Addendum_1.docx

Request for Proposals (RFP) Addendum #1 SWIFT Event #: 2000016406 Agency: Department of Natural Resources Addendum Number: 1 Date of Addendum: November 25, 2024 Title: Skandia WMA Stream and Wetland Restoration New Due Date: December 9, 2024

VENDORS: PROPOSAL DUE DATE HAS CHANGED.

SCOPE OF ADDENDUM

Sharing vendor questions and State’s answers.

Vendors’ questions to the RFP and the State’s answers are as follows:

1. Can you supply:

The survey data both the topo and geomorphic that the MNDNR has collected?

Answer: Yes. See attached document for survey locations, profiles, and cross sections.

Maps of the proposed reach to be worked on?

Answer: At this point, we have a conceptual design in the attached document. The scope of the project is flexible to streams within Skandia WMA.

Location of Fen wetlands?

Answer: Yes – see attached document. We are requiring a 500’ buffer around the delineated extent of the calcareous fens. Shapefiles can be shared after awarding a contract.

Plans for the wetland previously restored?

Answer: There are no restored wetlands on the property that I am aware of.

2. Can DNR share the conceptual design referenced on page 5 of the RFP?

Answer: Yes – see attached document. This concept is subject to change based on available funding.

3. Can DNR share the funding available or anticipated for this work?

Answer: $1,000,000 available for total project (design & construction)

4. Are proposer teams including subconsultant TG, ED, or veteran-owned businesses eligible for preference points, or are preference points only given if the prime consultant is a TG, ED, or veteran-owned business?

Answer: The preference points are only given if the prime consultant is TG, ED or VO.

5. What is the expectation for level of detail provided in the conceptual design due in January 2025, given that field work (such as wetland delineation) may not be possible to complete before spring 2025?

Answer: The work schedule is flexible, and we are understanding of inability of wetland delineations in winter. Some work has been completed by DNR staff.

6. Can the DNR provide more detailed information or visualizations of the current conceptual design?

Answer: See question 2.

7. Are there any specific design preferences or constraints that may limit the design?

Answer: We are seeking a natural channel restoration with floodplain reconnection to help with flood water retention and treatment. Potential constraints are funding ($1,000,000) and the existence of calcareous fens on the WMA that we will avoid excavation within 500’ of the boundary of those fens.

8. Much of the channel is ditched in the WMA, why is the stream restoration limited to 1,200 feet?

Answer: There is no limit to the stream restoration extent, except we must stay outside of a 500’ buffer around the calcareous fens.

9. Is there a comprehensive management plan for the Skandia WMA?

Answer: No. DNR Wildlife has generic management plans that can be discussed at the project meeting, but does not have a specific one for Skandia WMA.

10. What is the budget for this phase of the project?

Answer: see question 3.

11. Are there constraints or conditions tied to the project’s funding source that could influence the design or execution?

Answer: The funding requires the project to provide floodwater retention through stream and wetland restoration.

12. Can the DNR confirm the permitting processes they will manage versus those the consultant will support?

Answer: This will be discussed at project team meetings. DNR staff are willing to help out as needed with permitting processes.

13. Are there specific performance metrics or outcomes the DNR will prioritize during construction and post-construction?

Answer: No. DNR will assist with construction oversight and communication and will attend post-construction meeting.

14. Are there specific templates or formats required for reports and deliverables?

Answer: PDF format for the reports and deliverables not already specified.

15. According to FIRMETTE, the only location that is within a regulated floodway is the wetland to the northwest. Is it anticipated that a “no rise” will be required since the project is most likely on the mainstem of the “unnamed creek”, which is not regulated?

Answer: At this time, we do not anticipate a no-rise requirement.

16. Can you share the concept plan for the Project? Seeing the concept plan will greatly help us refine our estimate of cost and level of effort.

Answer: See answer 2.

17. Could you explain the road crossing modifications being considered?

Answer: If there is enough funding available, we are considering moving the culvert to the low part in the road and increasing the size to match bankfull hydraulics. Or, we have had discussions of removing the crossing, but have not gotten township approval.

18. Does the DNR have a preferred software for the H&H analysis?

Answer: No. We have worked with several engineering firms with multiple models.

19. There does not appear to be a FEMA mapped waterway in the project area. Is a no-rise needed?

Answer: At the time, we do not anticipate a no-rise.

20. Is the DNR aware of any existing farm or other drain tiles in the project area?

Answer: No. We did not document any tile in the project area, but will need to check with local landowners to be certain.

21. Can the names and positions of MnDNR and County staff engaged in this project team be provided?

Answer: The Project Manager is yet to be determined.

22. Can the existing geomorphic survey data be provided?

Answer: Yes – see question 1.

23. Could you explain the information expected to be provided by the natural resource review completed by the MnDNR?

Answer: Natural resource review will include rare and natural features, native plant communities, and potential threatened and endangered species that could be impacted by the project.

a. Will this include desktop analysis and field surveys?

Answer: Yes. Some field surveys have been completed around the calcareous fens and data will be provided. Desktop analysis will be performed within one year of project construction.

24. Could you explain the type of information to be provided and reviewed by the MnDNR Groundwater Technical Unit?

Answer: I anticipate all designs and information will be provided to ensure efficient review by Groundwater Technical. Members of the unit are on the project team so they will be aware of the project and have a voice throughout the process.

25. Was the conceptual design developed by MnDNR, or was that prepared by a consultant?

Answer: The concept was developed by DNR.

26. Is there a hydraulic model that will be available to use as a starting point or with the selected firm create it as part of the scope?

Answer: The selected firm.

27. Is there a preferred software application MnDNR would like to use for modeling the proposed improvements? Will the selected firm have discretion to use what they feel is most appropriate, if given approval by the MnDNR?

Answer: No. We have worked with several engineering firms with multiple models. We will work with the selected firm to provide data to help support their model.

28. Given the drainage basin upstream, it is anticipated construction work would take place over the winter months?

Answer: At this point, construction would be flexible, but is anticipated for winter months.

29. Section 8c of the Construction Engineering states "Contractor is responsible for construction staking and layout. Consultant will be responsible for verify contractors' grades to ensure compliance." Who will be responsible for survey control points used for layout and staking?

Answer: If needed, DNR has the ability to create survey control points. This can be discussed throughout the contract period.

30. Has a reference reach been surveyed to assist with the design? If not, is it anticipated that the contractor would need to find a complete a reference reach survey or are we able to pull from previously surveyed reaches in the area?

Answer: A reference reach has been surveyed and some details are included in the attached document. DNR staff will provide data to the selected firm.

Rev. 07.01.2024