Addendum 1.pdf

PDF 507 KB Posted

Attached to
Request for Proposal - Town of Madison - Neck River Flood Water Diversion
Solicitation number
37724
Issued by
New Haven County, Connecticut

About this file

This is Addendum No. 1 to a Request for Proposal issued by the Town of Madison, Connecticut for engineering services related to the Neck River Flood Water Diversion System Rehabilitation project. The addendum, dated July 24, 2026, clarifies the scope of work and provides answers to questions submitted by prospective respondents prior to the original August 12, 2026 proposal due date. Key additions to the scope include surveying and locating maintenance easement stakes along the easement boundary and providing coordinates to the Town for future reference. The addendum establishes that respondents must submit 2 hardcopies and 1 electronic PDF copy of their proposals, with a deadline for submitting questions set at July 30, 2026. The scope of work does not require a new topographic survey but must include accurate depiction of all trees larger than 4 inches in diameter at breast height within easement limits, with diameters labeled on plans. The consultant is responsible for thoroughly inspecting toe drains to evaluate functionality, including measuring groundwater elevation and providing access ports if necessary, and must develop repair or replacement solutions if drains are non-functional.

The addendum clarifies that wetland delineation, reporting, or mitigation are not included in the scope of work, nor is local IWWC permitting required. However, the consultant must identify all necessary permits, which may include federal permits such as Army Corps of Engineers authorization. The work falls under Connecticut CTDEEP Dam Safety General Permit No. GP-016, which exempts the project from municipal wetlands and watercourses permits. Soil testing is not anticipated to require borings, though geotechnical engineering services are at the respondent's discretion. The consultant must develop a removal plan for trees larger than 4 inches, including root removal and filling holes with similar embankment material, and must provide detailed instructions for achieving grass cover on the dam and dikes while maintaining the facility free of woody vegetation. No pricing, contract term, set-asides, or award information is provided in this addendum document.

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
Bid No. 27-02 - Geotechnical Report.pdf PDF
37724_Oct_2_26_solicitation_doc.pdf PDF
37724_Sep_24_26_solicitation_doc.pdf PDF
37724_Oct_16_26_solicitation_doc.pdf PDF
37724_Oct_23_26_solicitation_doc.pdf PDF
CT-443-P As Built 2 of 2.pdf PDF
37724_Sep_11_26_solicitation_doc.pdf PDF
Plan Set sheets 1 through 16.pdf PDF
37724_Aug_10_26_solicitation_doc.pdf PDF
37724_Aug_28_26_solicitation_doc.pdf PDF
37724_Sep_10_26_solicitation_doc.pdf PDF
37724_Oct_13_26_solicitation_doc.pdf PDF
CT-443-P As Built 1 of 2.pdf PDF
37724_Aug_27_26_solicitation_doc.pdf PDF
37724_Aug_19_26_solicitation_doc.pdf PDF
37724_Oct_7_26_solicitation_doc.pdf PDF
37724_Oct_15_26_solicitation_doc.pdf PDF
37724_Sep_17_26_solicitation_doc.pdf PDF
37724_Aug_21_26_solicitation_doc.pdf PDF
37724_Oct_27_26_solicitation_doc.pdf PDF
Parker Terrace - Drawings March 2026 - Sealed.pdf PDF
37724_Sep_16_26_solicitation_doc.pdf PDF
37724_Aug_17_26_solicitation_doc.pdf PDF
37724_Sep_1_26_solicitation_doc.pdf PDF
37724_Sep_4_26_solicitation_doc.pdf PDF
37724_Oct_8_26_solicitation_doc.pdf PDF
PROSPECTIVE BIDDERS - 7.pdf PDF
RFP.pdf PDF
37724_Jun_30_26_solicitation_doc.pdf PDF
Show all 29

On GovTribe

Work with this file

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Text version

ADDENDUM NO. 1

RFP Title: Neck river Flood Water Diversion System Rehabilitation – Engineering Services

RFP Date: June 23, 2026

Date of Addendum: July 24, 2026

Part 1: Instructions to Respondents

Bidders must sign and return this addendum with their proposal submission.

The following clarification pertains to RFP Section 3 – Scope of Work (Engineering Services):

The Scope of Work includes the items contained in the RFP and clarified by the answers to question received from Respondents (see Part 2 below). In addition, the scope of work will not exceed any permit limitations in the Eligible Activities listed under CTDEEP Dam Safety General Permit# GP-016.

The following Task is added to RFP Section 3 – Scope of Work (Engineering Services):

Survey locate the maintenance easement stakes set in the field by the Town of Madison and set any missing stakes at angle points along the easement boundary. Provide coordinates to the Town suitable for reestablishing the easement limits for future maintenance work.

Part 2: Answers to question received from Respondents:

Question 1

Can you please let us know how many copies of the proposal package you would like us to submit?

Answer: Submit 2 hardcopies of the proposal package and 1 electronic copy in PDF. The hardcopies must be received by the Proposal Due Date.

Question 2

Is there a deadline for questions prior to the proposal deadline? We didn’t see one listed.

Answer: The deadline for submitting questions is July 30, 2026.

Question 3

Is topographic survey required to prepare a base plan for the project? The RFP includes surveying and mapping but there was some discussion at the pre-proposal meeting of GPS locations of trees and placement on the existing drawings. Looking for clarification on this.

Answer: A new topographic survey is not a requirement. The existing drawings may be used by the consultant in the preparation of a base plan. The base plan must show all relevant features of the flood water diversion system including the baselines and stationing for the dam, dikes and riprap channel. Supplemental survey may also be used in the preparation of a base plan if needed.

All trees larger than 4 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH) within the easement limits must be located and accurately depicted on the drawings. The diameter of each tree must be labeled on the plan. The methods used for locating the trees will be determined by the consultant.

Question 4

Which property contains the yard drain?

Answer: The yard drain is located at 126 Deepwood Drive.

Question 5

There was some discussion during the pre-proposal meeting on if inspection of the toe drains was definitely going to be required. If it is required, the drawings don’t indicate any access ports aside from the discharge at the concrete headwall. Would the scope be to just inspect from the discharge to the 90-degree elbow or would test pits be required to locate the ends of the toe drains and create access ports?

Answer: The document in Attachment A of the RFP named “Neck River Diversion Dam, Dikes and Channel Inspection 2023, by NRCS, dated December 12, 2023” states, “There was no water observed flowing from the toe drains. Due to the ponded water on the upstream side of the diversion dam, flows from the toe drains are expected. These drains should be thoroughly inspected to determine if they are functional”. The inspection should include whatever is necessary to evaluate the functionality of the drains including measuring the groundwater elevation relative to the drain and providing access ports if necessary. If it is determined that the drains are not functioning, the consultant must include a solution to repair or replace the drains on the construction plans.

Question 6

There is no mention of Wetland Delineation, Reporting, or Mitigation scope in the RFP. Is this scope of work expected to be included? If so, what are the extents of the mitigation scope?

Answer: Wetland delineation, reporting or mitigation are not included in the scope.

Question 7

There is no mention of local IWWC permitting being required? Will this be required?

Answer: A local IWWC permit is not included in the scope. The work included in this project is under the purview of CTDEEP. Activities authorized under Dam Safety General Permit GP-016 are exempt from securing municipal wetlands and watercourses permits under sections 22a-36 through 22a-44 of the Connecticut General Statutes. The plans must include erosion & sedimentation control measures and follow appropriate best management practices.

Question 8

There is no mention of ACOE Permitting. This is typically required for this type of a project and would like to confirm is required.

Answer: Per Section 3C of the RFP, the consultant will identify all necessary permits and include their submission in the scope of engineering services. This may include federal permits (such as ACOE) if applicable.

Question 9

The RFP mentions “Soil Testing if applicable. What is the reason for the testing, and should the services of Geotechnical Engineer be included? What is the extent of that scope of work and are borings expected to collect the samples or is test pits or hand auguring a suitable method?

Answer: Correspondence from NRCS indicates trees larger than 4 inches will need a removal plan including:

-Removal of roots.

-Filling holes with similar material to the embankment.

-Submitting a gradation of the fill material and compaction plan to NRCS.

The need for borings is not anticipated. The need for geotechnical engineering services is at the discretion of the respondent.

Question 10

The RFP mentions “Re-vegetation methods for disturbed grass areas”. Is the intent to match what is currently there? Or is a specific wetland mitigation planting plan expected?

Answer: Per NRCS correspondence, the dam, dikes and channel should be free of any woody vegetation. The dam and dikes should also have grass cover. Instructions and a detail(s) to achieve the grass cover must be included in the construction documents. Wetland mitigation is not in the scope.

Part 3: Respondent Acknowledgement of Receipt of Addendum No. 1

Company Name: _____________________________

Authorized Signature: _________________________

Date: ______________

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .