Tenders Are Invited For Building-Inspection Services – Dzp.261.160.2026 Service Consisting In Establishing 2,700 Digital Building Object Books (C-Kob) For Properties Managed/Administered By The Municipal Premises Board In Łódź

Building-Inspection Services – Dzp.261.160.2026 Service Consisting In Establishing 2,700 Digital Building Object Books (C-Kob) For Properties Managed/Administered By The Municipal Premises Board In Łódź. The Subject Of The Order Is The Purchase Of A Service Consisting In Determining And Processing Data Required For Inclusion In The Digital Construction Object Book (C-Kob), On The Basis Of The Paper Documentation Provided By The Ordering Party And Arrangements Made On Its Own, Including Using Available And Legally Sanctioned Services (Which Have Data In The Field Of Geodesy And Cartography), Such As, Among Others, Information About The Facility: • Type And Function Of The Building And Year Of Commissioning, • Technical Parameters (Building Area, Height, Cubic Capacity, Number Of Floors, Number Of Premises), • Equipment With Installations And Devices, Site Plan And Marking On The Map, • Information About Products Containing Asbestos And The Competent Building Supervision Authority. Providing Them To The Ordering Party In The Form Of A Tool Enabling Direct Data Export To The Government System Https://C-Kob.Gunb.Gov.Pl/. A Detailed Description Of The Subject Of The Order (Opz) Is Included In The Modified Annex No. 2 To The Swz. The Ordering Party Provides For The Possibility Of Invalidating The Procedure If The Public Funds It Intended To Allocate For The Implementation Of All Or Part Of The Order Were Not Awarded To It - In Accordance With Art. 257 Pzp. The Ordering Party, In Accordance With Art. 91 Section 1 Of The Act Of September 11, 2019 - Public Procurement Law, Analyzed The Possibility Of Dividing The Contract Into Parts. As A Result Of The Analysis, It Was Found That The Division Of The Contract In Question Was Not Justified For Technical, Organizational And Economic Reasons. The Contracting Authority Also Assessed The Impact Of Not Dividing The Contract On Competition. The Subject Of The Contract Is Available To Contractors Who Have Appropriate Technical And Organizational Potential Or Who Can Apply For The Contract Jointly Or Use The Resources Of Third Parties, In Accordance With The Provisions Of The Public Procurement Law. Therefore, The Failure To Divide The Contract Into Lots Does Not Lead To An Unjustified Restriction Of Competition Or A Violation Of The Principle Of Fair Competition And Equal Treatment Of Contractors. Taking Into Account The Above Circumstances, The Ordering Party Decided That Awarding The Contract As One, Comprehensive Contract Would Ensure The Achievement Of The Assumed Objectives, Reduce Technical And Organizational Risks, Enable Effective Management Of The Project Implementation And Ensure Uniform Responsibility Of The Contractor For The Proper Performance Of The Entire Subject Of The Contract. Therefore, The Ordering Party Refrained From Dividing The Order Into Parts.