Laserfiche WebLink
A committee comprised of the Director of Parks and Recreation, Assistant Director, Park <br />Superintendent and Skating Center Superintendent reviewed proposals and participated in the <br />interview process. The following key elements were used to evaluate the proposals: <br />• Public input for all individual plans <br />• Public input for overall process <br />• Process for information exchange i.e. Web site, blog..... <br />• Number of public meetings <br />• Community Center discussion and concept planning <br />• Team make-up/qualifications <br />• Understanding of the project <br />• Input from city staff, recreation, maintenance, other city departments <br />• Demographics influence on process <br />• Understanding of what is unique to Roseville Parks and Recreation <br />• Maintenance issue awareness <br />• Practicality <br />• Completeness of Proposal <br />• Work plan compatibility with our expectations <br />• Relevant experience <br />• Strength of references <br />• Intangibles <br />• Fees and costs <br />On June 8t", 2009 interviews were conducted with the top four proposers, they were as follows. <br />Firm Cost Score (out of 170) <br />Bonestroo $140,000 144 <br />LHB $125,300 156 <br />NAC $150,000 138 <br />SEH $ 98,017 140 <br />Note: other staff, Parks and Recreation Commission and community members were involved in <br />providing input and advice in various ways. <br />A portion of the "Best Value Procurement" method was utilized involving five specific filters: <br />1) Proposal review <br />2) Key elements identified in the proposal <br />3) General interviews <br />4) Pre-award interviews <br />5) Value added discussions with key personnel <br />After interviewing the top four firms for their demonstrated understanding of the project, clarity of <br />approach, fees and costs and deliverables, staff is recommending that the City enter into an <br />agreement with LHB/Cornejo Consulting for the Roseville Parks and Recreation System Master <br />Plan Update for a scope outlined in the attachment for a cost not to exceed $125,300 to be taken <br />from the City Park Dedication Fund. <br />Somewhat unclear in all proposals but will become clearer as the process begins is to what extent <br />a needs assessment (index) and marketing effort should be conducted. The Parks and <br />Recreation Commission has discussed the need to increase the marketing efforts as appropriate <br />Page 2 of 4 <br />