Talent_PIER_engineering_services_inquiry_log.pdf

City of Talent & Talent Urban Renewal Agency

Responses to Questions

RFP PW-2025-GIDE

Updated: September 3, 2025

Questions have been reproduced here (in most cases verbatim) in Time New Roman font.

Responses are written in italicized Arial font.

Question 001

The RFP mentions construction inspections. How often are inspections expected? Is the contracted engineer expected to be present at all times during construction? Task 11.5 references daily inspection forms. Will the City require full time inspection for all aspect of the construction phase of the project?

Answer

The engineer’s presence is required as often as is needed to ensure contractor performance and adherence to construction specifications. In all likelihood, the engineer should not need to be present to oversee construction, but should be available if questions or problems arise in the field and as needed to document proper construction and installation of public infrastructure identified in approved construction documents.

Addendum #1 has been issued to further clarify the deliverable expected for Task 11.5.

Daily inspection reports will not be required.

Question 002

Can you elaborate on which tasks as associated with the anticipated 3 phases?

Answer

The three phases of the project are intended to divide the project conceptually into different parts of the project. The first phase of the project involves preparation of project information and plans such that further development and then refinement of those designs can occur through public outreach and decision making by TURA and City of Talent officials and staff. The three project phases are not intended to be exactly demarcate when certain tasks are expected to be completed and others are expected to be initiated.

Some tasks will be performed across the entire project, and the appropriate time of their execution is at the discretion of the consultant.

Generally speaking, the following tasks will be involved during Phase I: Tasks 1, 2, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 4, 8

The following tasks will be involved during Phase II: Tasks 1, 2, 3.4, 5, 6, 7, 9, and 10

The following tasks will be involved during Phase III: Tasks 1 and 11

Question 003

Are the anticipated completion dates for Phase1 and Phase 2 hard deadlines, or may those be moved to accommodate more time for design, so long as the overall project deadline of 2/2/28 is met?

Answer The completion dates for Phases I and II are subject to change. The RFP allows for adjustment of the tentative scope of work, including expected dates of completion. The hard deadline, however, is February 2028. Due to the nature of the funding source, earlier project completion is recommended to ensure compliance with funding requirements.

Question 004

Can you provide clarification on the intent of Task 3.1.6? Are those all to occur within Task 3.1?

Is so, how would the meetings be different? Are these meeting separate from the kick-off meeting?

Answer The meetings with the Project Planning Team are distinct from the Kick-Off meeting.

These meetings will provide opportunities for the consultant to engage with and discuss ongoing progress with the City’s internal project team as preliminary design is being completed. These meetings could occur throughout Phase I and II of the project.

Question 005

Can you provide clarification regarding the proposed deliverable for Task 3.1 – Is it assumed that public input will have been received by this point, and therefore the memo will summarize the public input? Or is this memo intending to articulate the process by which public input, project planning team, and the city input will be gathered and used to develop the design?

Answer The memo is intended to summarize public input and outcomes of the Kick-Off meeting, results of initial project research, and meetings with the City’s internal project management team.

Question 006

Is there an easement for the roundabout that appears to be on the TID property?

Answer As of the writing of this response, and based on available records, it is believed that tax lot boundary which appears in the Jackson County GIS is not current, and that the current tax lot boundary is consistent with the public right-of-way such that the West Valley View alignment is more or less consistent between Talent Avenue and South Pacific Highway.

In other words, it does not appear that TL 2600 encroaches into the public right-of-way in a manner that would require an easement or other legal instrument to allow for public access across the northeast corner of TL 2600. Staff will continue to investigate this issue until it has been resolved definitively.