RFI Document.pdf

Issue Date: October 27th, 2026

Issuing Agency: County of Warren Finance & Purchasing Department

220 N. Commerce Ave., Suite 700 ATTN: Kimberly Henry, Buyer Front Royal, VA 22630

Title: Fairview House (Thomas McKay House) Restoration

Due Date: November 19th, 2026 by 2:00 p.m.

OPTIONAL SITE WALK-THROUGH: November 6th, 2026 at 11:00 a.m. at the Fairview House

(Thomas McKay House) located at 7139 Winchester Road, Front Royal, VA 22630.

Direct all inquiries in writing to:

o Kimberly Henry, Buyer at khenry@warrencountyva.gov

This public body does not discriminate against faith-based organizations in accordance with the

Code of Virginia, § 2.2-4343.1 or against a bidder or offeror because of race, religion, color, sex, national origin, age, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, political affiliation, or veteran status or any other basis prohibited by state law relating to discrimination in employment.

THIS IS NOT A SOLICITATION TO CONTRACT WITH THE COUNTY OF WARREN

The County of Warren has issued this Request for Information (RFI) solely for informational, market research, budgetary and planning purposes. This RFI is not a solicitation to purchase goods or services, and does not constitute a commitment to issue any future solicitation, award of a contract, or payment for any cost incurred in developing a response to this RFI. In the future, the County of Warren may or may not choose to issue a solicitation to contract for these or similar goods and services, and may or may not choose to incorporate information gathered through this RFI into future requirements.

REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI)

County of Warren, Virginia

Finance & Purchasing Department mailto:khenry@warrencountyva.gov

PURPOSE

Warren County is seeking information from qualified historic preservation architects, building-envelope specialists, contractors, and related professionals regarding the assessment, stabilization, and restoration of Fairview House, also known as the Thomas McKay House. Responses will help the County define the appropriate technical approach, sequencing, procurement strategy, schedule, and budget for future restoration work.

STATEMENT OF NEEDS

1. Property Background and Preservation Objective:

Fairview House is a stone and frame dwelling constructed circa 1830 and is locally significant as an example of Shenandoah Valley architecture. The condition of the interior and exterior has deteriorated rapidly during the last decade, principally because of water infiltration. The County recognizes the immediate need to coordinate stabilization and restoration activities before additional damage occurs.

The County’s objective is to retain and restore the building’s existing form, historic integrity, and character-defining materials so it may be preserved and interpreted as a site of local historical significance. Work should follow a repair-first approach and be planned to correct the sources of water entry before undertaking finish repairs that could be damaged by continuing moisture.

2. RFI Objective:

• Identify qualified firms and disciplines capable of assessing and restoring a circa-1830 stone and frame dwelling.

• Obtain recommendations for immediate stabilization, investigation, design, construction sequencing, and long-term moisture management.

• Understand which services should be performed under one contract and which may require specialty consultants or trades.

• Develop planning-level cost ranges, schedules, procurement considerations, and appropriate project phases.

• Identify material testing, documentation, permitting, environmental review, and preservation oversight needed before construction.

3. Anticipated Technical Scope:

The following scope is preliminary. Respondents should identify missing investigations or related work that is necessary to produce a durable, historically appropriate result.

4. Preservation and Performance Expectations:

Recommendations should be consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, using the Standards for Rehabilitation unless subsequent research supports another treatment. Respondents should explain how the following principles would be incorporated:

• Retain historic materials and repair them in place whenever feasible; replace only deteriorated portions that cannot reasonably be repaired.

• Base mortar, coatings, sealants, wood profiles, glazing, roofing, and other materials on physical investigation and testing rather than assumption.

• Use compatible mortar that is no harder or less permeable than the historic masonry. Do not assume

Portland cement-rich mortar is appropriate.

Work Area Information Requested

Roofing and water management

Assess the complete roofing assembly, flashings, valleys, penetrations, chimneys, gutters, downspouts, drainage, roof framing visible without destructive investigation, and evidence of active or concealed leakage. Recommend emergency protection and permanent repair or replacement options, including historically compatible materials and details. Identify ventilation, condensation, and discharge improvements needed to prevent recurring moisture damage.

Exterior brick chimneys

Assess and repoint exterior brick masonry on two chimneys. Document brick condition, mortar loss, cracking, displacement, flashing conditions, caps, and prior incompatible repairs. Recommend mortar analysis, sample panels, appropriate lime-based mortar, joint preparation, tooling, brick repair or selective replacement, and protection during curing.

Interior stone chimneys

Assess and repoint interior stonework associated with four chimneys. Identify loose or missing mortar, unstable masonry, moisture and salt damage, concealed conditions, and fire or life-safety concerns. Recommend compatible mortar, cleaning, localized dismantling and rebuilding if necessary, and protection of adjacent historic fabric.

Wood siding

Assess existing siding, trim, corner boards, sheathing, and related wood components.

Prioritize consolidation, dutchman repairs, patching, and selective replacement over wholesale removal. Where replacement is unavoidable, recommend species, profile, dimensions, texture, fastening, priming, and finish treatments that match documented historic material.

Historic windows

Assess all 27 windows and classify each by condition and recommended treatment.

Address sash, frames, sills, muntins, glazing bars, weights, cords, hardware, glazing putty, glass, coatings, weatherstripping, and perimeter water entry. Prioritize in-place repair and reglazing. Identify windows requiring shop repair or reconstruction, with replacement components matching existing profiles and retaining historic glass wherever feasible.

Documentation and coordination

Recommend measured documentation, condition photography, material testing, mockups, protection plans, quality-control inspections, and record drawings. Explain how roofing, masonry, carpentry, window, interior, and site-drainage work should be coordinated to avoid damage or rework.

• Avoid abrasive cleaning, waterproof coatings, irreversible sealants, or other treatments that may trap moisture or damage historic fabric.

• Correct roof, flashing, drainage, and other water-management deficiencies before completing vulnerable interior or exterior finish repairs.

• Use mockups and sample repairs for County and preservation review before broad application.

• Document significant conditions before, during, and after work and identify concealed conditions that warrant allowances or unit pricing.

5. Requested Response:

Responses should be concise and should address each item below. Conceptual recommendations are welcome; respondents are not expected to prepare construction documents as part of this RFI.

1. Firm and team. Firm name, address, primary contact, business structure, and the proposed disciplines or specialty trades. Identify the anticipated lead entity and any likely subconsultants.

2. Relevant experience. Three to five comparable projects involving early nineteenth-century stone, brick, frame, roofing, wood siding, or historic window work. Include owner, location, date, role, approximate construction value, and a reference if available.

3. Preliminary approach. Recommended investigation and treatment approach for each work area, including immediate stabilization, material testing, mockups, documentation, and quality control.

4. Project delivery and phasing. Recommended contract structure and phases, such as emergency stabilization, assessment, design, bidding, construction, and monitoring. Identify work that should occur first and any activities that can proceed concurrently.

5. Schedule. Planning-level duration for assessment and design, anticipated lead times, seasonal constraints, and construction duration. Identify conditions that could materially affect the schedule.

6. Budget information. Planning-level cost ranges by work area and project phase, with assumptions, exclusions, escalation basis, design and contingency allowances, and optional unit-cost information. Clearly distinguish professional services from construction costs.

7. Risks and unknowns. Likely concealed conditions, access limitations, structural concerns, hazardous materials, lead-safe work requirements, code issues, permitting, utility needs, and information the County should obtain before issuing a solicitation.

8. County support needed. Recommended surveys, reports, drawings, testing, access, utilities, staging areas, owner decisions, and preservation or regulatory coordination.

9. Procurement recommendations. Suggested minimum qualifications, licenses, certifications, evaluation criteria, alternates, allowances, unit prices, and contract provisions for a future solicitation.

10. Conflicts and exceptions. Any potential conflicts of interest, limitations, exceptions, proprietary methods, or terms the County should understand.

6. Planning Assumptions and Matters for Comment:

• The building may contain lead-based paint, asbestos-containing material, mold, bird or animal waste, or other environmental hazards. Respondents should identify recommended surveys and safe-work practices. No statement in this RFI represents a finding that a particular hazard is or is not present.

• Respondents should state whether limited exploratory openings, probes, mortar analysis, paint analysis, wood-species identification, moisture mapping, infrared investigation, or structural evaluation are recommended.

• Respondents should comment on temporary stabilization measures that should be undertaken before final design or construction and identify any actions that should not be delayed.

• Respondents should identify whether the County should retain an independent preservation architect or owner’s representative to provide design, bidding, and construction-phase oversight.

• The County welcomes comments on grant compliance, historic review, easements, or other preservation requirements that could affect project delivery, but respondents should identify the basis for any such requirement rather than assume it applies.

7. County Review and Potential Next Steps:

The County may review responses based on demonstrated historic-preservation experience, understanding of water-related deterioration, technical approach, capacity to coordinate specialty disciplines, practical phasing, and the usefulness of the schedule and budget information. This review is for planning and market-research purposes and is not a competitive ranking or source-selection decision.

After reviewing the information, the County may take no further action; request clarification; conduct additional investigation; issue a separate solicitation; use a cooperative or other lawful procurement method; or revise the anticipated scope. Participation in this RFI is not required to participate in a future solicitation unless that solicitation expressly states otherwise.

8. General Conditions:

• The County will not reimburse any cost incurred in preparing a response, attending a site visit, providing clarification, or participating in follow-up discussions.

• Responses become County records and may be subject to disclosure under the Virginia Freedom of

Information Act. Respondents should clearly identify information they believe is protected from disclosure and state the legal basis; marking an entire response confidential may not be accepted.

• Respondents should not include trade secrets or other sensitive information unless necessary to answer the RFI. The County cannot guarantee confidentiality beyond that provided by law.

• This RFI does not commit the County to issue a solicitation, award a contract, use any information submitted, or proceed with the project as described.

• Any future procurement will be governed by its own solicitation, the Virginia Public Procurement Act, and applicable Warren County policies and contract terms.

• The County may use ideas and planning information from responses in developing a future scope.

Respondents should identify any proprietary limitation on use at the point where the information appears.

Suggested Planning Cost

Category Planning Range Assumptions and Exclusions

Emergency stabilization and temporary weather protection

Investigation, testing, and documentation

Preservation architectural and engineering services

Roofing and associated water management

Two exterior brick chimneys

Four interior stone chimneys

Wood siding and trim

Twenty-seven historic windows

Access, scaffolding, containment, and protection

Category Planning Range Assumptions and Exclusions

Permits, bonds, insurance, general conditions, and mobilization

Contingency and escalation

Post-construction monitoring or maintenance plan