Travis County Commssioners Court
February 11, 2003
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
Item 16
16. Discuss evaluation committee rankings of the architectural/engineering proposals submitted for rfq no. Q030020-jj, professional engineering services for the wells branch parkway road -- lease try it again. No. Q030020-jj, professional engineering services for the wells branch parkway road design project, approve authorization to commence contract negotiations with the most highly qualified firm, and take appropriate action.
>> this r.f.q. We received 13 proposals. Once again, the evaluation committee went through the process and [inaudible] and top ranking firm was tnt engineering. A special note to the court, tnt engineering is a h.u.b. Firm. It is a -- an anglo woman owned business.
>> the only thing that I would like to add to this, again, we got premises response to the r.f.p. That went out. And just want to thank all of the folks in purchasing and tnr, acea, other kinds of organization that's really got the word out about this project and we got some very good responses. I wish there could be more than.
>> wynn:er, but there isn't.
>> > we actually started this process last year in March when we had a bond kickoff program, invited all of the h.u.b. Firms to come in and it's been a long process and joe and them are working really hard to get all of these out. So it's been a tremendous effort and I would be remiss if I didn't comment on sylvia and jorge, they are doing a really good job to try to meet the hub participation goals of the court. Hopefully when we come back at contract award we will be able to give you those firm numbers.
>> the evaluation matrix here, exhibit a, is a lot more informative than the backup that we had on the other item. Why are they different, I guess, if -- since it's the same department?
>> one was a park and the other was a road. So the evaluation criteria are similar.
>> do we lay it out the same way.
>> we could --
>> this is readable, provide as lot more information.
>> go --
>> we have different staff working on it that have different methods, but --
>> I -- you all understand my point, though.
>> standardize.
>> anybody here on this item?
>> judge, I would move that we authorize the commencement of contract negotiations with tnt on this project.
>> second.
>> any more discussion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote.
Last Modified: Wednesday, April 2, 2003 10:25 AM