Nine Springs Watershed RFP.pdf

CITY OF MADISON

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

Title: WATERSHED STUDIES – NINE SPRINGS

City Agency: Engineering Division

Due Date: April 15, 2024

4:00 PM CST

Department of Public Works

Engineering Division James M. Wolfe, P.E., City Engineer City-County Building, Room 115 210 Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard Madison, Wisconsin 53703 Phone: (608) 266-4751 Fax: (608) 264-9275 engineering@cityofmadison.com www.cityofmadison.com/engineering

DATE: March 18, 2024

TO: Consultants Submitting Proposals for the 2024 Watershed Studies

FROM: James M. Wolfe, P.E., City Engineer

SUBJECT: Request for Proposals

The City of Madison Engineering Division is requesting consultant proposals for watershed modeling for the Nine Springs

Watershed. Please refer to the RFPs for pertinent information and dates. The following items are included with the RFPs and considered part of it:

Appendix A: Contract for Purchase of Services

Exhibit 1: Watershed Specific Information

Exhibit 2: Data provided by City

Exhibit 3: City of Madison Modeling Guidance

Exhibit 4: Final Report Outline and GIS Deliverables

The RFP responses for both watersheds are due in in pdf format via email to the office of the City Engineer, Attn: Ryan

Stenjem, by 4:00 p.m., April 15, 2024, at rstenjem@cityofmadison.com. Selections are anticipated to be made by May 15, 2024.

Questions regarding this project shall be directed to Ryan Stenjem at rstenjem@cityofmadison.com. Please submit any questions by April 1, 2024 at 4:00 PM.

Sincerely, James M. Wolfe, P.E., City Engineer JMW: rs cc: Janet Schmidt, City Engineering

Assistant City Engineer Bryan Cooper, AIA

Gregory T. Fries, P.E.

Chris Petykowski, P.E.

Deputy Division Manager Kathleen M. Cryan

Principal Engineer 2 John S. Fahrney, P.E.

Janet Schmidt, P.E.

Principal Engineer 1 Mark D. Moder, P.E.

Andrew J. Zwieg, P.E.

Financial Manager Steven B. Danner-Rivers

Page i

Table of Contents

1 NOTICE TO PROPOSERS

1.1 Summary of Services Requested

1.2 Summary

1.3 Project Area

1.4 Important Dates

1.5 Format

1.6 Delivery of Proposals

1.7 Standard Terms & Conditions

1.8 Appendix A: Sample Contract for Purchase of Services

1.9 Affirmative Action Notice

1.10 City of Madison Contact Information

1.11 Inquiries and Clarifications

1.12 Addenda

1.13 Local Vendor Preference

1.14 Acceptance/Rejection of Proposals

1.15 Withdrawal or Revision of Proposals

1.16 Non-Material and Material Variances

1.17 Public Records

1.18 Usage Reports

1.19 Tax Exempt

1.20 Proposers Responsibility

2 SCOPE OF SERVICES

3 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

SCHEDULE AND SUBMISSION CONTENT

3.1 Timeline

3.2 Evaluation Criteria and Submission Contents

3.3 Submittal Logistics

4 EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS

Appendix A: Standard Terms and Conditions Appendix B: Sample Contract for Purchase of Services Exhibit 1: Nine Springs Watershed Specific Information Exhibit 2: Data provided by City Exhibit 3: City of Madison Modeling Guidance Exhibit 5: Watershed Study Report Outline and GIS Deliverables Description

1 NOTICE TO PROPOSERS

1.1 Summary of Services Requested

The City of Madison (City) is seeking proposals from a firm or team (Consultant) for advanced watershed modeling and planning services for Nine Springs Watershed in the City of Madison, WI. This Request for Proposals (RFP) is intended to solicit information from interested firms including qualifications of project team and key personnel, project understanding and potential challenges, previous related project experience, level of effort, and schedule of services. City of Madison Engineering staff will use submitted RFP responses to select the Consultant the watershed.

The RFP is the in the process to develop actionable mitigation measures in each watershed to meet the City’s goals of reducing damages associated with flooding events, prioritizing for flood mitigation projects and providing enough guidance to budget for the construction of projects identified in the watershed plans. Phase 1 is for model development, analysis of existing conditions, and conceptual level mitigation alternatives. Phase 2 is anticipated to cover more detailed modeling of preferred mitigation measures and cost-benefit and design feasibility analyses. Phase 3 is anticipated to cover final modeling, mitigation alternative refinement, and report documentation.

The City has budgeted approximately $175,000.00 for the study.

1.2 Summary

The City of Madison, like many communities, has seen a recent increase in extreme flood events. This increase has occurred most notably in Madison since 2016, when a large and intense rain event in late July caused extensive flooding of public and private property on Madison’s west side. Large events in July 2017 and June 2018 caused similar flooding, again largely focused on Madison’s west side.

On August 20, 2018, Dane County experienced an unusual precipitation event that caused flooding in excess of that seen in any of the prior events mentioned. Rain gages monitoring that event registered between 3-4” of precipitation on Madison’s east side and 8-10” of precipitation on its west side over (approximately) a 12-hr period. Many of Madison’s west side neighborhoods experienced flash flooding, resulting in millions of dollars in property damage.

In response to the damage incurred due to recent extreme rainfall events, as well as the likely increasing frequency of such events due to global climate change, the Madison Common Council authorized the City of Madison Engineering Division (City Engineering) to develop watershed models and plans for watersheds of greatest concern in the Madison area. Specific watershed information is included in Exhibits 1.

1.3 Project Area

The watersheds included in this RFP process are listed below. Specific watershed information is found in:

Exhibit 1: Nine Springs Watershed

It is expected that the CONSULTANT complete site investigations to become familiar with the watershed.

1.4 Important Dates

Deliver Proposal no later than the due time and date indicated below. The City will reject late Proposals:

Issue Date: March 18, 2024 Questions Due Date: April 1, 2024

Answers Posted Date: April 4, 2024 Proposal Due Date: April 15, 2024, 4:00 PM CST

1.5 Format

Submit Proposal as identified in distinct parts within the Proposal package.

Submit one electronic copy of all materials via email by the due date and time. Clearly mark each proposal with the watershed study it is for. Maximum allowable file size to be emailed is 17 MB. If proposed materials are larger than 17 MB, make arrangements to send proposal via a large file sharing system.

The City will not consider illegible Proposals.

Elaborate Proposals (i.e., expensive artwork), beyond that sufficient to present a complete and effective Proposal, are not necessary or desired.

1.6 Delivery of Proposals

Delivery of electronic files: City of Madison Engineering Division

Watershed Studies – Nine Springs Attn: Ryan Stenjem rstenjem@cityofmadison.com City County Building, Room 115 210 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.

Madison, WI 53703

1.7 Appendix A: Standard Terms & Conditions

Proposers are responsible for reviewing this attachment prior to submission of their Proposals. City of Madison Standard Terms and Conditions are the minimum requirements for the submission of Proposals.

1.8 Appendix B: Sample Contract for Purchase of Services

Proposers are responsible for reviewing this attachment prior to submission of their Proposals. The Sample Contract for Purchase of Services shall serve as the basis of the contract resulting from this RFP.

The terms of this template contract shall become contractual obligations following award of the RFP. By submitting a proposal, Proposers affirm their willingness to enter into a contract containing these terms.

1.9 Affirmative Action Notice

If Contractor employs 15 or more employees and does aggregate annual business with the City of $50,000 or more for the calendar year in which the PO and/or Contract is in effect, Contractor shall file, within thirty (30) days from the PO/Contract effective date and BEFORE RELEASE OF PAYMENT, an Affirmative Action Plan designed to ensure that Contractor provides equal employment opportunity to all and takes affirmative action in its utilization of applicants and employees who are women, minorities and/or persons with disabilities. A sample affirmative action plan, Request for Exemption forms, and instructions are available at: www.cityofmadison.com/civil-rights/contract-compliance/vendors-suppliers/forms or by contacting a Contract Compliance Specialist at the City of Madison Affirmative Action Division at (608) 266-4910. Vendors must register for an account to complete the required forms online, here: https://elam.cityofmadison.com/citizenaccess

Contractor shall also allow maximum feasible opportunity to small business enterprises to compete for any subcontracts entered into pursuant to this PO/Contract.

Job postings: All Contractors who employ 15 or more employees (regardless of the dollar amount of this contract or their annual aggregate business with the City) must notify the City of all external job openings at locations in Dane County, Wisconsin, and agree to interview candidates referred by the City or its designated organization. Job posting information is available at: http://www.cityofmadison.com/civil-http://www.cityofmadison.com/civil-rights/contract-compliance/vendors-suppliers/forms http://www.cityofmadison.com/civil-rights/contract-compliance/vendors-suppliers/forms https://elam.cityofmadison.com/citizenaccess/ http://www.cityofmadison.com/civil-rights/programs/referrals-and-interviews-for-sustainable-employment-raise-program rights/programs/referrals-and-interviews-for-sustainable-employment-raise-program. Instructions for Contractors: http://www.cityofmadison.com/civil-rights/documents/RaISE_Job_Posting_Instructions.pdf

The complete set of Affirmative Action requirements for this purchase can be found in Section 13 of Appendix A – Sample Contract for Purchase of Services.

1.10 City of Madison Contact Information

The City of Madison is the procuring agency:

Ryan Stenjem City of Madison Engineering Division rstenjem@cityofmadison.com

For questions regarding Affirmative Action Plans please contact:

Contract Compliance Department of Civil Rights City-County Bldg., Room 523 210 Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd.

Madison, WI 53703

PH: (608) 266-4910

dcr@cityofmadison.com

The City employs spam filtering that occasionally blocks legitimate emails, holding them in ‘quarantine” for four calendar days. The contacts listed in this RFP will acknowledge all emails received. Proposers not receiving acknowledgement within twenty-four hours shall follow-up via phone with specific information identifying the originating email address for message recovery.

1.11 Inquiries and Clarifications

Proposers finding any significant ambiguity, error, conflict, discrepancy, omission, or other deficiency in this RFP document shall immediately notify the City and request clarification. In the event that it is necessary to provide additional clarification or revision to the RFP, the City will post addenda – see 1.12 below. Proposers are strongly encouraged to check for addenda regularly.

Proposals should be as responsive as possible to the provisions stated herein. Exceptions are not permitted. The City of Madison reserves the right to disqualify any and all bids that are non-responsive or that include exceptions.

Any questions regarding the submittal process and/or aspects of the RFP may be made via e-mail to Ryan Stenjem at rstenjem@cityofmadison.com. Only email communications will be accepted.

An acknowledgement of receipt of the questions will be emailed to the Consultant as the questions are received. No questions will be accepted after 4:00 p.m. (CDT) April 1, 2024. All questions and responses will be sent and posted no later than April 4, 2024 by 4:00 p.m.

1.12 Addenda

In the event that it is necessary to provide additional clarification or revision to the RFP, the City will provide an addendum to all consultants. The addendum will be provided via email to the contact listed on the RFP. If other group members would like to be included on the email for addendum it’s the consultant’s responsibility to identify those persons wishing to receive the email.

1.13 Local Vendor Preference

The City of Madison has adopted a local preference purchasing policy granting a scoring preference to local suppliers. Only suppliers registered as of the bid’s due date will receive preference. Learn more and register at the City of Madison website: www.cityofmadison.com/business/localPurchasing.

http://www.cityofmadison.com/civil-rights/programs/referrals-and-interviews-for-sustainable-employment-raise-program http://www.cityofmadison.com/civil-rights/documents/RaISE_Job_Posting_Instructions.pdf mailto:dcr@cityofmadison.com http://www.cityofmadison.com/business/localPurchasing

1.14 Acceptance/Rejection of Proposals

The City reserves the right to accept or reject any or all Proposals submitted, in whole or in part, and to waive any informalities or technicalities, which at the City's discretion is determined to be in the best interests of the City. Further, the City makes no representations that a contract will be awarded to any proposer responding to this request. The City expressly reserves the right to reject any and all Proposals responding to this invitation without indicating any reasons for such rejection(s).

The City reserves the right to postpone due dates and openings for its own convenience and to withdraw this solicitation at any time without prior notice.

1.15 Withdrawal or Revision of Proposals

Proposers may, without prejudice, withdraw Proposals submitted prior to the date and time specified for receipt of Proposals by requesting such withdrawal before the due time and date of the submission of Proposals. After the due date of submission of Proposals, no Proposals may be withdrawn for a period of 90 days or as otherwise specified or provided by law. Proposers may modify their Proposals at any time prior to opening of Proposals.

1.16 Non-Material and Material Variances

The City reserves the right to waive or permit cure of nonmaterial variances in the offer if, in the judgment of the City, it is in the City’s best interest to do so. The determination of materiality is in the sole discretion of the City.

1.17 Public Records

Proposers are hereby notified that all information submitted in response to this RFP may be made available for public inspection according to the Public Records Law of the State of Wisconsin or other applicable public record laws. Information qualifying as a “trade secret”defined in State of Wisconsin Statutesmay be held confidential.

Proposers shall seal separately and clearly identify all information they deem to be “trade secrets,” as defined in the State of Wisconsin Statutes. Do not duplicate or co-mingle information, deemed confidential and sealed, elsewhere in your response.

S. 19.36(5)

(5) TRADE SECRETS. An authority may withhold access to any record or portion of a record containing information qualifying as a trade secret as defined in s. 134.90(1)(c).

s. 134.90(1)(c)

(c) “Trade secret” means information, including a formula, pattern, compilation, program, device, method, technique or process to which all of the following apply:

1. The information derives independent economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally known to, and not being readily ascertainable by proper means by, other persons who can obtain economic value from its disclosure or use.

2. The information is the subject of efforts to maintain its secrecy that are reasonable under the circumstances.

The City cannot ensure that information will not be subject to release if a request is made under applicable public records laws. The City cannot consider the following confidential: a bid in its entirety, price bid information, or the entire contents of any resulting contract. The City will not provide advance notice to Proposers prior to release of any requested record.

To the extent permitted by such laws, it is the intention of the City to withhold the contents of Proposals from public viewuntil such times as competitive or bargaining reasons no longer require non-disclosure, in the City’s opinion. At that time, all Proposals will be available for review in accordance with such laws.

1.18 Usage Reports

Annually, the successful Proposers shall furnish to City Purchasing usage reports summarizing the ordering history for each department served during the previous contract year. The report, at a minimum, must include each and every item or service ordered during the period, its total quantities and dollars by item/service and in total. The City reserves the right to request usage reports at any time and request additional information, if required, when reviewing contract activity.

1.19 Tax Exempt

The City of Madison as a municipality is exempt from payment of federal excise taxes (Registration Number 39-73-0411-K) and State of Wisconsin taxes per Wisconsin statute 77.54(9a). Federal Tax ID #39-6005507. A completed Wisconsin Department of Revenue Form S-211 (R.2-00) can be found on the City website. Our tax-exempt number is ES 42916.

1.20 Proposers Responsibility

Proposers shall examine this RFP and shall exercise their judgment as to the nature and scope of the work required. No plea of ignorance concerning conditions or difficulties that exist or may hereafter arise in the execution of the work under the resulting contract, as a consequence of failure to make necessary examinations and investigations, shall be accepted as an excuse for any failure or omission on the part of the Proposers to fulfill the requirements of the resulting contract.

2 SCOPE OF SERVICES

Specific tasks for this RFP have been identified below, along with the required deliverable per task. All cost estimates shall reference the specific task number or sub-task component as outlined in the Cost Proposal document, included with the RFP. Upon written direction, During the project The City, at their discretion and upon written direction, may elect to shift funds between tasks as they see fit as long as the overall contract dollar amount is not exceeded.

PHASE 1

TASK 1 Review Existing Data and Support Data Collection Plan Development

1.1 CONSULTANT will review existing data for the watershed including City-provided GIS data. City data provided is listed in Exhibit 2. CONSULTANT will also identify additional sources of data that will be used and/or needed for model setup/calibration.

1.2 CONSULTANT will determine where field survey data is required to complete model input requirements, or as necessary for conducting the stormwater modeling. Survey data may include:

open channel cross sections, culvert crossings, pipe inverts / size, and structure rims, to provide the necessary input data for the modeling. Exact locations will be identified in collaboration with the City.

CONSULTANT will provide survey for requested locations requested in this RFP. All survey data will utilize Wisconsin County Coordinate System – Dane Zone, NAD83 (HARN). All survey data shall be referenced to NAVD 88 (pre-2007 adjustment) feet for vertical datum. Survey data shall be provided to the City in a format compatible with ArcCollector software. The City will provide a standard survey data template to the CONSULTANT.

Task 1 Deliverables:

1) List of data gaps and needs

2) Point shapefile of survey locations

3) Completed survey in ArcCollector format

TASK 2 Public Engagement 1

2.1 CONSULTANT will provide watershed information and two (2) staff people to help conduct Public

Information Meeting #1 (PIM #1). The purpose of PIM #1 is to introduce the project and to discuss process and approach.

PIM #1 will be held at the beginning of the project. The City has developed the PowerPoint presentation for PIM #1. CONSULTANT will review the City’s presentation, provide input on the presentation, and provide the City with watershed-specific statistics (including but not limited to watershed area and quantity of stormwater infrastructure) and graphics for insertion into the presentation. CONSULTANT shall be the lead presenter of the PowerPoint at PIM #1.

2.2 If authorized by City, CONSULTANT will provide one (1) staff person and facilitate up to five (5) focus group or stakeholder meetings, as authorized and organized by the City, with affected residents or neighborhoods. The purpose of the meetings will be to gather additional information and gain input regarding flooding impacts in specific locations. Meetings will be paid for by the Unit price for this task as identified in the Cost Proposal provided with the Proposal. The focus group or stakeholder meetings may be held in-person or virtually. Include a cost for each in the provided Cost Proposal worksheet.

The City will identify the group(s) for each meeting, arrange for a suitable location, and notify residents of the meeting. CONSULTANT will provide the materials created for PIM #1 as well as an 11x17” figure of the focus group/stakeholder’s area of interest.

CONSULTANT will conduct the listening session and document the citizen comments.

Task 2 Deliverables:

1) Edits to City’s standard PIM#1 PowerPoint presentation, including watershed-specific statistics and graphics.

2) Other PIM#1 presentation materials as necessary.

3) 11”x17” focus group area figures.

4) Compiled feedback and responses to questions from PIM and focus groups in written report format. This report shall include an executive summary that can be posted to the City website.

TASK 3 Develop and Calibrate Existing Conditions Model for the Watershed

CONSULTANT will conduct the hydrologic and hydraulic modeling as described in this project using 1D and 2D software utilizing traditional hydrology (rain-on-grid is not to be used). CONSULTANT shall use either Innovyze’s XP-SWMM or Computational Hydraulics International’s PCSWMM software to complete the modeling. The version of the software will be the most recent version and will not change after the calibration process. CONSULTANT shall document the version of either software used for construction of the model.

CONSULTANT will also use ArcGIS as-needed for the project; where the City is on a different version of ArcGIS than the CONSULTANT, CONSULTANT will save files to version the City is in. City is currently utilizing ArcGIS v10.7.1

3.1 A Modeling Guidance document has been created for the Watershed Studies to provide for consistency in modeling among watersheds. It is understood this document will evolve as modeling tools and data change. The CONSULTANT will coordinate with City and other Consultants to update the Modeling Guidance document where appropriate for these watershed studies (see Exhibit 3). Coordination may be done via email or phone.

3.1.1 The Modeling Guidance document will be updated and maintained to reflect group decisions on the modeling source documents, naming conventions, standardized coordinate systems, modeling input parameters, and other factors to maximize the consistency among the models being developed for all watersheds.

3.1.2 The Modeling Guidance document will include documentation of modeling parameters and agreed-upon changes to parameters with a log of dates,

3.1.3 The Modeling Guidance document will include documentation of all other agreed-upon changes by the City and CONSULTANT.

3.1.4 The City will have final veto authority over any and all changes to the Modeling Guidance document.

3.2 For the purpose of this contract, the level of effort required shall be reflected in the assumptions made within the Modeling Guidance document, dated February 19, 2024 and provided with this RFP. Any further assumptions or changes to the Modeling Guidance document that will result in a measurable increase in the level of effort will be consulted with the City and adjustments to the contract cost will be determined prior to proceeding.

If the CONSULTANT considers the level of effort outlined in the Modeling Guidance to be insufficient to meet the City’s flood mitigation goals (as outlined in the Modeling Guidance document) in some or all of the proposed model area, they are encouraged to address that in their response to this RFP.

If the CONSULTANT considers the level of effort outlined in the Modeling Guidance to be sufficient to meet the City’s flood mitigation goals, but would recommend increased level of effort in some or all parts of the model to meet a different standard, they are encouraged to scope the proposal to the level of effort outlined in the Modeling Guidance document. Discussion of the increased level of effort, and its associated costs, should be included with this submittal as an Additional Task or Service in the Attachments/Appendices section of the CONSULTANT’s response to this RFP (see Section 3.2 of this RFP).

3.3 Exhibits 1-2 identifies areas of concern and known areas of flooding. Additional model detail shall be provided for the identified areas. The level of detail is dependent upon the specific area.

CONSULTANT TO PROVIDE AN APPROACH AND SCOPE FOR THE APPROPRIATE LEVEL

OF DETAIL BASED ON THEIR PROFESSIONAL JUDGEMENT.

3.4 Applicable portions of the private conveyance system may be included; the expectation is that private systems and private properties will be analyzed to the extent necessary to build and calibrate the models. This effort is not intended to result in solutions to solve flooding on private property but it may be necessary in order to accurately build and calibrate the model. If additional work beyond the assumptions are required on a case by case basis, that should be noted and provided to the City for consideration of additional compensation.

3.5 Following the development of the existing conditions model, the CONSULTANT will calibrate the model with available data.

The City of Madison is monitoring key locations within the watershed in accordance with the joint USGS-City of Madison monitoring plan for the watershed. Monitoring of sites in the watershed began in the Spring of 2023. Monitoring data will be provided to the CONSULTANT through a City-provided login to the monitoring website. Collected data are uploaded to that website on a 24-hr basis.

3.5.1 The CONSULTANT is responsible for downloading required data after its collection.

3.5.2 CONSULTANT is expected to visit the location of each monitoring gage and familiarize themselves with the location and upstream and downstream conditions.

3.5.3 The number of calibration locations within the watershed shall be based on the actual number of locations successfully monitored by the USGS with qualifying rain events.

3.5.4 Calibration will consider applicable rainfall data collected and damage information from August 20, 2018 storm if available. It will also consider anecdotal information collected during PIM #1 or Focus Groups, debris line surveys, or other pertinent information provided by the City or the public.

3.5.5 CONSULTANT will complete field verification, site visits, and evaluations as necessary to verify the existing conditions model.

3.5.6 Calibration will be attempted for no more than three (3) 2023-2024-monitored storm events. The three (3) events will be selected by City and CONSULTANT(s). If suitable events do not occur prior to July 31, 2024, CONSULTANT and City will agree on revised schedule for both monitoring and remainder of modeling.

For purposes of this project, the model will be considered to be calibrated if the overall average model bias for water surface elevations is within +/- 5% with reasonable effort made to minimize the largest absolute error while at the same time balancing that effort with the relative importance of the model results at each monitoring site location. The largest absolute error at each monitored location is defined as +/- 25%. It is understood that there may be some circumstances where calibration cannot be accomplished. If calibration cannot be accomplished, CONSULTANT and the City will discuss and decide on an acceptable course of action.

3.5.7 Final calibration using field-collected data shall be complete by Mar 31, 2025. This schedule assumes suitable rain events are successfully monitored in 2023-2024 and the monitored data is available to CONSULTANT by July 31, 2024.

3.5.8 CONSULTANT will participate in one (1) in-person meeting with City staff to discuss the calibration methodology prior to creation of the existing conditions model. This may be done in conjunction with the monthly progress meetings. Calibration parameters will be discussed and agreed upon.

3.5.9 CONSULTANT will complete field verification, site visits, and evaluations as necessary to complete and verify the existing conditions model.

Task 3 Deliverables:

1) Non-Calibrated Existing Conditions Model input files

2) Non-Calibrated Existing Conditions Model output files

3) GIS shapefiles and feature classes including:

a. Subbasins

b. Flow paths

c. Modeled conveyance network (pipes, structures, greenways, etc)

4) Flow, water level and rainfall data used for calibration

5) Tables and graphs to illustrate calibration

6) Calibrated Existing Conditions Model Input

7) Calibrated Existing Conditions Model Output

8) Documentation describing calibrations and pre-and post-calibrated parameters

TASK 4 Execute Existing Conditions Model

4.1 CONSULTANT will run the calibrated model for the 2-, 5-, 10-, 25-, 100-, 200-, and 500-yr, 24-hr design events using the MSE4 rainfall distribution and the rainfall depths provided by the City in the Modeling Guidance document.

4.2 CONSULTANT shall also run one long-duration (>24-hr) event as described in the Modeling

Guidance document for the existing conditions model.

4.3 CONSULTANT will review model results with City Engineering staff. This meeting shall be face-to-face and may be done in conjunction with the monthly progress meetings.

4.4 CONSULTANT will prepare a Draft Watershed Existing Conditions Report and provide draft documents for City staff review. The City has developed an outline for the report and will provide it to the CONSULTANT. Report shall include the following:

1) Introduction

2) Description of existing conditions.

3) Current land uses and assumptions

4) Land use maps

5) Soils maps

6) Major storm infrastructure networks

7) Calibration methodology, approach, and results

8) Maximum extent of flooding figures / inundation mapping under the 2-, 5-, 10-, 25-, 100-, 200-, and 500-yr, 24-hr design events

9) Modeling Guidance documentation.

10) Compiled feedback from Focus Groups and PIMs #1 and #2.

Task 4 Deliverables:

1) Color figures showing the maximum extent of flooding during each storm event. The figures shall be color coded to show depth of flooding (typical ranges utilized are: 0.01’-0.25’, 0.25’-0.5’, 0.5’- 1.0’, 1.0’-3’, and greater than 3’).

2) Table noting the flooding depth for up to 25 locations for each design storm. Locations will be determined through coordination with City staff.

3) Table and figure showing structures flooded during the 100-yr storm event.

4) Table and figure showing streets not meeting 10-year goal.

5) Draft report for existing conditions.

6) Model files and documentation.

7) GIS files generated for model development. All files shall be delivered to the City on an external hard drive.

TASK 5 Public Engagement 2 (Present Existing Conditions Results and Get Feedback from Stakeholders)

5.1 CONSULTANT will provide information materials and three (3) staff people to help conduct Public

Information Meeting #2 (PIM #2). The purpose of PIM #2 is to present the existing conditions modeling results and ask for public feedback regarding the results.

PIM #2 will be held following the calibration of the existing conditions model. CONSULTANT will create materials including a PowerPoint presentation and a map showing the project area.

CONSULTANT shall provide draft PowerPoint presentation to the City and work with City staff to finalize the presentation.

5.2 If Authorized by City, CONSULTANT will provide one (1) staff person and facilitate up to five (5) focus group or stakeholder meetings, as authorized and organized by the City, with affected residents or neighborhoods. The purpose of the meetings will be to gather additional information and gain input regarding flooding impacts in specific locations. The focus group or stakeholder meetings may be held in-person or virtually. Include a cost for each in the provided Cost Proposal worksheet.

The City will identify the group(s) for each meeting, arrange for a suitable location, and notify residents of the meeting. CONSULTANT will provide the materials created for PIM #2 as well as 11x17” figures of each focus group/stakeholder’s area of interest.

CONSULTANT will conduct the listening session and document the citizen comments.

Task 5 Deliverables:

1) PIM #2 presentation in PowerPoint format.

2) Other PIM#2 presentation materials as necessary.

3) 11”x17” focus group area figures.

4) Compile feedback and responses to questions from PIM#2 and focus groups and provide report to the City. This report shall include an executive summary that can be posted to the City website.

5) Specific focus group deliverables include:

o Bulleted summary of information provided by focus group attendees o Point shapefile/feature class showing locations that were visited during focus group o If reasonable, August 2018 flood extent sketch for each focus group

PHASE 2

CONSULTANT shall not move on to Phase 2 without express direction by the City. All comments and changes as identified by the City in Phase 1 and any respective modeling, calibration and draft report modifications shall be addressed prior to starting the mitigation alternative analysis.

TASK 6 Evaluate Flood Mitigation Alternatives

6.1 Peak Flow Control

For purposes of the watershed studies, Peak Flow Control (PFC) is considered any stormwater control measure that has the ability to store or convey water, but not infiltrate water. These types of stormwater control measures could be referred to as Grey Infrastructure.

This Task has subtasks. First, the Consultant will identify possible causes of flooding in Task 6.1.1.

Then, in Task 6.1.2, the Consultant will identify potential locations for solutions. Task 6.1.3 will combine Tasks 6.1.1 and 6.1.2 to develop and evaluation solutions to mitigate the potential causes.

6.1.1 Identify Causes of Flooding

The objective of this subtask is to identify the major causes of flooding, but not necessarily solve them. This will:

• Guide later sections of this scope

• Provide big picture causes such that if the solutions presented in the final report cannot be implemented, then other options targeting the issue can be developed at a later date

General causes include but are not limited to:

• Undersized surface storage – insufficient above-ground storage capacity (ponds, etc)

• Insufficient surface-to-underground conveyance capacity – insufficient inlet/pond discharge/etc. capacity to allow water to exit the above-ground system and enter the below-ground system

• Restrictions in underground system – undersized trunk line conveyance

• High tailwater at discharge point

Use the inundation maps and flooding locations table generated in Task 4, Deliverables 1 and 2 in the Scope of Work to identify problem flooding areas throughout the watershed.

Using professional judgement and drainage network properties (including but not limited to contributing area and existing storm infrastructure), identify locations where flooding occurs and the identified reason(s) for flooding throughout the watershed for the 10-yr, 25-yr, and 100-yr, 24-hour MSE4 storm events. It is understood that locations may vary in meeting the City’s Goals based on the storm event.

The Consultant should use the City of Madison Flood Mitigation Goals in the Modeling Guidance Document to guide selection of the locations.

Prior to finalizing the selection of locations, the CONSULANT should meet with City staff to review locations and discuss the identified reasons for flooding.

Deliverables for this step shall include:

1) Color map of watershed with selected locations clearly identified for each storm event.

2) For each selected point, a brief description of why that point was selected for further study.

6.1.2 Develop Solutions for PFC

Step 1: Create a Model with All Potential Peak Flow Control Infrastructure.

This step creates a theoretical scenario to understand what the outcome would be if all available Peak Flow Control Infrastructure (PFCI) were implemented.

The first part of Step 1 will be to meet with City staff for a brainstorming session.

Consultants should be prepared with high-level, idyllic solutions to solve flooding. For example, a solution that could solve flooding would be to install 6’ x 10’ box culverts under every street in a watershed. Although this could solve flooding, it may not be feasible for a particular watershed. During this meeting, high-level, idyllic solutions will be discussed and guidance will be given to the consultant on which to further evaluate.

Using the information from the meeting, maximize a PFCI in each watershed. These solutions may “oversolve” the flooding; this is okay for this step as it will be refined in subsequent steps.

Solutions offered shall not make conditions worse downstream (worse is defined as increased peak water surface elevations), unless the upstream solution is paired with a downstream solution that mitigates the worsened condition.

For this step, assume solutions may not increase peak flows to a downstream municipality.

A solution may solve flooding at multiple locations or there may be a solution for each identified location.

This model will be called the Maximum PFCI Model. Run the model for the 10-yr, 25-yr, 100-yr and 500-yr, 24-hour MSE4 storm events. Note: solutions do not need to be provided for the 500-year, 24-hour event. The purpose of the model run is to understand the effect the solutions have on that storm.

Deliverables for this step shall include:

1) A spreadsheet or list for each PFCI that includes rough sizing/dimensions where applicable (approximate storage volume required, increase in pipe size, diversion pipe size, etc.).

2) Color figures showing the maximum extent of flooding during each storm event.

The figures shall be color coded to show depth of flooding (typical ranges utilized are: 0.01’-0.25’, 0.25’-0.5’, 0.5’-1.0’, 1.0’-3’, and greater than 3’).

3) Table noting the flooding depth for the locations identified during Task 4 for each design storm.

4) Table and figure showing structures flooded and removed during the 100-yr storm event.

5) Model files and documentation.

6) GIS files generated for model development. All files shall be delivered to the City on an external hard drive.

At this point, Consultants will pause on proposed tasks while City conducts internal meetings with City agencies including, but not limited to, the Parks, Forestry and Streets Departments and the Office of the Mayor. Consultants are not expected to attend these meetings.

Step 2: Develop PFC Solutions Model

Using the information identified in Task 6.1.1 and the information the City collects during its internal meetings, develop “feasible” solutions to solve the identified causes of flooding. Solutions could include:

• Above-ground detention basins

• Additional inlets

• Underground storage

• Enlarged greenways and pipes

• Pumping

• Locations to purchase property that is repeatedly flooded

• Other solutions the consultant deems sound

It is expected that one (1) holistic set of solutions will be developed for the watershed which include both regional solutions and local sewer upgrades.

The consultant shall develop conceptual solutions to meet the goals of the watershed studies as outlined in the Modeling Guidance. The holistic set of solutions should include conceptual solutions to meet all City Goals in all areas of the watershed unless a location(s) is explicitly discussed with City staff and removed from the solutions set.

Conceptual solutions should consider:

• Utility conflicts (using available data)

• Topographic relief (if pumps are required to get stormwater runoff to/from PFCI)

• Downstream flood impacts

• Environmental concerns (using available data including CARPC info, wetland indicators, etc)

• Permitting concerns

• Land ownership – note, GIS ownership records for ponds/greenways layer is not correct; Consultant should reference parcel data instead for those areas

This model will be called the PFC Solutions Model. Run the model for the 2-yr, 5-yr, 10-yr, 25-yr, 100-yr, 200-yr, and 500-yr, 24-hour MSE4 storm events. The purpose of the model run is to understand the effect the solutions have on each incremental storm event.

Develop conceptual (30%) cost estimates for each proposed PFCI included in the PFC Solutions Model.

Deliverables for this step shall include:

1) A spreadsheet or list for each PFCI that includes rough sizing/dimensions where applicable (approximate storage volume required, increase in pipe size, diversion pipe size, etc.).

2) Conceptual (30%) drawings (1 per PFCI) showing (if applicable):

a. The footprint and inlet/outlet information for storage or greenway modifications

b. Tie-in and required changes (increased size, decreased size, abandonment, etc) to existing storm sewer system

c. Locations of additional inlets

d. Location of pump station, pump station footprint, and inlet/outlet pipes

e. Locations of properties to be purchased

f. Utility conflicts from existing available GIS data

g. Known wetlands/FEMA floodplains/environmental areas of concern

3) Conceptual (30%) cost estimates utilizing unit costs provided by the City for items identified by the Consultant.

4) Color figures showing the maximum extent of flooding during each storm event.

The figures shall be color coded to show depth of flooding (typical ranges utilized are: 0.01’-0.25’, 0.25’-0.5’, 0.5’-1.0’, 1.0’-3’, and greater than 3’).

5) Table noting the flooding depth for the 25 locations identified during Task 4.

6) Table and figure showing number of structures flooded and removed from flooding during the 100-year event.

7) Figure showing streets meeting and still not meeting goal during the 10-year storm event.

8) Model files and documentation.

9) GIS files generated for model development. All files shall be delivered to the City on an external hard drive.

6.1.3 Assess the 500-yr Storm and Potential Upgrades

The purpose of this subtask is to further understand where it may be practical to purchase property and/or where PFCI could be maximized to achieve additional flood control benefits. In some cases this may not be practical or feasible, therefore solution is considered partially theoretical.

Using the model from Task 6.1.2, Step 2 (PFC Solutions Model) as a base, increase the capacity of all conveyance, storage, and/or pumps in the model to relieve as much flooding as possible for the 500-yr event while staying within the ownership boundaries of the PFC devices. For example, if a PFCI is going to be proposed for an open lot owned by the City of Madison, maximize the PFCI on the land owned by the City but do not go outside those boundaries. This model is called the Upsized PFC Solutions Model.

The solutions may involve increase infrastructure upstream and/or downstream of the solutions identified in Task 6.1.2, Step 2, as long the solution stays within the ownership boundaries.

Run the PFC Solutions Model from Task 6.1.2, Step 2 for the 500-yr event. Compare the results from this model to the results of the Upsized PFC Solutions Model run for the 500-yr storm.

As part of the comparison, identify the location and number of buildings that are no longer inundated with the upsized PFCI. For purposes of this analysis, inundation will be identified as water touching a structure.

Prepare a conceptual (30%) cost estimate for upsized PFCI identified in Task 6.1.3.

Deliverables

1) Comparison of infrastructure costs between the PFC Solutions Model and the Upsized PFC Solutions Model for the 500-yr event

2) Count of buildings inundated in PFC Solutions Model compared to the Upsized PFC Solutions Model during the 500-yr event

3) Model files and documentation

6.2 Draft Watershed Proposed Solutions Report:

CONSULTANT will provide a draft document for the proposed alternatives to be reviewed by the City.

The report shall include the following:

1) Overview and description of the modeling approach and selection of PFC alternative locations.

2) Proposed solutions for deficiencies.

3) Maximum extent of flooding/inundation maps comparing existing and proposed alternatives.

4) Critical elevations in areas where structural flooding is occurring for the 500-year flood extent.

a. Critical elevations for structures will be based on available data provided by the City and/or from field survey work conducted by the survey firm under City contract.

Task 6 Deliverables

1) Color figures showing the maximum extent of flooding during each storm event for each alternative. The figures shall be color coded to show depth of flooding (typical ranges utilized are:

0.01’- 0.25’, 0.25’-0.5’, 0.5’-1.0’, 1.0’-3’, and greater than 3’).

2) Table noting the flooding depth for up to 25 locations identified during Task 4 for each design storm.

3) Table and figure showing number of structures flooded and removed from flooding during the 100-year event.

4) Figure showing streets meeting and still not meeting goal during the 10-year storm event.

5) Draft Watershed Proposed Solutions Report.

TASK 7 Public Engagement 3 (Present Mitigation Alternatives)

7.1 CONSULTANT will provide information materials and three (3) staff people to help conduct Public

Information Meeting #3 (PIM #3). The purpose of PIM #3 is to present the proposed conditions selected alternative scenario and solicit public feedback.

PIM #3 will be held after the completion of the proposed conditions modeling. CONSULTANT will create materials including a PowerPoint presentation and a map showing the project area.

CONSULTANT shall provide draft PowerPoint presentation to the City and work with City staff to finalize the presentation.

7.2 If authorized by the City, additional public informational meeting may be required based on feedback from the City, policy makers or the public. Additional meetings are not budgeted under the initial contract. A contract amendment for each additional meeting will be executed by the City if additional meetings are requested.

Task 7 Deliverables:

1) Public feedback from implemented public outreach and engagement plan.

2) PIM#3 Presentation in PowerPoint format.

3) Other PIM#3 presentation materials as necessary.

4) Compile feedback and responses to questions from PIM#3 and provide report to the City. This report shall include an executive summary that can be posted to the City website.

PHASE 3 – FINAL REPORT

CONSULTANT shall not move on to Phase 3 without express direction by the City. All comments and changes as identified by the City in both Phase 1 and Phase 2 and the respective modeling, alternative analysis and draft report shall be addressed prior to final preparation of the final deliverables in Task 8.

TASK 8 Prepare Detailed Written Report and Deliver Model

CONSULTANT will prepare a detailed Watershed Report that includes the existing conditions report, modeling results, maximum extent of flooding/inundation maps, and proposed mitigation alternatives, as detailed in Tasks 4 and 6.

The report shall also include an executive summary that identifies and prioritizes the recommended improvements and, if necessary, identifies improvements that would need to be completed in a specific order. A draft report will be prepared for City review, and a final report will be prepared based on City review comments.

The final report will also refine cost estimates as identified in Task 6 for the top five (5) improvements identified in the summary. The cost refinements will be based upon updated unit cost information provided by the City. The report will also include response to QA/QC comments as identified in Task 7.

The City has prepared a Report Outline and GIS Deliverables document containing the requested information and format of information. The document can be found in Exhibit 5 of this RFP.

Task 8 Deliverables:

Reports will be provided to the City as follows:

1) One (1) digital copy of the document in the software in which it was prepared.

2) One (1) digital copy of the document in PDF format.

CONSULTANT will also provide:

1) The final model(s), fully QA/QC’ed, to the City including the existing conditions models for the respective storms as identified in Task 4 and all alternative analyses or scenarios as identified in Task 6. The model(s) shall be provided to the City on a hard drive.

2) All related files used in the creation of the model shall be provided to the City as part of the final deliverables, including but not limited to GIS, CADD, topographic surveys, Access database, or Excel files.

PROJECT COORDINATION

TASK 9 Progress Meetings and Coordination

CONSULTANT will attend the kick-off meeting and up to fourteen (14) additional virtual monthly progress meetings as requested by the City and participate in preparing meeting minutes summarizing the discussions held during the meetings.

CONSULTANT will attend up to five (5) weekly virtual progress meetings as-needed and participate in preparing meeting minutes summarizing the discussions held during the meetings.

The meetings may be watershed-specific or may cover all watersheds.

CONSULTANT should expect to coordinate with other CONSULTANTs working on other watershed studies within the City of Madison.

Task 9 Deliverables: CONSULTANT will work with other CONSULTANTS to provide meeting summaries within 3 days of each meeting.

3 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

Responsibilities of the City of Madison

1. The City of Madison Engineering Division will provide the following data as provided for in Exhibit 3: Data provided by City

a. Pond data

b. Greenway data

c. Watershed/outfall data

d. Pipe data

e. Storm structure data

f. Citywide surface cover data (including impervious areas)

g. Curve number generator tool (used to supplement percent impervious calculations)

h. DEM & Contours

i. Historic flooding data

j. Modeling Guidance…