QA_Mendota Grassman Greenway RFP.pdf
PDF 202 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- EN-20-8953
- Issued by
- Wisconsin
About this file
This document is a Question and Answer record from a Request for Proposals issued by the City of Mendota, Wisconsin, for the Mendota Grassman Greenway Flood Mitigation and Restoration Design project. The RFP solicits a design firm or team to develop design services and a comprehensive Scope of Services aimed at enhancing conveyance and reducing flood impact in the project area. Questions were received on August 28, 2020, with answers posted on September 4, 2020. The project timeline targets project bidding in November 2021 for construction to commence in 2022. Key deliverables include a basis of design report, opinions of probable costs at the 30%, 60%, 90%, and final design stages, a sediment sampling plan in accordance with NR347, and a dredging plan. The existing conditions model is an XP-SWMM model containing approximately 500 links, 500 nodes, and 600,000 two-dimensional cells. Land acquisition must be finalized prior to project bidding, though the schedule may be modified if necessary to accommodate land and easement acquisition without negatively impacting the 2022 construction timeline.
The City has allocated more than $100,000 for design and permits, with construction and restoration budgeted at $1 million to $1.25 million, excluding potential costs for University Avenue culvert replacement if required. Consultants are responsible for developing their own cost proposal sheets based on the scope created, with costs separated by meeting and number of assumed meetings. The City confirmed that if a multi-package bid approach is necessary due to budget constraints, this determination will be made at the 30% design stage. The City will cover sample collection and analysis costs should sampling prove necessary based on permit requirements. The existing XP-SWMM model will remain in its current platform rather than migrate to an open-source EPA SWMM or PCSWMM model.
View the file
Other files
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Mendota Grassman Greenway RFP Question and Answer Questions received: 8/28/20 Answers posted: 9/4/20
1. The RFP references Appendix A (Standard Terms & Conditions) and Appendix B (Contract for Purchase of
Services) – we could not find these Appendices as part of the RFP. Can they be provided? Or will these items be the same as past recent RFPs?
a. Appendix A and Appendix B were posted.
2. The RFP references a Cost Proposal, but a cost proposal form is not included. Prior RFPs have included a specific
Cost Proposal form to be filled out as part of the submittal. For this RFP will a specific form be provided? Or will it be the responsibility of the consultant to develop a form?
a. Consultants shall create their own cost proposal sheets based on the scope they create. Consultants shall follow Section 3.2 Submission Contents, Section 6, and be sure to separate the cost per meeting and number of assumed in meetings.
3. The RFP identifies that there may be a need for multiple bid packages due to budget constraints. The RFP indicates that this decision will be made at the 30% stage, with the 30% design estimate (Task 8). Task 7 identifies the preparation of opinion of probable costs for 60%, 90%, and Final Design. Should a 30% opinion of probable cost be added to this task?
a. Yes, a 30% probable cost should be added.
4. The RFP does not identify a basis of design report. Would the City like a basis of design report for the project?
a. Yes, please provide a basis of design report.
5. We understand the land acquisition process will take approximately 8 months. Is it acceptable to have land acquisition be on-going during the bidding of the project?
a. To avoid potential contract delays due to land acquisitions issues, the City will need to have land acquisition in hand at the time of bidding. However, if necessary, and if agreed to by all parties, the bidding schedule may be modified to finalize land and/or easement acquisition so long as it would not negatively impact a 2022 construction schedule.
6. Task 3 of the scope of work identifies potentially developing a sediment sampling plan in accordance with NR347. Until the applicability of NR347 is confirmed with the DNR it is unknown whether a sampling plan is needed. For the purposes of the RFP should we assume a sampling plan is needed? Should we assume a dredging plan is needed?
a. Please assume both are needed and provide a cost for both. The City will pay for sample collection and analysis should it be needed based on permits.
7. What number of 1D nodes and 2D cells does the existing conditions XP‐SWMM model include? (i.e. What level of license is required to run the model?)
a. The current XP-SWMM model is about 500 links and 500 nodes with about 600,000 2D cells.
8. Is the City interested in migrating this model to EPA SWMM / PCSWMM to use an open‐source model?
a. For now, the City would like the current model to stay in XP-SWMM
9. What is the desired end date for this project?
a. The City would like to bid the project November, 2021 to be constructed in 2022.
10. What is the available budget amount for this project?
a. We have more than $100,000 for design and permits, and $1M ‐$1.25M for construction/restoration.
This does not include costs for the University Ave culvert replacement, if necessary.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .