Addendum
to the
Request for Information
City of Los Angeles
“Convention Center Modernization and Expansion Project”
Updates to the RFI (BAVNID: #26909)
Announcement(s):
Regarding the optional, as-requested one-on-one interviews (see Section A, 2.3 RFI Timeframe),
respondents that desire a one-on-one interview must respond (to [email protected]) with
an interview request by the May 6, 2016 RFI submission deadline.
Questions and Answers:
The “Questions and Answers” section below includes the clarification questions submitted with
answers provided.
Amended Section B: RFI Tables and related updates:
The final section of the addendum is an amended Section B: RFI Tables. Respondents should use
these tables to provide your written feedback.
 Question 4.2.9 was removed as this topic is sufficiently covered in Questions 4.5.1-4.5.5.
 Question 4.3.3 has been amended to clarify that prevailing wage and all of the City’s
other contracting requirements will be an element of this project. This RFI posting also
includes as an added attachment the most recent list of required City contracting forms
(for informational purposes only, this RFI is not soliciting bids or contracting
opportunities).
 Question 4.6.7 has been amended for clarity.
 Edits are included in red text, comments are highlighted in yellow.
Questions and Answers
1.) I would like to request a bidders list or plan holders list for the Convention Center
Expansion Project coming up on the sixth.
This is a Request for Information only. We are not seeking project bids or qualifying a list of
respondents. We are seeking voluntary feedback from the market at this time. As such, there
will be no bidders list, plan holders list, etc. as part of this RFI.
2.) I am interested in receiving a plan holders list for the Convention Center Expansion
and Modernization Project. Please let me know if these are available in digital format
and as a planroom, how I should go about acquiring this. Also, what’s the best method
for me to stay current with changes to the plan holders list? I appreciate any assistance
you can offer.
See the response to Question 1 above.
3.) I am writing to request more information regarding Design/Build Services for
Convention Center Modernization And Expansion Project for the LACC, solicitation#
26909.
This Request for Information (RFI) seeks voluntary market feedback about the project
delivery approaches under consideration, particularly feedback related to a proposed DesignBuild-Finance-Operate-Maintain (“DBFOM” or “P3”) delivery method that is being studied.
The RFI document itself contains lots of helpful descriptive information about this project,
including links to other public documents that provide more detailed information.
4.) Hello, I’d like to request the information on / RFQ for this project.
See the response to Question 3 above.
5.) [Section B, RFI Tables 4.2.9] Question 4.2.9 regarding operations and maintenance
“with respect to”, appears to be unfinished. Please confirm the contents of this question.
Questions 4.5.1-4.5.5 cover this topic, so Question 4.2.9 has been removed. The RFI Tables
have been amended and provided below. Please use these tables rather than those in the
original RFI document to submit your responses.
6.) Question 4.2.9 is incomplete
See the response to Question 4 above.
7.) Is there an update on the timeline for the Headquarter Hotel?
The most up-to-date information for the Headquarter Hotel can be found by following this
link:
https://cityclerk.lacity.org/lacityclerkconnect/index.cfm?fa=ccfi.viewrecord&cfnumber=150446
Amended Section B - RFI Tables
In exploring the feasibility of a P3 delivery method for the LACC redevelopment, the City is interested in receiving feedback from
respondents across the following aspects:
1. General respondent information
2. Technical
3. Real estate opportunity
4. Financial
5. Operations
6. Procurement
7. Contracting
Questions related to each of these are presented in tables below. The City requests that each respondent provide answers to as many of
the questions as possible within the attached tables. Please indicate the presence or absence of a response via a Y or N in the
‘Response Provided’ column.
1.1
Item
No.
General Respondent Information
Question
4.1.1
Name, position, and contact information for
respondent’s lead contact.
4.1.2
Organizational profile (organization’s mission,
primary activities, total employment).
Response
Provided
(Y/N)
Response
Item
No.
Question
4.1.3
A brief summary of the qualifications of the
respondent’s firm related to P3 infrastructure
development and/or real estate development
generally, and as to convention centers, other
urban/social infrastructure development, and/or
real estate development in partnership with the
public sector specifically.
4.1.4
What category does your company fit into?
(Real estate investor, P3 investor, real estate
developer, P3 developer, real estate lender, P3
lender, other – please explain).
1.2
Item
No.
Response
Provided
(Y/N)
Response
Technical
Question
4.2.1
In your opinion, what are the key opportunities
and risks with the overall program/project as
presented?
4.2.2
Given the proposed program, what concerns do
you have or opportunities do you see with
respect to accommodating the Convention
Center program within the campus to permit real
Response
Provided
(Y/N)
Response
Item
No.
Question
estate development?
4.2.3
What key drivers would you anticipate with
respect to the proposed DBFOM design and
construction scope would produce more value or
be more advantageous for the City, as compared
to a traditional procurement method?
4.2.4
What concerns do you have, or opportunities do
you see, with preserving parts of the existing
facilities?
4.2.5
What design elements or performance metrics
should the City prescribe to maximize the
opportunity for innovation by private-sector
proposers?
4.2.6
What additional studies and/or analysis should
the City complete and share with potential
proposers to support a successful DBFOM
procurement?
4.2.7
What is your range of estimates for the total
design and construction schedule (in months) for
the Project?
4.2.8
What are the major cost and schedule risk
drivers you would expect for a project of this
size and scope? What other key technical risks
should the City pay particular attention to?
Response
Provided
(Y/N)
Response
Item
No.
4.2.9
1.3
Question
Response
Provided
(Y/N)
Response
Response
Provided
(Y/N)
Response
This topic is covered in Questions 4.5.1-4.5.5
below.
What scope of operations & maintenance would
be attractive for you, especially with respect to
Real Estate Opportunity
Item
No.
Question
4.3.1
The plan for the redeveloped Convention Center
could include the reconfiguration of the site to
make some land available for private real estate
development adjacent to the LACC (amount to
be determined but may range between 9 and 14
acres). What is your view on the market
potential of this land given its location in
Downtown Los Angeles? What are key
opportunities and risks related to development
on this land?
4.3.2
The business plan currently anticipates the
prohibition of residential uses on the land made
available for private real estate development.
How would the prohibition of residential uses
affect the value and/or attractiveness of the land?
What non-residential real estate, institutional,
Item
No.
Question
non-traditional, or other uses seem most
appropriate for the land?
4.3.3
The City of Los Angeles will may require certain
public benefits as part of any development
proposal for expansion of the LACC and private
land uses on the LACC site including, but not
limited to, open space improvements, prevailing
wage agreements, and the other City contracting
requirements (current contracting requirements
attached to the RFI posting on BAVN). How
would these requirements affect the
attractiveness of development rights of the land?
Should some or all of these public benefits be
implemented on-site or off-site by the real estate
developer, or paid for by the developer, but
implemented by the City of Los Angeles?
4.3.4
Most large-scale developments in Downtown
Los Angeles range in size from two to five acres.
How would the site be best subdivided and
developed?
4.3.5
Land at the LACC site is not yet available for
real estate development, and may not be
available in this current market cycle. How
should the value of that land be discounted to
reflect market, political and other risks?
Response
Provided
(Y/N)
Response
Item
No.
Question
4.3.6
The business plan to deliver the Convention
Center currently anticipates including the
Convention Center delivery with the real estate
development opportunity. What are the strengths
and weaknesses of this combined delivery
approach? What synergies do you anticipate
from a combined delivery approach? Are there
alternate approaches that would maximize the
real estate development opportunity (e.g.,
bidding the real estate opportunity separately)?
4.3.7
What synergies do you expect would be feasible
with respect to a joint development of mixedused real estate and of the LACC venue that
would enhance the value of each component?
1.4
Response
Provided
(Y/N)
Response
Response
Provided
(Y/N)
Response
Financial
Item
No.
Question
4.4.1
In the context of an availability payment revenue
structure cross-subsidized with real estate
development proceeds, what would be the
minimum equity size for the project under a
DBFOM contract to ensure long term
performance but minimize cost? If you are a
Item
No.
Question
lender or an underwriter, what key requirements
should the City consider (e.g. required equity
gearing, debt service coverage ratio and/or term
of the debt)?
4.4.2
In the context of an availability payment revenue
structure that may include other revenue sources
(e.g., parking, food and beverage, signage,
naming rights, etc), what would be the minimum
equity size for the project under a DBFOM
contract to ensure long term performance but
minimize cost?
4.4.3
What are the benefits and costs of using
milestone payments for capital expenditures?
Would the absence of milestone payments affect
your willingness or ability to propose on the
projects?
4.4.4
Would credit enhancement be required to
achieve an investment-grade rating for the
Project? If so, what type?
4.4.5
What do you consider to be the main risks to
closing financing under a DBFOM availability
payment structure in a timely manner?
4.4.6
What length of term for the DBFOM agreement
do you think is optimal for this Project and why?
Response
Provided
(Y/N)
Response
Item
No.
Question
4.4.7
Describe mechanisms that may be feasible to
include, based on your experience on other
social infrastructure P3 projects, to support the
continued funding and implementation of facility
upgrades during the operational phase of a
DBFOM contract?
1.5
Response
Provided
(Y/N)
Response
Response
Provided
(Y/N)
Response
Operations
Item
No.
Question
4.5.1
Given that the City will retain the LACC’s longterm booking operations, should the City also
retain any other operating activities (short-term
bookings, parking, food and beverage, signage,
naming rights, etc.)?
4.5.2
Given that the City will retain the LACC’s longterm bookings and that the P3 developer would
be responsible for short and long term facility
maintenance, what concerns do you have or
opportunities do you see under such
arrangement?
4.5.3
Are the LACC’s commercial operations
(parking, food and beverage, etc.) and short-term
Item
No.
Question
Response
Provided
(Y/N)
Response
Response
Provided
(Y/N)
Response
booking a strategically material source of
revenues when considering a DBFOM
procurement?
4.5.4
What is the scope of opportunity, in your view,
with respect to additional sources of revenue that
are not currently fully developed at the LACC,
such as but not limited to signage and naming
rights?
4.5.5
Please describe innovations with respect to
convention center venue operations – in
particular as they relate to the ability to
maximize level of service to customers, attract
new business, and retain existing business – that
a private sector operator in the context of a
DBFOM model may be able to deliver for the
LACC.
1.6
Procurement Process
Item
No.
Question
4.6.1
What are the three to five most important factors
(commercial; financial; contractual; legal,
including permits, approvals, and environmental;
and technical) you would consider in
Item
No.
Question
determining whether to participate in a DBFOM
procurement process?
4.6.2
What level of conceptual design and/or
schematics development do you believe is
sufficient to provide a clear reference design in a
potential DBFOM procurement process, while
not being overly prescriptive?
4.6.3
What do you think is the most effective way to
implement the ATC (Alternative Technical
Concepts) process in the context of this project?
What are some best-in-class, relevant examples
of the ATC process in your experience?
4.6.4
How important is it to provide
stipends/reimbursements for responsive and
responsible, but unsuccessful proposers? Are
stipends for unsuccessful bidders in a DBFOM
process of this size a factor for you in deciding
whether to submit a proposal? If so, indicate
what minimum stipend would be required for
you to participate in a DBFOM procurement of
this size and nature.
4.6.5
A DBFOM delivery method for the Project may
require a partnership between an infrastructure
developer and a real estate developer to
successfully leverage value from new land made
available on the LACC site. What type of
Response
Provided
(Y/N)
Response
Item
No.
Question
partnership would help maximize real estate
value at the LACC site and/or make
development rights at the LACC site most
attractive? Are there any alternative structures
that would be more effective? What are the risks
and benefits of a joint partnership structure?
Would permitting a sale in fee for land made
available be more attractive than a ground lease
structure?
4.6.6
Should the land made available for mixed-use
development within the LACC campus be leased
as part of or separately from the DBFOM
procurement?
4.6.7
The timing of private real estate development on
the LACC site will be subject to market
conditions that are likely to be significantly
different than present conditions. What could the
City of Los Angeles or a DBFOM partnership do
to accelerate build out of the entire project site
after procurement?
4.6.8
What concerns, if any, do you have with respect
to the CEQA process being developed in parallel
with a potential DBFOM procurement and why?
What effective methods have you seen in other
similar situations that have proved effective to
manage the procurement and environmental
Response
Provided
(Y/N)
Response
Item
No.
Question
Response
Provided
(Y/N)
Response
Question
Response
Provided
(Y/N)
Response
permitting issues?
1.7
Item
No.
Contracting
4.7.1
What minimum financial capacity and DBFOM
experience requirements should the City
consider in the shortlisting process?
4.7.2
Based on your experience with other
procurement processes for P3/DBFOM social
infrastructure projects, do you have any
comments or suggestions on the procurement
process the City is currently evaluating? What
are key lessons learned or case studies that the
City should consider to help ensure a successful
outcome?
4.7.3
In your experience, what has been the most
effective ways to facilitate the robust
participation of M/W/D/L/SBE firms in a project
or program of this size and nature?