11:04 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #39 - Existing Structural Documentation This post is publicly visible

Can you please advise the extent of existing Structural Engineering documentation that MP has to assit evaluation of existing conditions and structural design parameters.  

Posted on 07/12/2020 14:16 by Supplier Person

MP has existing drawings that we believe are not necessary for the tender stage as this project is mostly a refurbishment. 

Replied on 08/12/2020 12:54 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Buyer Post #38 - Answers to Clarification Questions This post is publicly visible

As detailed in Part A – RFT Conditions clause 2. Indicative timetable, clarification questions close on 10 December 2020.  All questions and answers posted via this forum will be uploaded in a single document as an Addendum to the RFT after this date.

Posted on 07/12/2020 13:46 by Melbourne Polytechnic

Buyer Post #37 - Briefing for the RFT for Principal Design Consultant and Superintendent Collingwood Campus Redevelopment Project This post is publicly visible

Melbourne Polytechnic will hold its Briefing for the RFT for Principal Design Consultant and Superintendent Collingwood Campus Redevelopment Project (RFT-PDC-1020) at 10:00am on Friday 11 December 2020 via Zoom. 

To register for the non-mandatory briefing session, you must do so by emailing: Amanda Ravaneschi, Senior Executive Officer Strategic Asset Development at amandaravaneschi@melbournepolytechnic.edu.au

Please detail, the name, position title, organisation, email and telephone number of the person(s) attending the briefing session. There is a limit of two persons per organisation that can attend this session.

Please register prior to 2pm AEST, Thursday 10 December 2020.

Posted on 07/12/2020 11:48 by Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #36 - Specification This post is publicly visible

Could you please advise whether VSBA volume 2 specification needs to be adopted for this project? 

Thank you for keeping the details of this post confidential.

Posted on 07/12/2020 10:45 by Supplier Person

The project will use VSBA volume 2 as a guide for the specification for the project. 

Replied on 08/12/2020 12:53 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #34 - Expected GBA and carparks for new building/s This post is publicly visible

  1. Following Supplier Post #19, are you able to provide guidance of MP's expected GBA of the proposed new building/s on the site? 
     
  2. Are you able to provide guidance of MP's expected total carparks on the site? 

Thank you for keeping the details of this post confidential.

Posted on 04/12/2020 19:03 by Supplier Person

No further guidance is offered at this time regarding the GFA for the new building. 

Replied on 08/12/2020 12:48 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #33 - Social Procurement Priority Objectives This post is publicly visible

Is MP prioritising any specific social and/or sustainable procurement objectives or setting social/sustaianble targets for the project?

Posted on 04/12/2020 16:10 by Supplier Person

MP has not set any specific social or sustainable procurement objectives due to a major part of the construction being refurbishment of an existing building.   

Part B – Project Specification and Scope of Services Clause 2.1 Scope Statement details parameters that need to be addressed in the design of the facilities. 

Part A – RFT Conditions details that the Local Jobs First Policy, Major Projects Skills Guarantee, Social Procurement Framework and Victorian Government Aboriginal Economic Strategies are applicable. The RFT requires proponents provide a response to the requirements of these policies.  The successful supplier will be required to deliver on their commitments made in response to these policies. 

Replied on 08/12/2020 12:13 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #32 - Town Planning This post is publicly visible

Can you please confirm if Melbourne Polytechnic is exempt from Town Planning? Will there be any planning process to comply with?

Posted on 04/12/2020 13:49 by Supplier Person

MP understands that as the project will be made on behalf of the Minister, we are exempt from town planning.   

The refurbishment proposal has had a positive initial response from the Yarra Council Planning Department. 

Replied on 08/12/2020 12:09 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #31 - Innovation This post is publicly visible

Schedule 4 section (h) Innovation / Value Add has a word limit of 250 words. Is this correct?

Schedule 1 includes a note that Proponents responses are to include Part D, and up to 12, A4 pages of attachments. Could you please confirm page limits? There may be a dozen CV's - should these be included in the body of the response schedule? 

 

Posted on 04/12/2020 12:07 by Supplier Person

The word limit for Innovation/Value Add is correct.  Attachments can be used to support your response. 

As detailed in the RFT proponent’s responses are to include Part D and up to 12, A4 pages of attachments.  Links to other sources of information is allowed. 

Replied on 08/12/2020 12:07 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #30 - Claims Assessment during construction phase This post is publicly visible

What is the Cost Manager scope and what is their relationship to the superintendent?

Will the Cost Manager or the Superintendant undertake claim assessments during the construction phase?

 

Posted on 04/12/2020 11:58 by Supplier Person

The cost manager will assess claims during construction after examination by the superintendent. 

Replied on 08/12/2020 12:04 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #29 - Existing as-built information This post is publicly visible

Given the building will need to be brought up to current NCC compliance, can existing building structural as-built information including reinforcement details be provided? This will be required to inform compliance with current earthquake code. If this as-built information cannot be provided contractor led survey may be required.

Please keep our details confidential in your response to our query

 

Posted on 04/12/2020 10:12 by Supplier Person

Assessment can be made as to the current earthquake code and the existing building structure by the successful tenderer. 

If the building does not comply with the latest earthquake code we may be able to get an exemption for the existing structure. 

Replied on 11/12/2020 15:54 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #27 - Schedule of accommodation This post is publicly visible

Does MP have a schedule of accommodation that defines the brief for how much space is required on campus. There is a mention of 1 or 2 new buildings to be included within this project but no indication of m² size beyond an indicative footprint. Is there any more detail available to assist in providing an accurate and competitive fee?

Posted on 03/12/2020 16:41 by Supplier Person

The brief has been left open, with indicative size of possible new buildings only. New building size should be considered in conjunction with the refurbishment cost for the existing building and the construction budget.  

Replied on 08/12/2020 11:51 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #25 - Eligibility For Submission This post is publicly visible

Good evening,

Can you confirm that this is an open tender for a Principal Design Consultant and Superintendent and not invitation only (which is typically the case for VSBA projects)?

We're under the impression that we would meet the eligibility requirements for the role but want to make sure this is indeed the case, due to the time and resource commitment required to put together a response.

If you could keep our details confidential that would be apprecaited.

Kind regards,

Himmelzimmer

Posted on 02/12/2020 19:32 by Supplier Person

This RFT is a public tender. All submissions will be evaluated against the evaluation criteria as detailed in Part A clause 28 of the RFT. 

Replied on 08/12/2020 11:49 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #24 - Budget/Surveyor This post is publicly visible

Good afternoon, 

  1. Does the $40m budget include decanting costs if the polytechnic needs to operate for the 26 month period?
  2. The RFT states that the Building Surveyor is to be Novated , however , All registered building surveyors in Victoria will be required to comply with the code from 1 January 2021.
    1. The code states that Building surveyors must not agree to novation of your contract with the owner or developer to a builder or other party before or during construction.
      Please confirm that the VSBA accept that this will not be possible and therefore not be required,

Thank you

Posted on 02/12/2020 16:24 by Supplier Person

1. The $40 million budget includes decanting costs for the period; however, it should be noted that the building does not have many students. MP anticipate these costs to be low. 

2. The building team will not be novated to the builder. According to the Victorian Building Authority rules the Building Surveyor must remain independent. 

Replied on 03/12/2020 13:02 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #23 - site survey information This post is publicly visible

Please keep details of this post confidential.

Does Melbourne Polytechnic have existing detailed survey information in digital (dwg or similar) format for the following, 
1) Topographical land survey of site extents
2) In-ground survey of existing services and infrastructure assets
3) Detailed survey and/or digitised drawings of existing buildings on site.

If not, is it expected that a (land surveyor) sub-contractor should be appointed (by the PDCS) to undertake the above scope of works.

Posted on 02/12/2020 15:35 by Supplier Person

MP does not have any digital land surveys 

The tenderer should detail what allowance they have made for the necessary digitized surveys for: topographical, inground and existing buildings.  

Replied on 03/12/2020 12:58 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #22 - Tender Enquiries This post is publicly visible

  • Could you please clarify the requirements of the schematic design, design development and contract documentation reports. Will this follow the standard VSBA guidelines (Form 08, 10, 12) ?
  • The 2.1 Scope Statement governance diagram in Part B (pg 20) implies that there is a contract between the PDCS and the Building Contractor. Could you please clarify if this is the case or does this just reflect that the PDCS will perform the superintendent services?
  • Can you please confirm that iTWOcx will be used as the platform for reporting.
  • Can you please clarify what the ‘Schedule of Departures’ in the Design Development Stage is referring to? What are PDCS’ using as a comparison document to assess departures? Will this be the standard/current VSBA BQSH document?
  • The briefing documents make no mention of requiring Traffic Engineering and Waste Management consultants as part of the standard services. As the briefing information suggests, a Traffic Engineer and Waste Management consultant would most likely be required. Can you please confirm the requirement of these consultants?

Posted on 02/12/2020 14:33 by Supplier Person

1. MP is anticipating following the Victorian School Building Authority’s guidelines for these matters. 

2. There will be no contract between the PDCS and the builder, it merely reflects that the PDCS will be the superintendent. 

3. We understand that Department of Education and Training will require the Gems reporting system. 

4. MP will use the standard Victorian School Building Authority’s document to assess departures. 

5. MP expects that the existing site driveways with connections to Otter Street and Perry Streets to remain which leads to site waste management. MP anticipates the requirement for the consultancy will be small. 

Replied on 03/12/2020 12:56 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #21 - 3 questions This post is publicly visible

1. We note preference by Melbourne Polytechnic to have superintendency performed by the architect. We note that this role would preclude novation of the design team to a builder. Therefore please confirm if novation will not be used within the VSBA Consultancy Agreement.

2. To inform foreseeable building services scope, please provide statutory essential service register and recent test certificates/maintenance logs for those services.

3. To inform foreseeable building services and structural scope, please provide or indicate the availability of building services and structural as built documentation.

Posted on 02/12/2020 11:17 by Supplier Person

1. The building team will not be novated to the builder. According to the Victorian Building Authority rules the Building Surveyor must remain independent. 

2.Essential Services are maintained as per the statutory requirements. We believe that a substantial amount of the existing building services will have to be replaced, so the test certificates are of little value. 

3. There are existing design PDF drawings for the building services and for the structural. They are cumbersome and we believe of little value as most of the services need to be replaced. 

Replied on 03/12/2020 12:50 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #20 - Floor plans This post is publicly visible

Can MP provide a set of floor plans stipulating room functions?

Posted on 02/12/2020 11:10 by Supplier Person

MP cannot provide a set of floor plans stipulating room functions.  

Replied on 03/12/2020 12:44 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #19 - Key design considerations This post is publicly visible

Key design considerations mention:

MP would look favorably at building one or more new building over an 800 to 900m2 including a single-level car park.

Does it mean over 800 - 900m2 building foot print? Or total build area is 800 - 900m2?

Posted on 02/12/2020 11:10 by Supplier Person

This is a reference to the footprint of the building not the total build. Thank you for asking for this clarification as the language needed improvement. 

Replied on 03/12/2020 12:42 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #18 - Coordination of Hazardous Materials and Environmental Management This post is publicly visible

Can we assume that at the MP engagement a Division 5 Hazmat report will be obtained, which will be used for Lump Sum tendering?

Posted on 02/12/2020 11:08 by Supplier Person

MP has an Asbestos assessment for the building. 

Replied on 03/12/2020 12:39 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #17 - Core use of spaces This post is publicly visible

Hi there

Can you please provide more information on what the primary use of spaces will be used for and / or student groups who will be occupying the existingand proposed new buildings?

 

Posted on 01/12/2020 17:47 by Supplier Person

The campus is expected to cater for our Auslan, Foundation, ESL, Innovation, Design and Precinct Partners. 

Replied on 08/12/2020 11:56 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #16 - Fees This post is publicly visible

Is a pricing schedule supplied or do we make one up?

Posted on 01/12/2020 11:37 by Supplier Person

The RFT does not include a pricing schedule template. MP requires a schedule that describes the main consultant costs. 

Replied on 03/12/2020 12:38 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #15 - Project Program This post is publicly visible

To whom it may concern,

The program described on page 21 of the RFT provides little time to complete briefing concept, schematic and detailed design. We understand the desire to fasttrack however would MP be open to an alternate design program that provides more consultation time and still delivers tender documentation by the end of August?

Posted on 30/11/2020 12:03 by Supplier Person

Deliverability of the design within the timelines will be assessed in the scoring formula as per the evaluation criteria. 

Replied on 01/12/2020 13:56 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #14 - Local Industry Development Plan This post is publicly visible

The ICN has listed the tender close date as 14 January 2021. Could you please advise if the tender is being extended, and if not when the LIDP cut off date is?

Posted on 30/11/2020 11:56 by Supplier Person

Please follow the instructions and dates set out in the RFT document.  

Replied on 01/12/2020 13:54 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #13 - Project Manager This post is publicly visible

Are Melbourne Polytechnic intending to seek the services of a Project Manager additional to the engagement of a DSCS?

Posted on 30/11/2020 11:51 by Supplier Person

MP is aware of the benefits and costs of using a client-side Project Management firm. At this stage, the Institute’s preferred procurement model continues to be for the role of superintendent to be performed by the architect.  

Replied on 01/12/2020 13:51 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Buyer Post #12 - Briefing Session Postponed This post is publicly visible

IMPORTANT: The briefing session for the Request for Tender for Principal Design Consultant and Superintendent Collingwood Campus Redevelopment Project was proposed to be held on 2 December 2020.  At this time the Briefing session will not be held until further notice. Please continue to monitor this forum.

Posted on 30/11/2020 11:41 by Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #11 - Briefing Session information This post is publicly visible

The brief states a briefing session is to be held 2nd December. Please advise details of the session time and location, and if this is virtual or in person briefing. 

Posted on 30/11/2020 10:58 by Supplier Person

The Briefing will be streamed via Zoom to ensure CoVid safe requirements are adhered to. 

Registration is limited to two people per organisation. 

The Briefing session will be held on Friday 11 December at 10am to 11am, to register please email Amanda Ravaneschi (amandaravaneschi@melbournepolytechnic.edu.au

Replied on 01/12/2020 13:49 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #10 - Briefing session - 2 Dec This post is publicly visible

Is there a link for the briefing session? How do we register for this? 

Posted on 27/11/2020 17:19 by Supplier Person

The Briefing will be streamed via Zoom to ensure CoVid safe requirements are adhered to. 

Registration is limited to two people per organisation. 

The Briefing session will be held on Friday 11 December at 10am to 11am, to register please email Amanda Ravaneschi (amandaravaneschi@melbournepolytechnic.edu.au

Replied on 01/12/2020 13:48 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #9 - Superintendent This post is publicly visible

.

Would MP consider separating the roles between the PDC and the Superintendent. This approach to appoint an Architect to act as the Project Manager / Superintendent differs from the VSBA guidelines and is seldom used in the industry due to Architectural firms conflict of interest between their documentation and providing an open assessment of issues , as well as not having the required experience and skills to for fill the PM/ Superintendent roles.

Private developers and other Government Departments utilise PM companies to act as independent managers to programme the works, imitate Tenders , assess Tenders, monitor the construction works, assess costs and assess quality through the construction phase. An experienced PM can save clients more than their fees and can ensure the project remain on track and under budget. Architectural firms skills resides with the design and documentation and the industry move to appoint client side PMs for many years ago because they could see the benefit with having a PM with industry knowledge, skills and commitment to ensuring the project stays within the clients timelines and costs.

 

 

 

Posted on 27/11/2020 14:45 by Supplier Person

MP is aware of the benefits and costs of using a client-side Project Management firm. At this stage, the Institute’s preferred procurement model continues to be for the role of superintendent to be performed by the architect.  

Replied on 01/12/2020 13:46 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #8 - Briefing Session details This post is publicly visible

The brief states a briefing session is to be held 2nd December. Please advise details of the session time and location. 

Posted on 27/11/2020 13:39 by Supplier Person

At this time the Briefing session will not be held until further notice. Please continue to monitor this forum. 

Replied on 01/12/2020 13:47 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #7 - registration This post is publicly visible

hi Samantha

  1. Can you confirm how we register interest in this tender, as indicated is required in the RFT
  2. Will the briefing on 2 Dec be online or on site?
  3. should we include Audio Visual consultancy and to what value of works?

regards

Peter Malatt

Six Degrees Pty Ltd

Posted on 27/11/2020 11:31 by Supplier Person

1. Registration details are detailed in the RFT, refer to Part A Item 1 Lodgement details, Registration. 

2. The Briefing will be streamed via Zoom to ensure CoVid safe requirements are adhered to. 

Registration is limited to two people per organisation. 

The Briefing session will be held on Friday 11 December at 10am to 11am, to register please email Amanda Ravaneschi (amandaravaneschi@melbournepolytechnic.edu.au

3. Please refer to Part B item 4.2.1 of the RFT, that describes the expected standard services required. 

Replied on 01/12/2020 13:45 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #6 - Fee Format This post is publicly visible

We understand as per Clause 28.4 that the fee is required to be a lump sum. Please advise if MP is seeking for the fixed lump sum fee to be presented as single number, or with a breakdown by project phase, discplines etc? 

Posted on 27/11/2020 08:27 by Supplier Person

Respondents are encouraged to provide as much information as possible to enable appropriate assessment.  

Replied on 01/12/2020 13:43 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #5 - Local Industry Development Plan This post is publicly visible

Could you please advise when the project will be available via ICN to prepare the LIDP? The project is not currently publicly available on the portal. 

Posted on 27/11/2020 08:23 by Supplier Person

The project is available via Industry Capability Network login whereby all vendors can access the Local Industry Development Plan (LIDP) template. Go to https://icnvic.force.com/and search for this Tender using the tender reference number RFT-PDC-1020.  

If you require assistance call Industry Capability Network Client Services on 03 9864 6700 (option 2) or email info@icnvic.org.au 

Replied on 01/12/2020 13:41 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #4 - Tender Enquiries This post is publicly visible

  • Part 4.2.1 of the RFT requires that the Relevant Building Surveyor is to be novated to the building contractor prior to construction. We are concerned that this will limit the competitive pool of RBS firms willing to novate; is this negotiable?
  • Please confirm that security, access control, CCTV design is to be included in the PDCS scope.
  • Part 4.2.3 of the RFT requires that the PDCS shall maintain registration with the Architects Registration Board of Victoria throughout the duration of the commission. Is it acceptable for a company registered with ARBV to be part of the PDCS’s subconsultant team rather than the PDCS itself? Similarly, is registration on the CSR under ‘Project Management’ an acceptable alternative to comply with 4.2.3 of the RFT?
  • We assume that the Lump Sum Agreement referred to throughout the RFT relates to a construct-only procurement (not D&C) using either a modified Australian Standard or Melbourne Polytechnic bespoke contract, prepared by MP.
  • Is the project targeting a Green Star certification?

Posted on 26/11/2020 16:07 by Supplier Person

Q) Part 4.2.1 of the RFT requires that the Relevant Building Surveyor is to be novated to the building contractor prior to construction. We are concerned that this will limit the competitive pool of RBS firms willing to novate; is this negotiable?

A) MP requires the Building Surveyor to be engaged by the PDSC on a whole of project fee structure and then be novated to the appointed builder under the original fee structure. 

 

Q)Please confirm that security, access control, CCTV design is to be included in the PDCS scope.

A) Melbourne Polytechnic has a nominated supplier for CCTV and security services. Consultants will liaise with MP’s nominated supplier during the design process and incorporate the design into the documents. 

 

Q) Part 4.2.3 of the RFT requires that the PDCS shall maintain registration with the Architects Registration Board of Victoria throughout the duration of the commission. Is it acceptable for a company registered with ARBV to be part of the PDCS’s subconsultant team rather than the PDCS itself? Similarly, is registration on the CSR under ‘Project Management’ an acceptable alternative to comply with 4.2.3 of the RFT?

A) MP requires the PDSC to be registered with the Architects Registration Board of Victoria for the duration of the project. 

 

Q) We assume that the Lump Sum Agreement referred to throughout the RFT relates to a construct-only procurement (not D&C) using either a modified Australian Standard or Melbourne Polytechnic bespoke contract, prepared by MP.

A) The Building Contract will be a lump sum contract based on approved templates by the Department of Treasury and Finance and MP’s legal counsel. 

 

Q) Is the project targeting a Green Star certification?

A) MP will look favourably to responses that incorporate Sustainable principles (such as Green Star) into the design. However, it is not anticipated that the whole project will require certification mainly due to the largest component of the project is a refurbishment of the existing building.  

Replied on 27/11/2020 14:13 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #3 - Briefing Session This post is publicly visible

Hi,

May I know what time and where will the briefing session scheduled for 2 December 2020 be held?

Thank you. 

Posted on 26/11/2020 14:48 by Supplier Person

The Briefing will be streamed via Zoom to ensure CoVid safe requirements are adhered to. 

Registration is limited to two people per organisation. 

The Briefing session will be held on Friday 11 December at 10am to 11am, to register please email Amanda Ravaneschi (amandaravaneschi@melbournepolytechnic.edu.au

Replied on 27/11/2020 14:08 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #2 - Cost Manager This post is publicly visible

Has a cost manager been appointed? If not, when will Melbourne Polytechnic issue the invitation for this? 

Posted on 26/11/2020 14:08 by Supplier Person

MP anticipates that the Invitation to Supply for the Cost Manager will be issued in late December 2020 to early January 2021. 

Replied on 27/11/2020 14:03 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic

Supplier Post #1 - JV approach This post is publicly visible

Good morning,

Would a JV approach be acceptable between an Architectural firm and a Project Management organisation specialising in construction programming project delivery acting as the Superintendent?

Thanks

 

Posted on 26/11/2020 09:07 by Supplier Person

MP will not entertain departing from the published procurement method by entering into agreements with organisations that do not meet the established criteria. However, proposals that include sub-contracting arrangements (such as for the role of Superintendent) will be considered, as long as the Proponent retains all risk for the sub-contracted arrangement. 

Replied on 27/11/2020 14:02 by Wayne Huntley of Melbourne Polytechnic