24-Addendum 4 RFP 25-69-1514.pdf

RFQ 25-69-1514 Addendum #4

Forsyth County Procurement

Adrian Casey, Director

ADDENDUM #4

RFQ Number: 25-69-1514 Title: Progressive Design Build Big Creek

Greenway Rehabilitation

Date: August 8, 2025

Issuing Officer: Adrian Casey RFQ Initially Solicited: June 18, 2025

Email Address: acasey@forsythco.com Telephone: 770-888-8872

This addendum supersedes and supplements all portions of the bidding documents and becomes part of the contract documents for the above-referenced project. Where any item called for in the specifications or indicated on the drawings is supplemented hereby, the original requirements shall remain in effect. Where any original item is amended, voided, or superseded hereby, the provision of such item not so specifically amended, voided or superseded shall remain in effect.

Due Date Change

The solicitation opening date has been extended to August 28, 2025, 2:00 PM via Euna (Bonfire).

Questions Due Date Extension

The due date for questions has been extended to August 15, 2025, 12:00 PM via Euna (Bonfire)

File Additions

Additional documents provided in this Addendum:

1. Big Creek Greenway Phase 4 Ecology Survey – Waters – 5-29-2025

2. Big Creek Greenway Bethelview Trailhead – Hydrology Report

3. Summary of Work Revision 1

# Questions Answers

1. Does the design team need to show any type of GDOT prequalification in their respective discipline?

No

2. Are there any existing digital survey and topo files of the project the County has of the site that can be provided to the design build team?

Topographic lidar surveys were collected for the project will be provided to the awarded vendor.

3. Is there any federal funding for this project, or is it all local funding?

The project is 100% locally funded. There are NO federal funds.

4. Have any environmental assessments and impact statements been done for this project?

Ecological survey has been conducted to locate stream and wetland limits for Phases 2 & 3 and Phase

4. Please refer to Exhibit-Big Creek Greenway Phases 2&3 Ecology Survey - Waters 2-9-2024 provided in the bid documents and Big Creek Greenway Phase 4 Ecology Survey – Waters – 5-29-2025 provided in this Addendum.

No impact statements have been completed. The selected team will be responsible for submitting a Request for Determination (RFD) to the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Environmental Protection Division (EPD). This is a top-down replacement within the existing boardwalk footprint.

5. Can you please provide clarity on the following: 1.) The RFP states that there is a 20-page limit. Does this mean twenty double sided pages for a total of 40 single sided pages (i.e. front and back count as page 1, etc.), or does this mean 20 single sided pages total? 2.) Also, regarding the page limit, the page limits broken down by sections adds up to 23 pages. Is the County requiring a 20-page limit or a 23-page limit? 3.) Are there any font and spacing requirements?

Submission Format:

Proposals must not exceed 25 pages in total. Page sizes should be 8½" x 11", with allowance for 11" x 17" pages as specified. Margins must be at least 1 inch.

The total page count excludes the table of contents, front and back covers, title pages, separation tabs, resumes, required forms, and appendices. All main text should use a font size of at least 11 points.

Submission Content:

Your proposal must meet the minimum content requirements outlined in this RFP. Include relevant qualifications and supporting information. Avoid generic marketing content and ensure only information directly relevant to this proposal is included.

Organize your Technical Proposal as follows:

• Part 1: Transmittal Letter (Maximum 3 pages)

• Part 2: Project Approach (Maximum 8 pages)

• Part 3: Experience and Capabilities of Key Personnel (Maximum 2 pages, plus one additional 11" x 17" page; resumes not included in page count)

• Part 4: Proposer’s Experience and Capabilities (Maximum 7 pages)

• Part 5: Schedule (Maximum 2 pages, plus one additional 11" x 17" page)

• Part 6: Acknowledgement confirming the Proposer will sign the provided form of Agreement and Payment and Performance Bonds (1 page)

6. On sections of the boardwalk where the contractor is instructed to “demo and replace” will existing pilings be cut off at grade or will they have to be completely removed?

What are the existing pilings?

Timber? Helicals? Concrete?

Existing pilings are timber set in concrete and should be cut off at-grade.

7. The drawings call out sections of safety rail replacement. Where are the designs for the safety rail replacement? Is it the same design as the boardwalk handrails? How do posts anchor into the ground?

Design and details will be developed by the Design- Build Team as part of Preliminary Stage Work and Completion Stage Work activities.

8. Will detailed elevation profiles or grade information be provided for the full length of the boardwalk? If not, how should bidders account for unknown elevation changes when preparing pricing? Is there a preferred assumption or

Construction costs will be developed towards the end of the Preliminary Stage and in preparation for the GMP negotiation standard section that the Owner/Engineer would like contractors to base their pricing on in the absence of elevation data?

9. Upon review of the design drawings provided, we noticed inconsistencies between the boardwalk lengths listed in the schedule and the actual dimensions obtained when scaling the drawings. In several cases, the measured lengths differ from the scheduled lengths by several hundred feet.

For instance in phase 4 segment 1 BW #5 the stated length is 132 LF but when you scale the drawing the actual dimension is more like 1028 LF. This is also the case for Phase 2/3 segment 5 BW #3 and BW #4. To ensure accurate pricing and scope alignment, could you please confirm whether the boardwalk lengths listed in the schedule are to be considered accurate, or if revised drawings will be issued to correct the discrepancies?

The Phase 4, Segment 1 BW#5 length stated in the plans is a typo. The correct length is 1032 LF.

The Phase 2/3, Segment 5 BW #3 length stated in the plans is a typo. The correct length is 984 LF.

The Phase 2/3, Segment 5 BW #4 length stated in the plans is a typo. The correct length is 102 LF.

10. For estimating purposes, what embedment depth should we assume for the helical piles?

Costs for construction activities will be developed at the Preliminary Stage Work as part of the Guaranteed Maximum Price.

As specified in the Helical Pile Foundation, Section 3.1-Construction Submittals, the determination of minimal depths is the responsibility of the DB Team.

11. We do not see the Phase 4 Segment 2 concept drawings

Phase 4 Segment 2 concept drawings were provided in Addendum #2.

available for download. Can those drawings be provided?

12. Please clarify the scope for Phase 2-3 Segment 1. The supplied trail plans are noted as 90% and the RFP requests drawings to be provided to 60%.

For this segment, the selected DB Team will need to review the plans provided, make any necessary revisions to the plans and become the Engineer of Record (EOR).

13. Please clarify the scope for the Bethelview Road Trailhead. The supplied plans are noted as 100%. Please explain any anticipated design (or redesign) needed for trailhead.

For this segment, the selected DB Team will need to review the plans provided, make any necessary revisions to the plans and become the Engineer of Record (EOR).

14. Was a hydrology study been prepared by H&L for the Bethelview Trailhead?

A hydrology study has been prepared for the Bethelview Trailhead as part of the design is included in this Addendum. Please refer to document Big Creek Greenway Bethelview Trailhead

– Hydrology Report.

15. Have there been any flooding issues with the boardwalks?

Does the County plan to raise any boardwalks above their current elevations? If so, is there a flood elevation or event that the boardwalks should meet?

There have been flooding issues with the boardwalks. The profile will be raised in specific areas as noted in the plans. There is not a specific elevation or event that the boardwalk must meet beyond anything noted in the plans. The Design- Build team will need to review this during the Preliminary stage in coordination with the Owner and adjustments will be made at that time if necessary.

16. At this point, has any field run topo survey been done for either the trailhead or boardwalks?

Topographic lidar surveys were collected for the project and will be provided to the awarded vendor.

17. Has NOVA done any geotechnical investigations in addition to the trailhead percolation tests and Segment 3 Pedestrian Bridges?

Available geotechnical information was provided with the bid documents. Please refer to BCG Site Reconnaissance and Subsurface Exploration Phases 2&3 Segment 3.

18. Are the structural documents provided only for reference, or will we need to replicate the

The structural documents will be used as the basis of design of the boardwalks. DB Team is responsible for the project’s design as they will become the Engineer design intent for the extent of the boardwalk?

of Record (EOR). If the DB team believes adjustments are necessary, this can be discussed during the Preliminary Stage with the Owner and adjusted if necessary.

19. Can the County provide CADD files for all plans and schematics included in the RFP?

CAD files for Phases 2&3, Phase 4 and Bethelview Trailhead will be provided to the awarded vendor.

20. Can the County provide copies of all previously conducted environmental surveys and/or environmental studies?

Ecological survey has been conducted to locate stream and wetland limits for Phases 2 & 3 and Phase

4. Please refer to Exhibit-Big Creek Greenway Phases 2&3 Ecology Survey - Waters 2-9-2024 provided in the bid documents and Big Creek Greenway Phase 4 Ecology Survey – Waters – 5-29-2025 provided in this Addendum.

No impact statements have been completed. The selected team will be responsible for submitting a Request for Determination (RFD) to the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Environmental Protection Division (EPD). This is a top-down replacement within the existing boardwalk footprint.

21. Is there any existing survey data and 3D information available?

Topographic lidar surveys were collected for the project and will be provided to the awarded vendor.

22. Is there any supplemental geotechnical information that can be provided to proposers in addition to what has been provided?

Available geotechnical information was provided with the bid documents. Please refer to BCG Site Reconnaissance and Subsurface Exploration Phases 2&3 Segment 3.

23. Are there any existing environmental permits available that can be provided to proposers? Will the County require any additional permits from the County itself?

No environmental permits have been created or applied for. The County will require the selected team to apply for a Land Disturbance Permit and Building Permit. This will be a top-down replacement within the existing boardwalk footprint.

As stated in Supplementary Condition SC-7.09, DB Team is responsible for all regulatory and building permits required to complete design and construction of the Work

24. Are as-builts of the existing trail available?

: As-built plans of the existing trail are not available.

Original design plans are available and can be provided to the selected team.

25. What is the existing ROW width of the trail and are ROW files available?

Generally, there is a 20’-0” wide easement centered on the trail. No ROW files are available.

26. Does the County require any Public Outreach efforts and if so, will they handle?

No public outreach efforts will be required.

27. Are there any other trail areas outside of what was provided in the plans that will need to be removed/replaced?

There are no other trail areas outside of what was provided in the plans that will be removed or replaced.

28. Please advise if the County can supply the floodplain models that have already been run for the trail sections to proposers.

There have been no floodplain models run by the County as the design intent is to maintain or improve the existing condition

29. Does the County have utility as-built information that is available for proposers to review?

There is no utility as-built information available.

30. Regarding the “Preliminary Stage” lump sum fee on the Price Proposal Form, please clarify the scope that should be included in this fee.

31. To what level of design development (e.g., Preliminary, 30%, 60%, 90%, etc.) should Preliminary Stage construction drawings be progressed?

Please refer to Agreement and Exhibit A- Preliminary Stage Work., General Conditions, Supplementary Conditions and other contract documents. Please refer to Agreement, Article 1.2- Work Stage, Item B-Completion Stage, Exhibit C- Completion Stage - Cost of Completion of the Work Plus a Fee, Subject to a Guaranteed Maximum Price, General Conditions, Supplementary Conditions and all contract documents.

32. What services, besides design to a certain level, are included in

Please refer to Agreement and Exhibit A- Preliminary Stage Work., General Conditions, the Preliminary Stage fee? (e.g.

Utility Coordination, Permitting, Survey, etc)

Supplementary Conditions and other contract documents.

33. What is the definition of the “Preliminary Technical Documents”, and “Study & Report Services” referenced in Article 1.2(A) of the PDB Agreement? 2) Regarding the “Completion Stage” fees, please clarify the scope that is envisioned for this portion of the work.

Please refer to Agreement and Exhibit A- Preliminary Stage Work., General Conditions and Supplementary Conditions and all contract documents. Please refer to Agreement, Article 1.2- Work Stage, Item B-Completion Stage, Exhibit C- Completion Stage - Cost of Completion of the Work Plus a Fee, Subject to a Guaranteed Maximum Price, General Conditions, Supplementary Conditions and all contract documents

34. Does the fee percentage for the Completion Stage include fee for services other than construction?

Please refer to Agreement, Article 1.2-Work Stage, Item B-Completion Stage, Exhibit C-Completion Stage - Cost of Completion of the Work Plus a Fee, Subject to a Guaranteed Maximum Price, General Conditions, Supplementary Conditions and all contract documents.

35. In the event of extended review periods by agencies having jurisdiction on environmental permits, will the County consider providing schedule relief to the design-builder?

This will be discussed as part of the Preliminary Stage Work Phase and once a detailed schedule has been reviewed.

Please refer to Agreement Exhibit A-Preliminary Stage Work, Section A1.03.A.3 - Development and refinement of the construction schedule, with the addition of greater scheduling detail as the design and construction planning progresses.

36. Please advise whether the schedule should be a fully detailed, comprehensive schedule for all phases, or a milestone type schedule with only major work items and milestones.

Schedule shall be a fully detailed, comprehensive schedule for all phases. Please refer to Agreement Exhibit A-Preliminary Stage Work, Section A1.03.A.3

- Development and refinement of the construction schedule, with the addition of greater scheduling detail as the design and construction planning progresses.

37. The scope of work shown in the “Summary of Work” document for Segment 5 and the

The Summary of Work has been revised. Please refer to Summary of Work- Revision 1 included in this Addendum.

Bethelview Trailhead appear to be identical. Will the County provide a revised scope?

38. Regarding the transmittal letter requirements, please advise whether the County is requiring details about “litigation within the past five (5) years arising out of Proposer’s performance” from the contractor only or the contractor and design firms?

This requirement applies to both, contractor and design firms.

39. Please advise if the proposer team (both contractor and design firms) are permitted to include projects in Part 4. Please also advise whether proposers are permitted to include more than five (5) projects so long as the five-page limit is respected

The number of projects required under Article 6 – Technical Proposal, Part 4 – Proposer’s Experience and Capabilities need to be projects executed by the construction contractor.

Proposers can include more than five projects as long as they comply with the page limit requirement.

40. For Part 4, the RFQ states "Identify any major anticipated subcontractors and suppliers who will perform more than 10% of the contracted work and provide an experience statement with pertinent information regarding similar projects and other evidence of qualification for each subcontractor or supplier."

Please advise if the subcontractor experience/qualifications should be included within the five-page limit, or if the County may permit this information on additional pages.

Subcontractor experience/qualifications should be included within the five-page limit requirement.

41. Regarding the design-build team (the contractor and design

Yes firms) designation, is the design firm required to complete the "Subcontractor Affidavit Form?"

Thank you for your consideration, and we look forward to the County's responses to the above questions.

42. Will construction materials testing and inspection be provided by the County, or the design-builder?

Construction material testing will be provided by Forsyth County.

43. Section 6.03 D (6) presents an uninsurable vague, overly broad commercial liability exclusion request, specifically “Any limitation or exclusion based on the nature of Design-Builder’s work”. Would the County be willing to delete this requirement or, alternatively, qualify it with respect to the Design Professional in the final agreement?

No. Requirement remains.

44. Section 6.03 D (7) references a professional liability exclusion “broader in effect than ISO form CG 22 79 07 98”. ISO form CG 22 79 07 98 is a form specifically intended for contractors. With respect to the Design Professional, would the County be willing to adjust this form reference to reflect the corresponding professional services version of the form, CG 22 43 04 13.?

No. Language will not be adjusted.

45. Would the County consider adjusting the language of

No. Language will not be adjusted.

Section 7.06 D to more accurately reflect the Design Professional role in situations where “equal to” substitutions are proposed? Specifically, will the County replace that section’s requirement that the Design Professional “approve the proposal” with the more specific directive to "confirm conformity with the relevant plans, specifications, and standards"?

46. Can the County confirm whether the intended limits for excess or umbrella liability as set forth under 6.03 K (4) of the Supplemental Conditions are truly intended to be set at the following levels: Per Occurrence $ 10,000,000 and General Aggregate $ 10,000,000?

Confirmed. Requirements will remain as written.

47. Will the County consider modifying its requirement from Section 7.09 A (1), which states that the Design-Builder is specifically required to obtain all regulatory and building permits required to complete design and construction of the Work, to acknowledge that Design-Builder and its Design Professional are not responsible for any failure to obtain a required permit where the failure stems from a condition outside the control Design- Builder and it’s team (i.e. where conditions inherent to the project site make obtaining the

Requirement will not be modified.

permit impossible, where required cooperation of parties outside the control of the DB team is withheld, or where new governmental policies or administrative changes are implemented that impact the process or timeline for obtaining approval)?

48. Regarding the "Corporate Certification Form," the form indicates execution by a corporation. Please advise how the proposer should proceed with this form if the proposer is another entity designation (i.e., limited liability company, partnership, etc.). Should the proposer mark the form "N/A”, or will the County provide another form for completion?

The Corporate Certification Form should be filled out by corporations. Otherwise, N/A is sufficient.