Addendum 2 - Master-Planning.pdf

Request for Proposal (RFP) for Master Planning Services

Addendum # 2

9/11/2026

Town of Smithfield, VA

Master Planning Addendum # 2

Question:

Which body adopts the final Master Plan, and should the engagement produce a deliverable sufficient to support a subsequent rezoning or comprehensive plan amendment?

Answer: Town Council will adopt the final Master Plan. I would not anticipate this being the basis for a rezoning.

Question:

Does the Town anticipate that this scope includes rezoning, comprehensive plan amendment, or entitlement support for the property?

Answer: No.

Question:

Has the Town established a budget for this work, and is there a target completion date?

Answer: There is no established budget or timeline.

Question:

The RFP requests an all-inclusive fixed fee. Will the Town accept a fixed base fee plus a schedule of unit-priced optional services (additional public meetings, additional development scenarios, supplement survey), so that both parties can manage scope changes without a contract amendment?

Answer: Yes, that will be fine.

Question:

Does the Town expect the consultant to perform new field survey (boundary and topographic) and new environmental delineation (wetlands, Resource Protection Area, cultural resources) on the 57 acres, or should we rely on existing data furnished by the Town?

Answer: No, the existing ones can be relied upon.

Question:

For dry utilities (electric, natural gas, broadband/fiber), what level of coordination does the Town expect the consultant to lead with Dominion Energy, Virginia Natural Gas, and local broadband providers?

Answer: Nothing beyond planning level work.

Question: Is the community engagement structure the consultant’s to propose, or does the Town have a minimum expectation for the number of public workshops, listening sessions, and Town Council or Planning Commission touchpoints?

Answer: It is for the consultant to propose.

Question:

Is architectural programming and space-needs assessment for a potential municipal building included in this scope, has that work already been completed, or will it be procured separately?

Answer: The Town has previously done space needs study that can be provided.

Question:

Is the Town seeking a quantitative market and feasibility analysis (demand by sector, absorption, revenue projections) or a strategy-level report?

Answer: Strategy level is sufficient.

Question:

Who will serve as the Town’s day-to-day project manager, and is there an existing committee or steering group that will guide the effort?

Answer: The Town Manager, Micael Stallings, will serve in that capacity.

Question:

Beyond Town residents, whom does the Town consider stakeholders in this process? For example, downtown merchants, the Farmer Market operators, Isle of Wight County, Isle of Wight County Schools, Luter YMCA, Smithfield Foods? Clarity would help better understand the extent of expected outreach and communications?

Answer: All of those listed would be included but may not be all that are identified during the process.

Question:

Will previous communications records with the public on this property be made available to the selected consultant?

Answer: Yes, the Town will make all records available.

Question:

From the past zoning efforts of this project, was there a concern over types of uses that were inappropriate? If so, was there a standout use type that drive opposition more than any other?

Answer: Additional housing is the main concern from the public.

Does the Town have an established or anticipated budget range for the Master Planning Services described in the RFP?

Answer: No, the Town does not have an established budget for this work.

Question:

Does the Town have a desired project start date, overall duration, or target date for presentation / adoption of the final Master Plan?

Answer: The Town would like to start relatively soon after awarding the RFP. I would anticipate close to the start of the new year.

Question:

Please provide the parcel identification number(s), boundary information, or other mapping identifying the approximately 57-acre Town-owned property referenced in the RFP.

Answer: Parcels are as follows:

a. 21A-04-000H2

b. 21A-04-000H4

c. 21A-04-000G1

d. 21A-04-000F

e. 21A-04-000E

f. 21A-04-000I12A

g. 21A-04-000I17

h. 21A-04-049

i. 21A-04-000I15

j. 21A-04-040

k. 21A-04-039

l. 21A-04-038

m. 21A-04-037

n. 21A-04-050

o. 21A-04-051

p. 21A-04-052

q. 21A-04-053

r. 21A-04-054

s. 21A-04-030

t. 21A-04-012

What existing survey, GIS, utility, environmental, wetland, easement, geotechnical, or other site data will the Town make available to the selected consultant?

Answer: The Town will make available any and all information we have on the parcel. This will include recent surveys that show all easements.

Does the Town anticipate the utility and infrastructure assessment to be planning-level and based primarily on available information, or should proposers include field investigation, surveying, modeling, or engineering analysis?

Answer: Planning level should be sufficient for this work.

Question:

What level of market and economic feasibility analysis does the Town anticipate for potential uses? Should proposers assume planning-level market analysis, or detailed financial feasibility/pro forma analysis for individual development concepts?

Answer: Planning level is sufficient for this work.

Question:

Has the Town completed a municipal space needs assessment or facility study that will be provided to the selected consultant, or should development of that assessment be included within the proposed scope?

Answer: The Town does have a space needs study that was done that will be shared.

Question:

Does the Town have a desired minimum number or format of public meetings, workshops, stakeholder sessions, or Town Council presentations that proposers should assume in developing their scope and fee?

Answer: This should be proposed by the consultant.

Question:

How many hard copies of the final Comprehensive Property Development Master Plan does the Town require?

Answer: 10 copies should be sufficient.

Question:

Are there specific Tribal Nations, Indigenous communities, cultural resources, or consultation requirements the Town expects the selected consultant to address as part of this project?

Answer: No.

Question:

Does the Town expect the Master Plan to include planning-level cost estimates for recommended improvements and/or a capital improvement program identifying anticipated costs, funding sources, and implementation priorities?

Answer: Planning level would be sufficient.

Question:

Does the Town anticipate a planning-level assessment of site access, circulation, parking, and multimodal connectivity, or should proposers include detailed traffic analysis or transportation modeling?

Answer: Planning level is sufficient.

For the potential new municipal building, should proposers assume a planning-level assessment of municipal space needs and potential site location, or is detailed facility programming anticipated as part of this effort?

Answer: Planning level is sufficient.

Question:

Are there any known deed restrictions, acquisition conditions, easements, development commitments, grant requirements, or other encumbrances affecting the 57-acre property that should be considered in developing the proposed scope?

Answer: No.

Question:

Is the Town able to provide the scoring criteria and corresponding point value for this RFP?

Answer: The Town does not have any official scoring criteria established.

Question:

Will the Town accept the availability to perform responsibilities, work plan and methodology, and project timeline with milestones summarized in the Approach section of the proposal as opposed to the Cover Letter?

Answer: Yes, that would be fine.