Architectural Services

{
    "tag": [
        "compiled"
    ],
    "id": "ocds-h6vhtk-0426a5-2024-05-22T10:43:17+01:00",
    "date": "2024-05-22T10:43:17+01:00",
    "ocid": "ocds-h6vhtk-0426a5",
    "initiationType": "tender",
    "tender": {
        "id": "ocds-h6vhtk-0426a5",
        "legalBasis": {
            "id": "32014L0024",
            "scheme": "CELEX"
        },
        "title": "Architectural Services",
        "status": "complete",
        "classification": {
            "scheme": "CPV",
            "id": "71220000",
            "description": "Architectural design services"
        },
        "mainProcurementCategory": "services",
        "description": "Architectural Services RIBA Stages 0 -7 and acting as Lead Designer across multiple workstreams divided in to 2 Lots",
        "value": {
            "amount": 7645000,
            "currency": "GBP"
        },
        "lotDetails": {
            "awardCriteriaDetails": "Architect appointment 1 and Architect appointment 2"
        },
        "lots": [
            {
                "id": "1",
                "title": "Arhitect Appointment 1",
                "description": "Architectural Services and Lead Designer role for workstreams CH1 / CH2 / CH3 / BP1 / FLD1 (which are 5 workstreams out of an anticipated 15nr workstreams for the capital programme) Additional information: The workstreams are subject to funding being secured along with planning permission and listed building consent being obtained. The works will be signed off to proceed at each RIBA works stage subject to these variables.",
                "value": {
                    "amount": 5310364,
                    "currency": "GBP"
                },
                "contractPeriod": {
                    "startDate": "2024-04-01T00:00:00+01:00",
                    "endDate": "2026-05-30T23:59:59+01:00"
                },
                "hasRenewal": false,
                "submissionTerms": {
                    "variantPolicy": "notAllowed"
                },
                "hasOptions": false,
                "status": "cancelled",
                "awardCriteria": {
                    "criteria": [
                        {
                            "name": "Award questions",
                            "type": "quality",
                            "description": "60"
                        },
                        {
                            "name": "Value and resource",
                            "type": "cost",
                            "description": "40"
                        }
                    ]
                }
            },
            {
                "id": "2",
                "title": "Architect Appointment 2",
                "description": "Architectural Services and Lead Designer role for workstreams FLD2 / HR1 / HR2 / AC1 / AC2 / AC3 / AD1 / AD2 (which are 8 workstreams out of an anticipated 15nr workstreams for the capital programme) Additional information: The workstreams are subject to funding being secured along with planning permission and listed building consent being obtained. The works will be signed off to proceed at each RIBA works stage subject to these variables.",
                "value": {
                    "amount": 2038269,
                    "currency": "GBP"
                },
                "contractPeriod": {
                    "startDate": "2024-04-01T00:00:00+01:00",
                    "endDate": "2026-04-30T23:59:59+01:00"
                },
                "hasRenewal": false,
                "submissionTerms": {
                    "variantPolicy": "notAllowed",
                    "electronicCataloguePolicy": "required"
                },
                "hasOptions": false,
                "status": "cancelled",
                "awardCriteria": {
                    "criteria": [
                        {
                            "name": "Award questions",
                            "type": "quality",
                            "description": "60"
                        },
                        {
                            "name": "Price and Resource",
                            "type": "cost",
                            "description": "40"
                        }
                    ]
                }
            }
        ],
        "items": [
            {
                "id": "1",
                "additionalClassifications": [
                    {
                        "scheme": "CPV",
                        "id": "71200000",
                        "description": "Architectural and related services"
                    }
                ],
                "deliveryAddresses": [
                    {
                        "region": "UKH1"
                    },
                    {
                        "region": "UKH1"
                    }
                ],
                "deliveryLocation": {
                    "description": "Snape Maltings, Snape IP17 1SP"
                },
                "relatedLot": "1"
            },
            {
                "id": "2",
                "additionalClassifications": [
                    {
                        "scheme": "CPV",
                        "id": "71200000",
                        "description": "Architectural and related services"
                    }
                ],
                "deliveryAddresses": [
                    {
                        "region": "UKH1"
                    },
                    {
                        "region": "UKH1"
                    }
                ],
                "deliveryLocation": {
                    "description": "Snape Maltings, Snape IP17 1SP"
                },
                "relatedLot": "2"
            }
        ],
        "submissionMethod": [
            "electronicSubmission"
        ],
        "submissionMethodDetails": "http://www.brittenpearsarts.org",
        "documents": [
            {
                "id": "economic",
                "documentType": "economicSelectionCriteria"
            },
            {
                "id": "technical",
                "documentType": "technicalSelectionCriteria"
            }
        ],
        "otherRequirements": {
            "requiresStaffNamesAndQualifications": true
        },
        "procurementMethod": "open",
        "procurementMethodDetails": "Open procedure",
        "tenderPeriod": {
            "endDate": "2024-01-22"
        },
        "submissionTerms": {
            "languages": [
                "en"
            ]
        },
        "awardPeriod": {
            "startDate": "2024-01-23T12:00:00Z"
        },
        "bidOpening": {
            "date": "2024-01-23T12:00:00Z"
        },
        "hasRecurrence": false,
        "amendments": [
            {
                "id": "1",
                "description": "Tender Clarification Number 1 Architectural Services Appointment Lots 1 & 2 is to cover RIBA Stages 0 - 7 (not only 1-7 as stated on the original notice). Updated Invitation to Tender and Pricing Schedule included in the new link https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/kbgzma4c1pp1adywm0cw5/h?rlkey=it0h8uqg3mmw6o9k7cgxb86gh&dl=0"
            },
            {
                "id": "2",
                "description": "Tender Clarification 2 in response to tender questions raised. Q1. In respect of question 7.1, whilst I have experience / examples of contracts I have worked on, as I have only set up my practice in the last six months, I cannot provide current practice examples. Would examples from previous work be accepted? A1. Question 7.1 allows for a scenario where a newly formed or a Special Purpose Vehicle is to be created for this contract. 3 separate examples should be provided. The aim is to obtain experience of the proposed team members so it will be entirely satisfactory to receive previous work examples even if from a former employment on the understanding that the named contact should be able to provide written evidence to confirm the accuracy of the information provided. Q2. In respect of other disciplines to complete design works e.g. M&E, structures etc. Are these being appointed separately by BPA or are these to be included in the tender return? A2. The Architectural Services appointment Lots 1 & 2 relates only to the Architectural Services / Lead Designer roles for workstreams as described in the Invitation to Tender. Separate notices have already been issued for other consultant disciplines and they will be appointed directly by BPA."
            },
            {
                "id": "3",
                "description": "Tender Clarification Number 3 following tender queries. Q1 Part 1. The insurance level of PS10M for PII appears to be at the higher end relative to project value. To provide the best and appropriate value we wanted to check if this can be set at a value of circa PS5M, which aligns with our experience on other projects. Q1 Part 2. Could I ask if the PS10M PI is an absolute requirement. A1 to Part 1 and Part 2. It was considered that PS5M would not be adequate cover as it does not just relate to project value and the level of PS10M set provided the cover necessary and therefore adjustment to a lower level is not acceptable. Q2. Will there be a separate ITT for heritage / conservation architect services in due course? A2. A separate Notice for Planning / Heritage Consultant has been issued on Find a Tender however the intention is the Architectural Appointment Lots 1 and 2 including the Lead Designer role will capture the heritage / conservation design elements."
            },
            {
                "id": "4",
                "description": "Tender Clarification number 4 following tender queries. Q1. We were wondering if you will be issuing the Questionnaires in word format? A1. No alternative format of questionnaires or documents will be issued. Q2. You have advertised the planning and heritage consultant role so are we correct to assume that we do not need to provide a fee for these two roles. A2. The Planning / Heritage Consultant Services is one role (not two as suggested) and is one of a multiple number of Consultant services being sought. Each Consultant discipline is being advertised on Find a Tender / Contracts Finder separately and will be appointed separately. Each role is open to tender but no obligation exists or is inferred to having to apply for more than one discipline / role."
            },
            {
                "id": "5",
                "description": "Tender Clarification Number 5 following tender queries. Q1.The dates suggest the final tenders are to be submitted by the 22nd Jan 24. With Christmas and New year in between the release date of the 18th Dec 23, that effectively leaves 2 weeks or so to prepare a submission for a multi building, multi-phased bid for the whole design team. (ITT docs refer to an Architect Led team bid). A1. The date set reflects the need to get this discipline appointed, Whilst the tender period is over Christmas this is a working period. For clarity (as previously confirmed in earlier Tender Clarifications) each Consultant discipline will be appointed directly and whilst the ITT makes it clear the Architect will be the Lead it is not seeking for a Consortium submission. Q2. 1. Appointment Process: Could you please confirm if the selection process is purely cost-based or if it involves multiple stages, such as a two-stage tender? Additionally, are interviews part of the selection process? A2. ITT Appendix A: Evaluation Criteria and Process clearly sets out the selection process (40% Pricing and 60% Quality) and also explains that after initial scoring the top 3 may be invited for interview. Q3. 2. Feasibility Study: Clarification on whether the initial appointment is exclusively for a feasibility study covering stages 0-1, with subsequent stages (2-7) dependent on the study's outcomes. A3. The ITT makes it clear that the workstreams are subject to funding, planning and listed building consent and that works will be signed off for progression at each RIBA stage. Q4. Output Expectations: What specific deliverables are expected/desired as part of the feasibility study? This could include sketch plans, reports, visualizations, or any other specific requirements. A4. The ITT Appendix B2 sets out the scope of services for each stage. The design requirement will depend on the workstreams but is anticipated to be a mix of plans, reports, CGI's / visualisations, drawings, models or the like as necessary to satisfy the brief. Q5. I note there are one or two buildings included in the proposal document but not in the architectural package. I assume therefore these are not to be included. A5. The ITT identifies workstreams to multiple buildings (significantly more than 2) and this is in the Architectural Package and also other Consultant disciplines. Q6. My subcontractors have PI Of PS5 million; do they have to increase their PI to PS10 million? or should we as lead Organisation increase ours to PS10M. A6. Any Consultants appointed directly by BPA will need the level of PI set out in the ITT. If you chose to subcontract works it is for you to determine the appropriate level of PI you require. Q7.4. Can you advise if Allies and Morrison who prepared the masterplan and Haworth Tompkins who have completed many projects on the site previously are eligible to bid for this or if you are specifically looking for architects who have not worked on the site previously? A7. The Tender is an open procurement process available for all who consider they meet the criteria set out. Q8.For the 3 case studies required under Part 1: Quality Evaluation - section 2 experience - can you advise if the projects need to be completed or can we use projects which are in progress? A8. The case studies are required to demonstrate the knowledge and expertise and for this to be verified by the contact provided. If the works are sufficiently progressed to do this then we have no objection to them being work in progress. Q9.7. Can you confirm if the estimated total value in the tender notice (PS7,645,000) is the construction cost estimate or if it is the total project costs? A9. The PS7,645,000 relates to the combined total budget Construction cost for Lots 1 & 2 which may be placed separately - it excludes Client direct costs (professional fees / insurances / FF&E), Contingency, VAT etc."
            },
            {
                "id": "6",
                "description": "Tender Clarification Number 6. Box link included below for submission of Tenders https://app.box.com/f/ad1feb56bf95475abba7b3118664420e This link is to be used for tender submissions and is timed to close in line with the closing date published in the ITT and notice. Note Tenders are not to be sent via BPA website or direct to any BPA email addresses."
            },
            {
                "id": "7",
                "description": "Tender Clarification Number 7 following tender queries. Q1. Do you have an intended RIBA stage programme? A1. The Appendix H Pricing Schedule contains an indicative Timeline across the RIBA stages but this is subject to further development and external influences such as (but not limited to) funding, planning permission and listed building consent. Q2. Are you happy to have a mixture of online meetings and in-person meetings? A2. It is anticipated that meetings will be a mixture of on site and remote subject to the workstream stage and requirements. Q3. We note in the DRM the Architect is producing the design and access statement(s) - not the planning/heritage. We would assume for the heritage that most of the report writing would be by the specialist. A3. The Planning / Heritage Consultant services is currently published for tender separately on Find a Tender. It includes the following requirement \"The Planning and Heritage Consultant will be expected to develop a holistic planning / heritage strategy encompassing all relevant workstreams, and working with the design team, lead the liaison with the relevant authorities to ensure the strategy's realisation\". Also the Scope of Services sets out a requirement for them to provide a Planning statement. Q4. We note the inclusion of stages 0-1 where there is typically significant emphasis on briefing (including a feasibility study) - yet the scope seems quite well defined - how fixed/developed is the brief, and what level of optioneering is expected at this stage? A4. The intention is for the appointed Consultants for each discipline to start from RIBA stage 0 to ensure completeness of review and ensuring the brief from each workstream going forward is fully understood and verified. So whilst the outline Employers Requirements may have been described in the proposed scope some of the workstreams may need a study and offer of alternative proposals / options. Q5. Is there a requirement for BIM level 2? A5. Whilst collaborative working is anticipated and common sharing of CAD information expected no specific requirement for BIM have been set. Q6. Procurement - For clarity, there are three separate appointments/procurements for the three phases, is this correct? A6. No - 1 appointment for Architect Lot 1 (with the workstreams identified) and 1 appointment for Architect Lot 2 (with the workstreams identified). The grouping of the workstreams on the Pricing schedule is to facilitate the funding reporting. Q7. Scope 7.1 Are we correct in assuming the procurement will be traditional as opposed to D&B. A7. As detailed in the ITT / Pricing schedule it is anticipated that the building contracts will be let as single stage traditional procurement (with Contractors Design obligation for the elements set out in the DRM). Q8. Scope 7.7 Monitor the compilation of 'as constructed' information. 7.14 Prepare the 'As constructed' information - We assume general responsibility rests with the architect as per a traditional contract, but with contractor's input for CDP items - is this correct? A8. As detailed in the ITT / Pricing schedule it is anticipated that the building contracts will be let as single stage traditional procurement (with Contractors Design obligation for the elements set out in the DRM) so yes the general responsibility rests with the Architect with support on CDP elements by the Contractor. Q9.Looking at the programme - there seems to be insufficient allowance for planning/listed building consent and the front end seems quite compressed for what is being asked. Would you like us to price against your programme, or against the programme as we see it unfolding? A9. The Appendix H Pricing Schedule contains an indicative Timeline across the RIBA stages but this is subject to further development and external influences such as (but not limited to) funding, planning permission and listed building consent. Your tender should reflect the workstreams set out and the indicative timeline is issued for assistance only and open to interpretation by the tenderers and adjustment as they see fit. Q10. What will the anticipated meeting/site attendance be during the design and construction phases? A10. It is anticipated that meetings / site attendance will be a mixture of on site and remote subject to the workstream stage and requirements with the focus at construction stage being more site related. The scope of services identifies the roles to be covered at each stage."
            },
            {
                "id": "8",
                "description": "Tender Clarification Number 8 following tender questions. Q1. If we are submitting tenders for both BPA Arch1 and BPA Arch 2, do we have to complete two separate Selection Questionnaires, or will one be sufficient for evaluation purposes? A1. A separate questionnaire is required for each ITT. Q2. We note that BPA will be using the CIC Form of Appointment and will not accept proposed amendments. Where we have identified some areas which require clarification or amendment to meet the terms of our PI insurance cover, would BPA be prepared to consider any comments on the appointments terms during the tender stage? Should we be appointed, we would seek to agree a mutually acceptable set of terms prior to commencement. A2. It should be noted that only items that render the PI cover you hold inoperable will be reviewed and should be set out now. Q3. We have recently completed a similar and relevant project, working in collaboration with a conservation and heritage specialist architect. Given the nature of your requirements, we would like to propose a collaboration with the same team on this project. However, we note that in the Design Responsibility Matrix, on Page 49, that you intend to appoint a planning and heritage consultant separately. We would like to confirm that you do not see a conflict in us including a heritage and conservation specialist as part of our architect team. A3. Tender Clarification Number 7 identified that the Planning / Heritage role is a separate appointment. That said the Architecture ITT section 2.5.5 identifies that the Tenderers must demonstrate resourcing and capability to each workstream, some of which relate to listed buildings. The Architect will have the responsibility to provide the design so utilising a heritage and conservation specialist for an element of the design does not appear a conflict but is for the tenderer to satisfy themselves that they have included for the full scope of services set out and the right level of resourcing. Q4. The ESPD makes it clear that collaborating members of the team do not each need to supply three separate reference projects but can combine three between them. Do you require the collaborator to fill out the full ESPD form or is this only the responsibility of us as the Lead Architect, naming the collaborator within our form? A4. Section 3 Selection Questionnaire, 7.1 makes it clear that we are not seeking separate examples from multiple disciplines, this ITT requires examples relevant to the Architectural / Lead Architect roles as detailed in Lot 1 and Lot 2."
            },
            {
                "id": "9",
                "description": "Tender Clarification Number 9 following tender queries. Q1. Estimated construction costs PS5,310,364 and PS2,038,269 (plus VAT): please could you provide a schedule of approximate areas of respective buildings and/or a breakdown of the cost estimate related to the individual buildings or items of work, so that we and other tenderers can gain a better sense of how much work is anticipated on each of CH1, CH2, CH3, BP1, FLD1, FLD2, HR1, HR2, AC1, AC2, AC3, AD1, AD2? (The brief/scope at present is more open to interpretation than one wants if quoting a lump sum i.e. fixed fee). A1. Providing approximate areas would not distinguish / describe all workstreams as an example CH1 acoustic treatment / CH3 seating replacement. Budget construction values for each workstream are shown below (excluding VAT are shown below) CH1 PS1,597,000 CH2 PS1,005,364 CH3 PS546,000 BP1 PS2,062,000 FLD1 PS100,000 Total PS5,310,364 Lot 1 FLD2 PS125,000 HR1 PS497,532 HR2 PS200,737 AC1 PS720,000 AC2 PS160,000 AC3 PS100,000 AD1 PS60,000 AD2 PS175,000 Total PS2,038,269 Lot 2 Q2. Design Responsibility Matrix: please clarify how best to determine who is taking 'primary responsibility' where several parties have been given primary responsibility. For example in landscaping, it is unusual to see the architect being given primary responsibility for planting when a landscape architect is being involved. Whilst it seems obvious that everyone would be responsible for their own drawings and documents and hazard identification/mitigation, there are instances (e.g. audio and studio design) where 4 parties have been allocated 'primary responsibility' and could each make very different assumptions about who is leading, who actually has primary responsibility and the extent of who is being asked to do what. If this cannot be clarified now, it will need to be clarified prior to appointments being finalised. A2. The Primary responsibility for the specific discipline within a workstream design element can and is anticipated to be shared. If we take the Specialist Audio showing as 4nr primary responsibilities across the Architect, MEPH, Acoustic and Theatre Consultant will exist with each providing the primary element of their specialism with the Architect being the Lead to coordinate. Q3. The DRM notes \"all waterproofing responsibilities to specialist designer\" but the list of separate consultants doesn't mention a specialist or waterproofing designer. Please clarify your expectations on this. A3. The DRM denotes \"CD\" being Contractors Design for this element so it will not be a specialist consultant appointed directly by BPA but via the Contractor. Q4. Building Inspector: Is it proposed to involve an independent Approved Inspector or work with the local authority? Is this appointment to be made with the involvement of the architect once they are appointed. A4. Yes the intention is the Architect will be part of this decision making process. Q5. Principal Designer (Appendix B2 1.6) - please clarify which consultant is expected to take on PD responsibilities in relation to differing workstreams CH1, CH2, CH3, BP1, FLD1, FLD2, HR1, HR2, AC1, AC2, AC3, AD1, AD2 A5. We are out to tender (via Contracts Finder) for the PD / Pre Construction / Health and Safety Consultant with the intention to appoint directly. Q6. With the possible exception of Principal Designer, are all 20 consultant roles on the DRM being separately tendered? A6. Yes as confirmed in previous tender clarifications BPA are seeking to appoint all Consultant Disciplines separately. Q7. Ref Section 8.1a: We have noted in earlier responses to potential tenderers that BPA will deem PS5m cover inadequate and tenders will be considered 'not acceptable' without PS10m cover. Please advise the length of time Britten Pears Arts will require PS10m cover to be in place following the completion of the construction works and the services related to them? A7. The contracts will be underhand so a 6 year term from completion of the construction works. Q8. We currently hold PS5m for PI Insurance, PS5m for Employers Liability insurance & PS5M for Public Liability insurance but on Architects' Journal where you advert the project the applicants must hold employer's liability insurance of PS10 million, public liability insurance of PS10 million and professional indemnity insurance of PS10 million. Can we obtain, if necessary, this right level of insurance once the Contract has been awarded ? A8. The required PI level will be a pre requisite of a contract being placed but not a pre requisite of tendering. Q9. The contract examples provided/case study from Selection Questions Section 7_Technical and Professional Ability must be different by the cases from Award Questions_ Part 1: Quality Evaluation_ 2. Experience? A9. No - the case studies do not necessarily need to be separate / different they just need to support / respond to the questions raised ."
            },
            {
                "id": "10",
                "description": "Tender Clarification Number 10 following tender query. Q1. Project Lead (Appendix B2 1.7) - is this an independent PM or the client? The Lead designer is in the DRM noted as the architect but are there elements of the work where lead designer is someone else? A1. We have a notice out for a PM / CA role across workstreams CH1, CH2, BP1, HR1, AC1 as a separate appointment. For the other workstreams the Client will be directly Project Managing. The Architect is generally the Lead designer as defined in the ITT / Scope of Services. Exception will be workstreams HR1 and HR2 where the MEPH Consultant will be the Lead (due to the focus on heating and renewables)."
            },
            {
                "id": "11",
                "description": "Tender Clarification Number 11 Q1. Will survey drawings be available for all areas at the start of Stage 2? A1. The DRM highlights that survey requirements will be identified by the Lead Designer with a list of site surveys, assessments (as necessary) showing the Client as Primary Responsibility. It follows that if survey drawings are required for Stage 2 then the Lead Designer will establish that early on. Q2. We note the recent clarification on the Contract Administrator role across workstreams CH1, CH2, BP1, HR1, AC1 being undertaken under a separate PM/CA appointment. As the client will be PM for the other workstreams, who will carry out the CA role? A2. It is currently anticipated that the Client will be the CA for the other workstreams as they are smaller in value and more simple in nature Q3.Since there are 2 lots, and we are interested in bidding for both, do we need to complete all the forms twice? I expect they would be identical A3. We would expect two forms to be submitted, one for each tender even if they are identical as each tender will be scored, reviewed and marker separately"
            },
            {
                "id": "12",
                "description": "Tender Clarification Number 12. Q1.Timeline & Fee Drawdown - Please could you confirm this is not to be completed? A1. We need all the Appendix H forms completed. Q2. Resource Summary - Please could you confirm we can add rows to the resource levels? Or would you prefer us to stick to the four resource levels? A2. Subject to checking that the totals carry forward correctly we have no objection to additional resource levels / lines being added."
            },
            {
                "id": "13",
                "description": "Tender Clarification Number 13. Q1. Have Condition Surveys been done for the buildings? A1. Yes we have a number of condition surveys which will be made available post appointment, some of which may need updating and as works stages 0 - 7 apply to all consultant disciplines we would be expecting a fresh review of all buildings. Q2. Has M&E modelling been done for the buildings? A2. We have had a report on the M&E services within the concert hall and energy centre however no modelling. Any reports would be made available post appointment for background however as works stages 0 - 7 apply to all consultant disciplines we would be expecting a fresh review of all services. Q3. Are they expecting Principal Designer role? A3. We can confirm that the Principal Designer / H&S Consultant role is a separate discipline that is currently out to tender on Contracts Finder with the intention that this is appointed directly."
            },
            {
                "id": "14",
                "description": "Tender Clarification Number 14 Q1. Is there any further information available for the Britton Pears Building (BP1)? e.g., existing drawings. A1. We do have older drawings available but the brief for this appointment is to undertake stages 0 - 7 so whilst access to previous information may be available it will be post appointment and it is intended that new drawings will be produced. Q2.Could the scope of work for the Project Manager and Contract Administrator be outlined since there seem to be a number overlapping elements listed under RIBA work stages 5, 6 and 7 and the Lead Designer's Scope of Work. A2. The PM / CA ITT including the scope of work is available on the FindaTender website. Q3.Principal Designer role. Please confirm if this is CDM Principal Designer (CDM PD) and / or Building Safety Act Principal Designer (BSA PD). This should be clarified to reflect current regulations. The BSA PD should have Primary Responsibility for co-ordinating the Building Regulations Application, not the Architect / Lead Designer A3. The new Building Safety Regulations (BSA) which came into force on 1st October 2023 introduces new requirements for higher risk buildings. Whilst the works being undertaken as part of the Capital Programme do not come under the class of \"higher risk buildings\" the PD / CDM role being procured separately will have to comply with these regulations which do include a need for review and coordination of the Building Regulations Application. Q4. Design Protocols: While the Architect/Lead Designer has responsibility for Design Co-ordination, Integration should be covered by each discipline as appropriate. A4. The DRM identifies \"S \"against the other disciplines being a Supporting responsibility - they will provide the technical elements relating to their specialism for integration by the Architect / Lead Consultant. Q5. BWIC (non structural): As Architect, we would support in our co-ordination role, but the services should actually be set out by others i.e. the MEP contractor. A5. Due to heritage / listed nature of a lot of the workstreams we have determined the Architect / Lead Designer needs to set these out utilising information supplied by the MEPH consultant. Q6. Sustainability Strategy: As Architect, we would have supporting responsibility, but the primary responsibility is for the Sustainability Consultant A6. We have shown this as a shared Primary responsibility. The Architect will have a primary responsibility to ensure the Sustainability strategy being developed aligns with the Planning / Listed Building requirements. Q7. Demolition Strategy: Given the sensitivity and nature of the heritage works involved, the structural engineer should lead on all demolition elements and consideration and set out the scope of demolition works. A7. Due to heritage / listed nature of a lot of the workstreams we have determined the Architect / Lead Designer needs to have primary responsibility on the drawing and specification, supported by the other disciplines, including the Structural Engineer as shown. Q8. Masonry and Timber Repair: As stated the Structural Engineer should lead on all SRT elements consideration and have primary responsibility for these design aspects, rather than the Architect. A8.Due to heritage / listed nature of a lot of the workstreams we have determined the Architect / Lead Designer needs to have primary responsibility on the drawing and specification, supported by the other disciplines, including the Structural Engineer as shown. Q9. Responsibility: We note there are a number of services that are listed as being 'CD' and in such cases, the Architect's role should be indicated as 'C' as opposed to 'P'. For example, Primary Responsibility for Landscape Design (flora and fauna) should be with the landscape architect. Equally, below ground drainage should be with the engineer or landscape architect depending on condition, and Primary Responsibility for all MEPH services should be with the MEP engineer. A9. A number of the disciplines note a shared Primary responsibility. The intention of the Workstreams design is they are Architect Led and therefore Primary responsibility must remain with Architect with shared primary, supporting responsibility or Contractors Design elements as shown."
            },
            {
                "id": "15",
                "description": "Tender Clarification Number 15. Q1. Could you also please confirm which edition of the CIC form of appointment is being used? The link in the ITT takes us to the scope of services consultants A1. Major building projects, second edition. Please note specific term amendments required to maintain Professional Indemnity cover would need to be reviewed and signed off post appointment."
            },
            {
                "id": "16",
                "description": "Tender Clarification Number 16 Q1. In regards to appendices to be signed , why are there 2 sets of signatures at the end of each appendix -do you need 2 directors to sign? Or one is ours and one will be BPA's? A1. We are seeking signature from two Directors / Principals of the business (or alternatively one Director and one Company Secretary) Q2. Who do we address them to? I assume BPA but whose attention? They start with \"To: For the Attention of:\" A2. All tenders can be address to Britten Pears Arts for the attention of Ken Baines Q3. In part 4 you request Insurances, quality assurance, H&S, Environmental. Do you want the full policy or just the certificates to prove we have everything ? such as ISO9001, CHAS, ISO14001 A3. Section 8.1.b makes it clear we are seeking copies of insurance certification demonstrating insurances, at this stage we do not need full policy documents. Q4. Will we be marked down if the case studies are a perfect fit to yours but are older than the 3 years timeframe? A4. In order to be considered most relevant, case studies should reflect works carried out within the last 3 years."
            }
        ]
    },
    "parties": [
        {
            "id": "GB-COH-00980281",
            "name": "Britten Pears Arts",
            "identifier": {
                "legalName": "Britten Pears Arts",
                "id": "00980281",
                "scheme": "GB-COH"
            },
            "address": {
                "streetAddress": "Snape Maltings Concert Hall",
                "locality": "Saxmundham",
                "region": "UKH14",
                "postalCode": "IP171SP",
                "countryName": "United Kingdom"
            },
            "contactPoint": {
                "name": "Ken Baines",
                "telephone": "+44 7970161832",
                "email": "kbaines@brittenpearsarts.org",
                "url": "https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/kbgzma4c1pp1adywm0cw5/h?rlkey=it0h8uqg3mmw6o9k7cgxb86gh&dl=0"
            },
            "roles": [
                "buyer"
            ],
            "details": {
                "url": "http://www.brittenpearsarts.org",
                "classifications": [
                    {
                        "scheme": "TED_CA_TYPE",
                        "description": "Cultural Charity"
                    },
                    {
                        "scheme": "COFOG",
                        "description": "Charity Works"
                    }
                ]
            }
        },
        {
            "id": "GB-FTS-525",
            "name": "High Court",
            "identifier": {
                "legalName": "High Court"
            },
            "address": {
                "locality": "London",
                "countryName": "United Kingdom"
            },
            "roles": [
                "reviewBody"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "GB-COH-00980821",
            "name": "Britten Pears Arts",
            "identifier": {
                "legalName": "Britten Pears Arts",
                "id": "00980821",
                "scheme": "GB-COH"
            },
            "address": {
                "streetAddress": "Snape Maltings Concert Hall",
                "locality": "Saxmundham",
                "region": "UKH14",
                "postalCode": "IP171SP",
                "countryName": "United Kingdom"
            },
            "contactPoint": {
                "name": "Ken Baines",
                "telephone": "+44 7970161832",
                "email": "kbaines@brittenpearsarts.org"
            },
            "roles": [
                "buyer"
            ],
            "details": {
                "url": "http://www.brittenpearsarts.org"
            }
        },
        {
            "id": "GB-COH-00890281",
            "name": "Britten Pears Arts",
            "identifier": {
                "legalName": "Britten Pears Arts",
                "id": "00890281",
                "scheme": "GB-COH"
            },
            "address": {
                "streetAddress": "Snape Maltings Concert Hall",
                "locality": "Saxmundham",
                "region": "UKH14",
                "postalCode": "IP171SP",
                "countryName": "United Kingdom"
            },
            "contactPoint": {
                "name": "Ken Baines",
                "telephone": "+44 7970161832",
                "email": "kbaines@brittenpearsarts.org"
            },
            "roles": [
                "buyer"
            ],
            "details": {
                "url": "http://www.brittenpearsarts.org"
            }
        },
        {
            "id": "GB-COH-03885726",
            "name": "De Matos Ryan",
            "identifier": {
                "legalName": "De Matos Ryan",
                "id": "03885726",
                "scheme": "GB-COH"
            },
            "address": {
                "streetAddress": "99-100 Turnmill Street",
                "locality": "London",
                "region": "UKI4",
                "postalCode": "EC1M 5QP",
                "countryName": "United Kingdom"
            },
            "roles": [
                "supplier"
            ],
            "details": {
                "scale": "sme"
            }
        }
    ],
    "buyer": {
        "id": "GB-COH-00980281",
        "name": "Britten Pears Arts"
    },
    "language": "en",
    "description": "Awarded contract scores Lot 1 Quality 56 Price 15.18 Total 71.18 Lot 2 Quality 59 Price 12.04 Total 71.04",
    "awards": [
        {
            "id": "016122-2024-1",
            "status": "active",
            "suppliers": [
                {
                    "id": "GB-COH-03885726",
                    "name": "De Matos Ryan"
                }
            ]
        }
    ],
    "contracts": [
        {
            "id": "016122-2024-1",
            "awardID": "016122-2024-1",
            "status": "active",
            "value": {
                "amount": 7348633,
                "currency": "GBP"
            },
            "dateSigned": "2024-04-15T00:00:00+01:00"
        }
    ],
    "bids": {
        "statistics": [
            {
                "id": "1",
                "measure": "bids",
                "value": 50
            }
        ]
    }
}