Skip to main content
Looking to bid on government tenders? See our TaaS tender preparation service
Tenders

Development of construction design documentation, author's supervision, and construction works for the 'Reconstruction of the car park on Tartu street, land parcel with cadastral number 05000080416, Daugavpils'

Open
Deadline
25 days left
April 29, 2026
Contract Details
Category
Construction
Reference
167507
Value
Not disclosed
Location
Latgale, Latvia
Published
March 29, 2026
CPV Code
Project Timeline

Tender Published

March 29, 2026

Deadline for Questions

April 22, 2026

Submission Deadline

April 29, 2026

Tender Opening

April 29, 2026

Win ProbabilityPRO
🔒
Upgrade to Professional
See your estimated win probability based on historical data.
Upgrade to Professional →
Sector InsightsPRO
🔒
Unlock Sector Insights
See average winning prices, competition levels, and market trends.
Upgrade to Professional →
Budget
Not disclosed
Duration
8 months
Location
Latgale
Type
Construction
75
Quality Score/100
Good
Market Benchmark
Avg. Winning Price
€491,981
Avg. Bids
3.0
Competition
Low
SME Winners
99%
20,606 tenders analyzed

Original Tender Description

Development of construction design documentation, author's supervision, and construction works for the 'Reconstruction of the car park on Tartu street, land parcel with cadastral number 05000080416, Daugavpils'

Run Risk Analysis

Identify potential risks, inconsistencies, and red flags across all tender documents. Get a detailed risk report with severity levels and mitigation recommendations.

Login

Win Strategy

AI-powered analysis of this tender's requirements, opportunities, and challenges. Get strategic insights to maximize your win probability.

65%
Estimated Win ProbabilityModerate Fit

This tender requires a comprehensive approach, integrating design, supervision, and construction for a parking lot reconstruction. A winning strategy will focus on demonstrating robust technical capability, cost-effectiveness, and efficient project delivery within the specified timeframe, leveraging local expertise and a clear understanding of Daugavpils' specific needs.

Key Winning Messages

Integrated Expertise: Seamless delivery from design to construction, ensuring quality and efficiency.

Local Understanding, Proven Delivery: Deep knowledge of Daugavpils' infrastructure needs and a track record of successful municipal projects.

Value-Driven Solution: Competitive pricing combined with a commitment to durable, functional, and well-managed construction.

Key Opportunities
Lack of specified evaluation criteria presents an opportunity to define value.
The integrated nature of the contract (design, supervision, construction) allows for a holistic approach and potential cost efficiencies.
The relatively short duration (8 months) suggests a need for efficient project management and a well-resourced team.
The absence of explicit green or social value requirements allows focus on core technical and cost aspects, but can be a differentiator if strategically incorporated.
Key Challenges
Unspecified evaluation criteria make it difficult to tailor the bid precisely to the authority's priorities.

Conduct thorough due diligence to understand the contracting authority's likely priorities (e.g., cost, quality, speed, local impact). Proactively propose a clear and logical evaluation framework in the bid, emphasizing the bidder's strengths.

Lack of disclosed estimated value makes cost benchmarking difficult.

Research similar past projects in Daugavpils or Latvia to establish a realistic cost range. Focus on providing a highly competitive and well-justified price, demonstrating value for money.

Potential for high competition due to the integrated nature of the contract, attracting firms with broad capabilities.

Clearly articulate unique selling propositions, such as specialized local knowledge, innovative construction methods (even if not explicitly required), or superior project management methodologies.

Ideal Bidder Profile
A Latvian-based construction company with a proven track record in municipal infrastructure projects, specifically parking lot development or reconstruction. The ideal bidder possesses in-house design capabilities or strong partnerships with local design firms, a skilled workforce, and a history of successful project completion within budget and schedule. Experience with Daugavpils municipality projects would be a significant advantage.
Key Requirements
Development of construction design documentation
Author supervision
Construction works for parking lot reconstruction
Adherence to mandatory exclusion grounds
Meeting eligibility requirements
Meeting technical capability requirements
Meeting financial requirements
Adherence to submission requirements
Key Discriminators
Demonstrated experience in Daugavpils or similar Latvian urban environments.
A highly integrated project management approach that minimizes handovers and potential delays.
A proactive approach to risk management, clearly outlining potential issues and mitigation strategies.
A commitment to high-quality materials and construction techniques that ensure long-term durability of the parking lot.
Social Value Opportunities
Commit to employing local labor for a significant portion of the construction works, contributing to the Daugavpils economy.
Implement a waste reduction and recycling plan during construction, even if not mandated.
Bid Focus Areas
Technical Proposal (Design, Supervision, Construction)

Provide detailed, clear, and technically sound proposals for each phase. Emphasize the synergy between design and construction. Showcase relevant past projects with photographic evidence and client testimonials. For design, highlight practical, durable, and user-friendly solutions. For construction, detail efficient methodologies and quality control processes. For author supervision, emphasize proactive monitoring and problem-solving.

Price/Cost

Develop a highly competitive and transparent pricing structure. Clearly itemize costs and provide justification for key expenditures. Highlight cost-saving measures implemented without compromising quality. Consider offering value-added services or a slightly extended warranty as part of a competitive package.

Project Management and Schedule

Present a detailed, realistic, and achievable project schedule. Outline a robust project management plan, including communication protocols, stakeholder engagement, and risk management. Demonstrate the capacity to deliver within the 8-month timeframe.

Recommendations7
Thoroughly Analyze All Tender Documents
CriticalHigh effort

Despite AI extraction, meticulously review 'Nolikums ar pielikumiem' and 'Iepirkuma priekšmeta prasības, 1.versija' for all explicit and implicit requirements, especially regarding exclusion grounds, eligibility, technical, and financial criteria. Pay close attention to any appendices or referenced documents.

Ensures compliance and avoids disqualification.
Proactively Define Evaluation Criteria
CriticalMed effort

Since evaluation criteria are not specified, develop a proposed evaluation framework within the bid that aligns with the likely priorities of a municipal authority (e.g., technical merit, cost-effectiveness, project timeline adherence, local benefit). Clearly articulate how your bid excels in these areas.

Guides the evaluator and highlights bidder strengths.
Highlight Integrated Project Delivery Capability
HighMed effort

Emphasize the advantage of offering design, supervision, and construction under one roof. This reduces coordination risks, streamlines communication, and can lead to faster, more efficient project completion. Showcase past projects where this integrated approach was successful.

Positions the bidder as a one-stop solution, reducing perceived risk for the client.
Conduct Local Market Research for Pricing
HighMed effort

Given the undisclosed estimated value, research recent municipal infrastructure projects in Daugavpils and surrounding regions to establish a competitive pricing benchmark. Ensure the price is realistic, profitable, and perceived as good value.

Ensures a competitive and viable bid price.
Develop a Comprehensive Risk Management Plan
HighMed effort

Proactively identify potential risks associated with parking lot reconstruction (e.g., unforeseen ground conditions, utility conflicts, weather delays) and detail robust mitigation strategies. This demonstrates foresight and preparedness.

Builds confidence in the bidder's ability to manage the project successfully.
Incorporate Local Employment Commitment
MediumLow effort

Even though social value is not explicitly required, commit to employing local labor for a significant percentage of the workforce. This aligns with municipal goals and can be a subtle differentiator.

Enhances community relations and potentially improves local perception.
Showcase Relevant Local Experience
MediumMed effort

If the bidder has prior experience with Daugavpils municipality or similar projects in Latvia, highlight this prominently. Demonstrate familiarity with local regulations, standards, and community needs.

Builds credibility and trust with the contracting authority.
Competitive Positioning
Position the bid as the most reliable and efficient solution by emphasizing integrated service delivery and a proven track record in similar projects. Highlight a deep understanding of Daugavpils' specific context and a commitment to delivering a high-quality, durable parking facility that meets the community's needs. Focus on demonstrating superior project management and a proactive approach to problem-solving, ensuring minimal disruption and timely completion.

Competitors

Upgrade to see which companies are likely to bid on this tender, based on historical procurement data.

Login

Requirements & Qualifications

7 requirements across 5 categories

Submission (1)
Mandatory (1)
Compliance (1)
Technical (3)
Financial (1)
SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS1
--[Information not available in provided text]
MANDATORY EXCLUSION GROUNDS1
--[Information not available in provided text]
ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS1
--[Information not available in provided text]
TECHNICAL CAPABILITY REQUIREMENTS3
--Development of construction design documentation
--Author supervision
--Construction works for parking lot reconstruction
FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS1
--[Information not available in provided text]

Requirements Preview

Sign up to view complete requirements and analysis

Documents

3 documents available with AI summaries

Iepirkuma priekšmeta prasības, 1.versijaPDF
167507_PD.ANY_1_1_1_20260329112154.pdf -- 96.0 KB

This document outlines the tender requirements for the reconstruction of a parking lot on Tartu Street in Daugavpils, including exclusion conditions, selection criteria, technical and financial proposal requirements, and evaluation criteria.

Nolikums ar pielikumiemDOC
20260217 TS Tartu iela, stavlaukums.edoc.bin -- 2.6 MB

This document contains a technical specification for the development of construction design documentation, author supervision, and construction work for the reconstruction of a parking lot on Tartu Street in Daugavpils.

Main tender pageHTM
index.html

This document contains the main tender data for the development of construction design documentation, author supervision, and construction works for a parking lot reconstruction in Daugavpils, Latvia.

Documents Preview

Sign up to view document summaries and analysis

75
Good

Tender Quality Score

This tender for parking lot reconstruction in Daugavpils is generally well-structured, with clear technical requirements and a reasonable timeline. However, the lack of disclosed financial value and specific evaluation criteria raises concerns about transparency and fairness.

Score Breakdown

Legal Compliance75/100

The tender adheres to standard open procedure and includes a proper CPV code. Deadlines appear reasonable given the scope. No disputes are noted. Regulatory compliance is assumed based on the provided information, but the lack of explicit mention of specific regulations could be a minor point.

Clarity80/100

The description of the works is clear, and the attached documents (technical specification and requirements) provide detailed information. The criteria for technical capability are specified. However, the absence of explicit evaluation criteria for proposals reduces overall clarity on how bids will be assessed.

Missing evaluation criteria
Completeness70/100

Most basic information is present, including the title, reference, organization, and a clear description of the works. Contract duration and tender validity are specified. However, the estimated value is not disclosed, which is a significant omission for completeness.

Estimated value not disclosed
Fairness85/100

The tender is conducted via e-procurement, promoting accessibility. The objective criteria for technical capability are outlined. However, the undisclosed estimated value and the 'Restricted document access' flag suggest potential limitations in full document access for all interested parties, impacting fairness.

Restricted document access
Value not disclosed
Practicality65/100

The tender is active and uses e-procurement. A contract start date is not explicitly mentioned, but the contract duration is provided. Financing information is not disclosed. The primary concern is the potential for restricted document access, which could hinder practical preparation of bids.

Restricted document access
Financing information not disclosed
Data Consistency90/100

Key fields such as title, reference, organization, and deadlines are populated. The dates provided (Reveal, Submission, Opening) are logically sequenced. No suspension or disputes are indicated, contributing to high data consistency.

Sustainability50/100

There is no explicit mention of green procurement, social aspects, or innovation within the provided tender information. The tender is not indicated as EU funded. This suggests a lack of focus on sustainability criteria.

Not green procurement
No social criteria

Strengths

Clear technical requirements
Active e-procurement process
Reasonable submission deadline
Proper CPV code provided

Concerns

Estimated value not disclosed
Missing evaluation criteria
Restricted document access
Lack of sustainability criteria

Recommendations

1. Disclose the estimated value of the contract.
2. Clearly specify the evaluation criteria for submitted proposals.
3. Ensure full and unrestricted access to all tender documents for all potential bidders.

AI Scoring Preview

Sign up to view complete requirements and analysis

Complete quality score analysis
Detailed sub-score breakdown
Strengths & concerns insights
Strategic recommendations

No credit card required • Setup in 2 minutes

New Service

Want us to handle this tender?

Our procurement experts prepare everything. Proven to work — you review, approve, and submit.

~1hYour time only
80%+80%+
$0Upfront
See full comparison
Without TaaSWith TaaS
40-80 hrs
Preparation time
~1 hr
Your time only
15-25%
Average win rate
80%+
Win rate
Risk of errors
Manual review
Expert QA
Compliance check
You do all
Handle everything
We do all
End-to-end service
Let's Win This Tender
Pay only when you win · 400+ companies trust us
Or do it yourself

Add to Pipeline