Addendum_No2_Q_R_EV17655.pdf

Addendum No: Two (2) Dated: October 14, 2026

To: All Bidders Contract Documents

For: Coordinated Street Furniture Program Event No. EV00017655

City of Boston Property Management Department 1 City Hall Square Boston, MA 02201

This addendum modifies, amends, and supplements designated parts of the contract documents for: City of Boston Coordinated Street Furniture Program, Event EV00017655 and is hereby made a part thereof by reference and shall be as binding as though inserted in its entirety in the locations designated hereunder.

Whenever portions of any addendum conflict with a previous addendum, the addendum bearing the latest date shall govern.

It shall be the responsibility of each General Bidder to notify all non-filed subcontractors and suppliers, whom the General Bidder proposes to use for various parts of the work, of any changes or modifications contained in this addendum.

No claim for additional compensation due to the lack of knowledge of this addendum will be considered.

Bidders are hereby notified they must acknowledge all addenda on the Addenda Acknowledgement Form attached to this Addendum.

Sam Lovison Senior Deputy Commissioner Property Management Department

ITEM ONE: Please see attached documents including recordings, attendance lists, and transcripts for the Virtual Q&A session that took place on Wednesday, September 23, 2026

ITEM TWO: Please see attached Questions received from prospective respondents and the City’s corresponding responses.

ITEM THREE: The proposal opening date has been revised to Wednesday, December 2, 2026 at 12:00PM.

ITEM FOUR: A revised City of Boston Advertising Content Policy

ITEM FIVE: Additional attachments and revised bid forms and schedules:

Prevailing Wage Schedules, Planholder List, Certificate of Tax, CM15A and CM15B, Wage Theft Prevention CM16, and CSFP Updated Price Proposal.

End of Addendum No. 2 EV00017655

COORDINATED STREET FURNITURE PROGRAM

QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES

EV00017655

Questions due: 9/30 Responses posted: 10/14

Virtual Q&R: September 23, 2026 at 11:00AM

General Bids due: December 2, 2026 at 12:00PM (updated)

Question 1: Our company is interested in participating as a local cleaning and maintenance subcontractor to the selected prime contractor.

Could you please advise whether the RFP includes subcontracting, local vendor, small business, WBE/MBE or supplier-diversity participation requirements or goals?

We would also appreciate information regarding:

● Whether a list of registered plan holders or prospective bidders will be available

● How interested subcontractors may connect with prospective prime respondents

● Whether subcontractors should register separately for the Q&A session

● Which portions of the solicitation address cleaning, sanitation and routine upkeep

Response:

● Whether a list of registered plan holders or prospective bidders will be available

○ Yes, such list has been included in this Addenda

● How interested subcontractors may connect with prospective prime respondents

○ We encourage interested subcontractors to connect directly with “prime respondents” via the information contained in the Planholders List

● Whether the RFP includes subcontracting participation requirements or goals

○ This RFP does not include specific requirements or goals

● Whether subcontractors should register separately for the Q&A session

○ Not necessary

● Which portions of the solicitation address cleaning, sanitation and routine upkeep

○ Sections 1.3.4 and Sections 1.3.5 primarily address these items, but potential subcontractors should review the RFP document in detail for all other relevant sections.

Question 2: In Section 1.3.7 the City notes the possibility of

a. deploying experiential advertising, please provide a list of the locations where the City would permit such advertising.

b. installing pop-up retail experiences, please provide a list of the public plaza locations where the City would permit such activities.

Response:

A) Such a list of locations is not available at this time. These locations will be decided on via the processes outlined in Section 1.3.3 - Site Selection, Permitting, and Installation.

B) These locations are available for review here:

https://www.boston.gov/departments/streets-cabinet/neighborhood-street-plaz as

Question 3: Would the City consider awarding different parts of the program to multiple vendors? For example, could a vendor submit a proposal for advertising benches or advertising recycling receptacles? We see an opportunity for those elements to bring in additional revenue for the City.

Response: No, the City will not award different parts of the program to multiple vendors. A single, responsive and responsible vendor will be selected to perform all services requested under the RFP. The Selected Respondent may subcontract parts of the services requested to qualified subcontractors.

Question 4: Can you please provide more context on how operate costs will be evaluated or ranked? Is the intention to reward bidders who intend to spend the least on maintenance, the most on maintenance, or some value relative to the other financial elements of the bid?

Response: The City will evaluate proposals strictly according to the requirements of the RFP and in compliance with the City’s obligations under relevant procurement law. The City will not expand upon or alter this published evaluation standard.

Question 5: Can the City provide 5 years trailing revenue broken down by asset?

Response: Annual reports for the program are available through this link:

https://www.boston.gov/departments/property-management/coordinated-street -furniture#reports

Question 6: Will the City be sharing a list of attendees from the meeting?

Response: Yes. The list of attendees and the prospective respondents they represent is attached to this addenda and uploaded to the bid event information packet on the City of Boston Supplier Portal https://www.boston.gov/departments/property-management/coordinated-street-furniture#reports https://www.boston.gov/departments/property-management/coordinated-street-furniture#reports

Question 7: Please consider delaying the due date of the proposals to November 30, 2026, eight weeks is a short timeline to be able to secure all the cost information required to prepare a comprehensive and thoughtful response to this comprehensive streetscape reimagining RFP.

Response: The Due Date of Technical and Price Proposals is hereby extended four weeks, from November 4, 2026 at 12:00 PM Boston Time to Wednesday, December 2, 2026, at 12:00 PM, Boston Time to foster the broadest possible competitive field. Late Proposals shall not be accepted and no further extensions to the due date shall be considered.

Question 8: Section 1.1 of the RFP states that the goal is 500 new shelters to reach approximately

50 percent coverage of bus stops, but the price-proposal quantity table in Section

4.2.2 lists a total of 740 new shelters. Please clarify which figure governs – the 500-shelter target or the 740 units priced in the mandatory quantity table – and whether the additional 240 units should be treated as optional and priced separately, or as part of the mandatory baseline.

Response: All items identified as Required Program Elements in Box 2 of the Capital & Operating Costs tab must be priced at the quantities specified. The approximately 500-shelter figure refers to the City's goal of adding shelters at approximately 500 locations that do not currently have shelters. The additional 240 units represent anticipated replacement of existing shelters over the contract term. The proper figure for price proposal comparison is 740.

The City reserves the right to add bus shelters purchased or installed through other funding sources or partnerships to the contractor’s maintenance inventory during the term of the agreement. This may include shelters funded by the MBTA, City capital programs, developers, grants, institutions, or other public or private partners. Respondents should propose preestablished rates and terms for incorporating such shelters into the maintenance program so that additional shelters can be efficiently added without requiring separate maintenance agreements or contract renegotiation.

Question 9: With regard to Section 1.3.2. Program Elements:

a. Will the City or MBTA provide the hardware for the real time transit information or is this another element required by the contractor?

b. With regard to the trash receptacles replacement - are the compactors and units which are solar powered still operational and does the City require this service to continue until replacement?

c. In connection with providing designs for the Bike Parking Shelters, please clarify if the City intends designs to secure bicycles on a temporary basis when in use or bike storage units?

d. If the awardee has pre-existing shelter designs that meet the design requirements set out by the City, can they be used for Boston even if they are already being used in other markets?

e. 500 new shelters to the 281 existing shelters yields approximately 39% coverage of the more than 2,000 bus stops citywide, not the stated 50% goal. Please clarify whether the 50% target assumes a different existing shelter count?

f. Please confirm if the City has a determined specific dimensions for the micro bus shelter design and the high capacity bus shelter design and does the City envision bus rapid transit platforms for the high capacity bus shelter design?

g. Please clarify the specifications and service level requirements of the Wicked Free Wi-Fi network, including:

i. the expected coverage range and capacity expectations for a typical location;

ii. the typical connectivity in use (fiber, cellular, satellite, microwave, or other combinations of network technologies); and

iii. any preference for the network hardware, enclosures, or devices to be mounted or adapted to be used.

h. The RFP’s 20% green-roof and cooling-treatment target is described as applying to the “total shelter inventory.” Please clarify whether this percentage applies to the full combined inventory (existing plus new, approximately 780-plus units) or only to the 500 new shelters being added under this contract.

i. With regard to the City’s reservation to independently procure non-advertising supported program elements, would the City consider providing a right of first refusal to the contractor prior to seeking another vendor to maintain a coordinated design on the streetscape?

j. Would the City permit transit-service only (no advertising panel) bus shelters as a portion of the new inventory?

k. May city information panels have advertising on two sides or only one side?

l. The RFP notes that the digital displays must be a minimum of 15 seconds, however, digital advertising has a 10 second loop in most peer cities to Boston, including New York, Chicago and San Francisco, would the City permit 10 second advertising?

m. For many years, without any material issues arising, many peer cities to Boston, including New York and Chicago, have permitted animated creatives to be displayed generally and not limited to pedestrian-only areas – animation is an important attribute for higher value advertising. Would the City reconsider permitting animation in areas that are not only pedestrian?

n. Please clarify the responsibilities expected of the contractor in connection with procuring and installing the benches of the City of Boston Bench Program.

o. With regard to the fiber-optic network already installed in Boston:

i. Please confirm that the contractor would be able to connect and utilize the network without extending the network underground

ii. Please describe the specifications and network reach of the existing fiber-optic network in Boston.

Response:

A) The Selected Respondent is expected to provide the hardware, software, installation, and maintenance necessary to support real-time transit information, with associated costs identified in the Price Proposal as directed by the City.

The RFP references ePaper/e-ink displays as one potential technology and as a basis for pricing. However, the City does not intend to limit respondents to ePaper/e-ink technology. Respondents are encouraged to propose other technologies or display types where they believe those solutions would better meet the City's objectives for accessibility, visibility, reliability, durability, power consumption, maintainability, cost effectiveness, and the ability to adapt as technology evolves over the term of the contract. At a minimum, the reliability of ePaper/e-ink signs should be matched by any technology proposed by the respondent and must be approved by the City before installation.

The City's goal is to provide useful, reliable real-time information to transit riders while maintaining flexibility to evaluate the most appropriate technology for different locations and conditions. Proposed solutions must be capable of integrating with MBTA real-time transit information and, where applicable, information from other transit providers serving Boston.

B) Yes, the compactors and units which are solar powered are still operational. The selected respondent may elect to replace all units immediately or piecemeal - no specific service is required other than ensuring that all trash receptacles remain in an operable condition. Section 1.3.1 requires the selected vendor to develop a 5-year replacement plan for all existing trash and recycling receptacles.

C) The City intends designs to secure bicycles on a temporary basis when in use for commuting or other trips. The design is not intended to support overnight or long-term secure storage of bicycles.

D) Yes. The City encourages prospective respondents to make use of proven designs that have worked in other markets (See Section 1.3.2, Page 10), and that may be used in Boston in order to reduce R&D and manufacturing costs. All designs must still be approved for use in line with the review and approval processes outlined in the RFP

E) As stated in Section 1.1 of the RFP on Page 4, approximately 20% of the existing 2,000 bus stops within the boundaries of the City of Boston already have shelters installed - either directly through the MBTA, the City’s Coordinated Street Furniture Program, or other third-party non-advertising providers. The expectation is adding approximately 500 or more shelters to the existing network with an overall goal of achieving approximately 50% coverage.

F) No, the City does not have specific dimensions for the micro and high-capacity bus shelter designs. Shelter designs are anticipated to conform to the accessibility requirements and dimensions outlined in the MBTA Bus Stop Design Guide, including the required accessible boarding, landing, and clear-path areas.

G) The selected respondent will work with the City to develop shelter designs that fit Boston’s streetscape, meet accessibility requirements, and respond to the specific conditions of individual locations. Respondents should anticipate that the City will be particularly interested in shelter designs that can accommodate Boston’s smaller and more constrained sidewalks while still providing a comfortable and accessible passenger waiting area.

The City anticipates working collaboratively with the selected respondent on final shelter dimensions, configurations, and siting based on site conditions and applicable City and MBTA standards.

H) Expected coverage range and capacity should be in keeping with industry standards for public municipal Wi-Fi programs. Individual connection speeds should be designed to be just fast enough to stream medium-quality video, prioritizing general browsing, communication, and civic services. Access points in the Grove Hall neighborhood regularly handle approximately 7,700 daily users.

Range is expected to be engineered for outdoor street-level coverage and is not expected to penetrate buildings or overcome line-of-sight limitations.

Typical connectivity uses either direct connections to the City’s existing fiber network (BoNET) or point-to-point radio devices, such as Mimosa B5 backhaul radios.

Hardware is expected to be rugged and meet the IP67 weather-proof standard.

Devices should be install-ready so that they may mount directly to infrastructure.

The City predominantly uses Cisco Meraki MR-series outdoor access points such as the Meraki MR62.

This percentage, which is a stated goal, not a hard target or expectation, applies to the full combined inventory (existing plus new, approximately 780-plus units)

I) The focus of the City’s interest in procuring shelters and other program elements outside of the Coordinated Street Furniture Program is to utilize other sources of funding such as grants, or partnerships with Transit Authorities or State and Federal Government. The City can accomplish the goal of having a coordinated design of its street furniture elements through the procurement of the elements should other sources of funding come available. Should there be an opportunity to offer first-right-of-refusal to the Selected Respondent to provide advertising on these new or external elements in exchange for folding them into the respondent’s maintenance program, the City would consider this on a case-by-case basis.

J) Yes.

K) The respondent should offer its own proposal on the type, size and number of advertising displays on program elements. The City does not wish to place restrictions on how elements incorporate advertising, other than where historic districts, road conditions, or other restrictions stated in the RFP apply.

L) The current contract allows for a 15 second flip rate. The public has become familiar with that flip rate and therefore the City seeks to retain that rate in light of the increased amount of digital displays that the City anticipates in the new program. However, the City reserves the right to augment flip rates based on community, environmental factors, and other elements in consultation with the selected vendor.

Respondents should feel encouraged to demonstrate in their proposals how a 10-second flip rate would increase the revenue generated by the program and provide increased opportunities for capital investment and improved maintenance.

M) The City has allowed full motion advertising in pedestrian only areas with great success in the current program. Current Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Guidance H 1710.3A does not permit Full-motion digital displays along controlled highways. While not all streets in Boston are controlled highways, the FHWA Guidance provides the framework for state and local governments to control out of home advertising and ensure driver and pedestrian safety. The City considers the current practice to limit full-motion displays to pedestrian only areas to be practical and necessary.

N) See Page 18 - “City of Boston Sidewalk Bench Program” of the RFP for details. The City’s Age-Friendly Bench Program and Bus Stop Bench Program improves public spaces and complements that existing Street Furniture Program. The City requires that the Contractor will be responsible for routine maintenance, repair, and replacement of benches that are substantially damaged for the approximately 220 benches already in place as part of the program.

The City will entertain proposals for additional benches beyond the 220 in this program that may include advertising or sponsorship opportunities. If bidders propose additional benches, they should provide capital and maintenance costs as well as revenue projections in their Price Proposals. The benches in the City’s current bench program will remain non-advertising throughout the contract term.

O) The City’s Municipal Fiber Network, known as BoNET, connects roughly 150 municipal and Boston Public Schools buildings, currently expanding to more than 270 sites, with standard connections typically relying on 6 strands of single-mode fiber.

Information is available here https://www.boston.gov/departments/broadband-and-cable/expanding-broadba nd-boston

Question 10: In Section 1.3.3 the City notes

a. that all “elements requiring electricity have separate meters”. This requirement is ungainly and extremely expensive when multiplied by over 1,000+ units and result in substantial delays as this adds an additional layer of engagement with the utility company. With the goal of tracking the cost of electricity being paid by the contractor would the City permit only a small percentage of sample units having a separate meter and permitting the rest of the units to be connected to the city grid/lampposts with a more holistic payment to the City for those units?

b. that it desires siting the bus shelters to serve as “hubs for shared mobility”, please provide a list of those locations.

Response: A) The respondent should propose what it considers to be the most effective and efficient method to bring power to program elements. While separate meters are more costly, the City believes they are the best way to expedite the installation of new program elements

B): Such a list of locations is not available at this time. These locations will be decided on via the processes outlined in Section 1.3.3 - Site Selection, Permitting, and Installation and via additional discussions during contract negotiations and management with City stakeholders. Hubs for Shared Mobility develop organically from combined transit, active transportation and shared ride activity and the City’s desired locations may change or expand throughout the contract term.

Question 11: With regard to Section 1.3.4

a. The RFP references the expectation that the contractor will remove/reinstall/relocate program elements at least five times per year.

Please clarify what the annual cap on such removals/reinstallation/relocations will be.

b. In connection with the snow clearance requirements, the Boston Code of Ordinances, section 16-12.16, is drafted with regard to limited structures and not over 1,000+ locations, would the City view the contractor as compliant as long as they begin clearance within three hours of the end of a storm?

Response: A) The City declines to place an annual cap on removals, reinstallations, or Relocations

B) The City will evaluate compliance based on the standard set forth in the RFP.

While demonstrating immediate mobilization is a critical component of making a reasonable effort, the City declines to establish a blanket rule that mobilization alone constitutes full compliance. The City will evaluate the contractor’s reasonable efforts and resource deployment on a case-by-case basis during weather events. The City requests that special attention be given to structures necessary to allow for commuter access and comfort during morning or evening hours. The City reserves the right to ask the Selected Respondent to mobilize more quickly should weather conditions or timing warrant it.

Question 12: In Section 1.3.6 the RFP notes that the City “does not intend to enter into agreements that diminish the sale of advertising space” of the program.

a. Would the City consider providing a “right of first refusal” to the contractor for any programs it intends to develop on the public way?

b. Would the City consider maintaining the advertising revenue value of the program with an exclusivity zone of 50 meters/165 feet (less than a city block) around each such element of the program?

c. Would the City consider maintaining the advertising revenue value of the program elements by prohibiting the installation of items in the public way that interfere with the “line of sight” of the elements (with the exception of items related to regulating life on the streetscape and existing programs at the time of execution of a program agreement)?

A) The City grants to the Contractor the exclusive right to sell advertising on the program elements. That exclusive right does not include the right of first refusal on other programs that the City may wish to develop.

B) The scope of the contractor’s advertising exclusivity is defined strictly by the rights granted in the RFP. The City declines to establish specific dimensional exclusivity zones in the public right-of-way that are not currently set forth in the

RFP.

C) The City would not consider other programs, devices or structures that would impede the line of sight within a bus stop zone for safety purposes.

Question 13: In Section 1.3.7 the City notes the possibility of

a. deploying experiential advertising, please provide a list of the locations where the City would permit such advertising.

b. installing pop-up retail experiences, please provide a list of the public plaza locations where the City would permit such activities.

Response: See the answer to Question 2

Question 14: Section 4.2.4 notes that an optional Minimum Annual Fee should be “balanced” against the respondent’s own capital investment and revenue-share offer. Could the City provide relative weighting guidance between the optional Minimum Annual Fee and revenue share for evaluation purposes?

Response: Refer to Section 3.3 - Rule for Award Of Contract. The City will select the responsible and responsive proposer (who has met all submission requirements and minimum evaluation criteria) who has submitted the most advantageous proposal, based on both the proposed price and the comparative evaluation criteria. The evaluation team will complete its evaluation of the Technical Proposals prior to reviewing the Price Proposals. Note that the total price for ten years will be used as the basis for comparing price proposals.

Question 15: In Section 1.3.8 the 2% bad-debt cap is described as the contractor’s responsibility above that threshold. Please confirm if this is an annual threshold or uncollected receivables carry over between years?

Response: The Bad Debt cap is an annual threshold and will not be carried over into succeeding years.

Question 16: In connection with Section 1.5.1 the City notes the term as 10 years and two potential extensions at the sole discretion of the City. Due to the large upfront capital investment and the long length for useful life of the street furniture assets, would the City consider an initial term of 15 years with a single five-year extension (for a potential 20-year term) so that the contractor would be better able to amortize the investment over the life of these assets? Alternatively, if the contract is not extended would the City consider adding a requirement that the successor contractor pay the unamortized book value of the furniture to the incumbent contractor?

Response: No, the City is not considering changes to the proposed term and extension term lengths at this time.

Question 17: Please clarify if advertising from predictive markets companies, such as Kalshi and

Polymarket, would be permitted on street furniture.

Response: Predictive or Contract market company advertising would not be allowed as the Commonwealth of Massachusetts has blocked predictive market companies from operating in Massachusetts. The City would re-evaluate this advertising if legislation and regulations change to allow it, however the City reserves the right to restrict advertisements that may adversely affect residents’ financial or physical health.

Question 18: Please clarify the date of submission for the Price Proposal, as the “Instructions” tab of the Price Proposal itself states a Proposal Due Date of October 28, 2026, whereas the RFP appears to state a due date of November 4, 2026.

Response: The Price Proposal is due at the same date and time as the Technical Proposal Based on the revisions to the due date in Question 7, the Price Proposal is due December 2nd, 2026, at 12:00 PM, Boston Local Time

Question 19: How does the Price Proposal plan to capture the annual CPI increase, as row 8 appears to only multiply by a static 10 years?

Response: The Price Proposal does not capture the annual CPI increase. Bidders should include an annual 3% CPI increase prior to averaging their annual Maintenance and Administrative costs. The annual CPI can also be applied to maintenance costs prior to breaking down per unit where required. The Price Proposal addresses the initial 10-year agreement term so bidders should only create pricing based on that period.

Question 20: Can you clarify the city's vision for the 480 recycling bins?

Response: Please refer to Section 1.3.1, Page 18 for details.

The City of Boston has previously deployed 480 trash and recycling receptacles across the City, The Selected Respondent will be responsible for the replacement of all existing receptacles with new dual-stream trash and recycling receptacles that meet the City’s standards and the performance requirements of this RFP.

Replacement units must be ruggedized and have secured lids that limit the size of objects that can be disposed of to prevent the disposal of household trash. Trash receptacles shall be rated as rodent proof and not susceptible to intrusion by animals typically found in the City of Boston, such as racoons, squirrels, and skunks. All replacements will be completed at the contractor’s expense no later than the end of the fifth Contract Year

Question 21: We note on page 52 that a “Certificate of Tax, Employment Security and Child Care

Compliance” must be completed and uploaded as part of submission – please provide a link to, or a copy of, the certificate for our completion.

Response: Please see attached “Certificate of Tax, Employment Security and Child Care Compliance”

Question 22: Please reconsider the RFP’s stated approach that animation is limited to pedestrian only locations, as other products in the market, such as urban panels, do include animation, and this limitation will impact the awardee’s competitive position.

Response: See answer to Question 9

Question 23: Please describe the application, design review, approval, installation, inspection, energization, and account-transfer process for establishing separately metered electrical service for each powered street furniture element.

Response: The process to develop and install new locations for street furniture is outlined in the RFP.

Question 24: Does the City have a designated Eversource Energy contact, account manager, or established coordination channel that the selected contractor may use for CSFP meter applications and utility work?

Response: The City will provide contacts for Eversource and other Utility and Permitting Authorities upon contract execution

Question 25. Which party will submit meter applications, hold each utility account, and coordinate service upgrades, relocations, disconnections, and removals?

Response: The Selected Respondent shall submit meter applications, hold utility accounts for separately metered utilities, and coordinate all activity on said account(s) directly with the Utility Company.

Question 26: Please provide historical electricity consumption and cost by powered asset and location, including the applicable tariff, meter/account identifier, service voltage, and peak demand where available.

Response: See responses to Question 52 and Question 91.

Question 27: Please identify existing assets that currently have separate meters, shared service, unmetered service, solar power, battery power, or no available electrical service.

Response: See Responses to Question 52.

Question 28: Please provide typical Eversource lead times and costs experienced by the City for design approval, new service, meter installation, energization, and service relocation.

Response: The City does not possess utility lead-time data. Respondents must utilize their own assumptions based on industry standards and direct coordination with local utilities.

Question 29: Will the City assist with easements, utility conflicts, street-opening coordination, and escalation of delayed utility applications?

Response: The City will provide assistance to the Contractor where possible and direct the Contractor to the appropriate resources.

Question 30: Is there an established or expedited permitting pathway for the installation, replacement, relocation, refurbishment, and removal of CSFP shelters? If so, please provide the process map, required submissions, reviewing agencies, service-level targets, fees, and approval authorities.

Response: This information is not currently available. Respondents should utilize their own assumptions of these details using industry standards and other publicly available information when developing their Proposals. The Selected Respondent will have an opportunity to review this and other pertinent information during the transition period with the current program operator and the City. Permitting information for the City of Boston is available at boston.gov/boston-permitting

Question 31: Please identify all permits and approvals generally required for each shelter and kiosk type, including standard, micro, high-capacity, advertising, digital, and non-advertising shelters.

Response: Permitting information for the City of Boston is available at boston.gov/boston-permitting

Question 32: Which permits will be secured in the City's name, and what authorization will the

City provide to allow the contractor to apply on its behalf?

Response: All permits will be secured in the name of the City.

http://boston.gov/boston-permitting

Question 33: Please clarify the roles of PMD, Boston Transportation Department, Public Works, Public Improvement Commission, Inspectional Services, Disabilities Commission, Landmarks Commission, MBTA, MassDOT, Eversource, and other utilities in reviewing shelter installations.

Response: The Property Management Department (PMD) serves as the awarding and managing authority for the contract and the Coordinated Street Furniture Program. Other City of Boston Departments and Commissions, including but not limited to the Transportation Department, Public Works Department, and Disabilities Commission will advise and review prospective designs and locations for program elements, as well as provide guidance on program strategy, growth, and direction as needed. Respondents should review the websites of these organizations/departments for additional information.

Question 34: Are prototype or family-of-design approvals available to reduce repeated design review, with site-specific review limited to placement, accessibility, utilities, foundations, and local conditions?

Response: Prototype or design approvals will be conducted by the City upon the offering of new design concepts. That process will be accomplished prior to the site-specific review.

Question 35: Please provide average and maximum historical review durations by permit or agency, including historic-district and state-route locations.

Response: This information is not currently available. Respondents should utilize their own assumptions regarding review durations, based on industry standards and other publicly available information, when developing their Proposals.

Respondents should also familiarize themselves with the City of Boston’s historic and landmark districts and anticipate that installations within or adjacent to these areas may require additional review and coordination. Information and mapping of Boston’s historic landmarks and districts are available through the Boston Landmarks Commission’s historic landmarks and districts map.

General permitting information for the City of Boston is available through Boston.gov/permitting. The Selected Respondent will have an opportunity to review available information and coordinate with the City regarding applicable permitting and review processes during the transition and implementation of the program.

https://www.boston.gov/departments/landmarks-commission/map-boston-historic-landmarks-and-districts?utm_source=chatgpt.com https://www.boston.gov/departments/landmarks-commission/map-boston-historic-landmarks-and-districts?utm_source=chatgpt.com https://www.boston.gov/boston-permitting?utm_source=chatgpt.com https://www.boston.gov/boston-permitting?utm_source=chatgpt.com

Question 36: Please provide standard application forms, submission checklists, design criteria, engineering requirements, insurance/bonding requirements, and permit fee schedules.

Response: This information is not currently available. Respondents should utilize their own assumptions of these details using industry standards and other publicly available information when developing their Proposals. The Selected Respondent will have an opportunity to review this and other pertinent information during the transition period with the current program operator and the City. Permitting information for the City of Boston is available at boston.gov/boston-permitting.

Question 37: Please confirm whether the City will coordinate public, abutter, neighborhood, and elected official outreach and identify any required public hearing or notice process.

Response: The City will support the Contractor with required outreach and engagement activities. To the City’s knowledge there will be no public hearing requirements.

Question 38: Please clarify responsibility and schedule relief where installation is delayed by City, MBTA, MassDOT, utility, historic, community, or third-party approvals outside the contractor's control.

Response: The City is aware that approvals may be outside the control of the Contractor and the approval process may be lengthy. The City will work with the Contractor and any third parties to achieve program goals on a reasonable and achievable timeline.

Question 39: Please provide a complete asset-level inventory of the 281 existing bus shelters in

Excel or CSV format.

Response: A copy of the August 2025 Program Inventory has been uploaded to the Supplier Portal Event Page (linked here)

Question 40: For each shelter, please include: unique asset ID; address; coordinates; MBTA stop ID and routes; shelter manufacturer/model; dimensions; installation date/age;

ownership; structural and cosmetic condition; ADA/PROWAG compliance;

foundation type; permitting status; power source; meter/account details;

connectivity; lighting; seating; real-time information equipment; green roof;

advertising format; number and dimensions of ad faces;

static/digital/nonadvertising status; maintenance history; and planned removal, replacement, or relocation.

Response: This information is not currently available, outside of what was already provided in the August 2025 Program Inventory included in the RFP packet. The Selected Respondent will have an opportunity to review this and other pertinent https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1i5qf8v6eqiXOtt6x7dxJ3PVxD8893__J/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=100788996265432302904&rtpof=true&sd=true information during the transition period with the current program operator and the City.

Question 41: Please provide current as-built drawings, schematics, product specifications, foundation details, electrical one-lines, utility plans, warranties, inspection reports, and photographs for each shelter model.

Response: This information is not currently available, outside of what was already provided in the August 2025 Program Inventory included in the RFP packet. The Selected Respondent will have an opportunity to review this and other pertinent information during the transition period with the current program operator and the City.

Question 42: Please reconcile the stated inventory of 281 existing shelters with the Price Proposal assumptions covering 300 existing shelters: 200 refurbished static shelters and 100 converted-to-digital shelters.

Response: These quantities are set for the City’s consideration for refurbishing existing shelters to either remain static or be upgraded to digital.

Question 43: Please identify which existing shelters the City expects to refurbish, replace, relocate, or convert to digital, and provide the criteria used to assign those treatments.

Response: The City expects the contractor to complete its own assessment of the condition of the existing inventory and to determine which assets should be refurbished or replaced or converted. The City reserves the right to prioritize specific assets based on its own criteria or assessments as part of this process.

Question 44: Please provide historical shelter-level advertising revenue, occupancy, rate, maintenance cost, electricity cost, service-call, vandalism, glass-breakage, snow-response, and 311 data for the most recent five years.

Response: See response to Question 52.

Question 45: Please identify all shelters that are temporarily removed, warehoused, purchased but not installed, out of service, subject to active capital projects, or affected by planned MBTA network changes.

Response: See response to Question 47.

Question 46: Please confirm whether the linked 2026 CSFP inventory map is the controlling inventory and whether a downloadable GIS layer with the requested asset attributes will be provided.

Response: This information, including the requested asset attributes, is sourced from the August 2025 Program Inventory which is included in the RFP packet and uploaded to the supplier portal as part of this addendum.

Question 47: Please provide a complete inventory of spare parts, replacement materials, complete structures, and other CSFP assets currently warehoused, temporarily removed, purchased but not installed, or otherwise available for transfer to the selected contractor. For each item, please identify the manufacturer, model or part number, quantity, condition, compatibility, ownership, storage location, and intended disposition.

Response: As stated in the RFP, warehoused and uninstalled inventory will transfer to the selected vendor at the commencement of the new agreement. However, because this inventory will continue to be utilized by the current operator for maintenance through the end of the current term, the City makes no guarantees regarding the quantity, condition, or specific availability of the spare parts at the time of transition. Respondents must formulate their proposals without relying on the guaranteed existence or volumes of transferred spare parts.

Question 48: Please clarify the permitting and approval requirements for installing, replacing, or relocating benches and trash/recycling receptacles, including whether like-for-like replacements at existing locations require new permits, site plans, accessibility review, or utility review, and whether an expedited or blanket approval process will be available.

Response: Permitting information for the City of Boston is available at boston.gov/boston-permitting.

Question 49: Please confirm whether the encouraged 100-page Technical Proposal limit includes the cover, table of contents, dividers, resumes, financial statements, sample reports, sample advertising contract and billing reports, design drawings, and other appendices.

Response: The 100 page limit is exclusive of all these items with the exception of the Table of Contents

Question 50: Please clarify when CORI/background-check documentation is required, whether it applies to all contractors and subcontractor employees who may work on the program, and whether individual employee names must be provided with the proposal or only after award.

Response: The CM-15B CORI Compliance Standards attached to the RFP outline the City’s standards for when and how CORI checks should be conducted.

Question 51: Please state the order of precedence among the RFP, addenda, the selected proposal, Price Proposal, City standard forms, and negotiated contract, and identify whether and where proposers may disclose requested exceptions, assumptions, or proposed clarifications to contract terms without being deemed nonresponsive.

Response: The entire agreement will consist of the following documents, in order of precedence: (1) the City of Boston’s Standard Contract Document and the Standard Contract General Conditions (Forms CM10 and CM11); (2) the RFP and all addenda;

(3) the selected Technical and Price Proposals; and (4) a Scope of Work agreed upon by the City and selected vendor.

By submitting a proposal, an applicant acknowledges that if they are selected as the winning respondent, they will be required to complete and provide certain forms to the City as part of the contract package, which include the City of Boston’s Standard Contract Document and the Standard Contract General Conditions (Forms CM10 and CM11).

You should not expect to incorporate changes to the City's Form CM10/11, which will be part of the final contract. You are required to accept these terms in order to submit a response. To the extent that any clarifications are necessary, those clarifications may be included in the final Contract (for example, in a Scope of Work), at the City's discretion.

Question 52: Please provide a schedule of all advertising contracts expected to remain active during the transition, including campaign dates, locations, formats, prepaid amounts, receivables, commissions, production and installation obligations, makegoods, cancellation rights, and proposed allocation of revenue and expense between the incumbent and incoming contractor.

Response: The City does not possess this historical data. To ensure a fair and equitable procurement process for all potential respondents, the City’s evaluation of proposals will not rely on historical data generated under the prior contract.

Respondents are expected to formulate their responses based on independent market analyses, industry standards, and the new scope of services detailed in the RFP. Lack of access to historical data will not negatively impact a respondent’s comparative evaluation.

Question 53: Please provide gross advertising revenue, occupancy, available and sold inventory, rate-card and realized rates, discounts, agency commissions, bad debt, production revenue, installation charges, programmatic revenue, barter, bonusing, over-posting, and City/public-service use for each of the last five years, broken down by asset type, advertising format, and location where available.

proposals will not rely on historical data generated under the prior contract.

Respondents are expected to formulate their responses based on independent market analyses, industry standards, and the new scope of services detailed in the

Question 54: Please provide the current rate card, the top advertiser categories and top 20 advertisers for each of the last five years, and the approximate sales mix among national, regional, local, small -business, multicultural, public-sector, and nonprofit advertisers.

proposals will not rely on historical data generated under the prior contract.

Respondents are expected to formulate their responses based on independent market analyses, industry standards, and the new scope of services detailed in the

Question 55: Please clarify who will pay the creative, printing, fabrication, posting, scheduling, installation, removal, and disposal costs for City-retained messaging, transit information, maps, public-service campaigns, public art, and City-sponsored nonprofit advertising, and whether any reimbursed amounts are included in gross program revenue.

Response: The City develops its own creative and pays the cost of producing static materials. The Contractor posts static and places digital content into the Content Management System at no charge to the City. The Contractor also disposes of static materials at no cost to the City.

Question 56: After the complete inventory and technical documentation are released, will the City provide a formal inspection period and access to representative shelters, electrical cabinets, foundations, digital equipment, toilets, benches, receptacles, and warehoused assets? Please also confirm whether the proposal deadline will be extended if material information or addenda are issued fewer than 15 business days before proposals are due.

Response: The City expects the respondents to conduct their own assessments of publicly accessible program elements during the procurement process, in advance of the submission of their proposals. There will be NO inspection period. The Selected Respondent will have ample opportunity to inspect program elements in partnership with the existing Program Operator and the City during the contract handover and transition period.

Question 57: Please provide copies and status of all existing building, electrical, plumbing, street-opening, historic-district, outdoor-advertising, and other permits or entitlements for current CSFP assets, and identify which are transferable, renewable, grandfathered, expired, subject to violations, or require new approval following refurbishment, relocation, replacement, or digital conversion.

Response: To ensure a fair and equitable procurement process for all potential respondents, the City’s evaluation of proposals will not rely on historical data generated under the prior contract. Respondents are expected to formulate their responses based on independent market analyses, industry standards, and the new scope of services detailed in the RFP. Lack of access to historical data will not negatively impact a respondent’s comparative evaluation.

Question 58: Please identify all planned City, MBTA, MassDOT, utility, development, and streetscape projects or bus-network changes expected to affect CSFP sites during the contract term, and clarify the contractor's schedule and financial relief when inventory is removed, relocated, delayed, obstructed, or unavailable for reasons outside its control.

Response: The respondents are expected to do their own research to determine what publicly-known projects, studies, events or programs may impact the street furniture program.

Question 59: Please specify permitted work hours, site-access procedures, notice periods, escort requirements, traffic-control and pedestrian-management requirements, police-detail requirements, staging and storage restrictions, lane or sidewalk closure procedures, and rules for emergency access at CSFP locations.

Response: These items vary significantly depending on the asset type and location and cannot be provided in detail at this time. The Selected Respondent will have an opportunity to review this and other pertinent information during the transition period with the current program operator and the City.

Question 60: For real-time…