RFP Poor Farm Bridge Replacement
Town of Washington, Vermont Request for Proposals (RFP) Engineering, Design, and Project Management Services for Poor Farm Bridge Replacement
Date Issued: Tuesday, May 12th, 2026
Mandatory Pre-Bid Site Visit: Thursday, May 21st, 2026 @ 9am
Proposal Due Date: Monday, June 1st, 2026 by 3pm
Bid Opening: Monday, June 1st, 2026 @ the 6:30pm Selectboard Meeting Bid Review and contract awarded: no later than June 15th, 2026
Project Completion: preferred by November 1st, 2026
1. Introduction The Town of Washington, Vermont is seeking proposals from qualified engineering firms for the design, engineering analysis, and project management of a replacement structure for Poor Farm Bridge #1, (GPS Coordinates 44.05154, -72.47343) located on the south side of Poor Farm Road, 200 feet from the intersection with Vermont Route 110.
The selected firm will be responsible for engineering the installation of a precast open bottom arch structure at the site, which provides the 24' minimum clear span and 8.5' minimum clear height laid out in the 8.1.23 Hydraulic Study (attached here as APPENDIX A).
In the design phase, the selected firm will consult with our regional ANR representative Jaron Borg to ensure the structure conforms to codes and standards and integrates appropriately into the stream channel and surrounding environment.
In designing the installation, the selected firm will prepare complete working drawings and specifications including flared wingwalls matched into the channel banks, and stone-stablised embankments.
The project management phase will include overseeing all elements of the construction phase from working with the Town to draft an RFP, assessing proposals that bid on the project, providing regular presence on site during preparatory and installation phases, as well as inspecting and approving the completed structure and its site-integration upon completion.
This project is being funded through FEMA and is intended to provide a long-lasting, weather adaptive, and cost-effective structure that supports the safe passage of low volume vehicular traffic, including emergency and maintenance vehicles.
2. Project Scope Firms are encouraged to submit, along with their bid, a proposal for any additional elements pertaining to how they would conduct their work in each of the three phases outlined in brief below.
Those components indicated beneath each phase represent a minimum scope of work for each stage of the project.
● PRELIMINARY SITE AND STRUCTURE ANALYSIS
(1) A review of the 8.1.23 Hydraulic Study (APPENDIX A), which lays out the minimum required dimensions of the precast open bottom arch structure, and recommends the channel bank-matched wingwalls and the use of stone to help stabilise disturbed or recontoured road slopes and embankments.
(2) A site visit to take necessary measurements and evaluate soils, slopes, and the roadway to assist in designing a bridge integrated into the specific topography and landscape.
(3) An evaluation of the necessary environmental and permitting requirements.
● DESIGN PHASE
(1) Detailed drawings of the open bottom arch, wingwalls, and embankment stablization will be prepared in accordance with the 8.1.23 Hydraulic Study (APPENDIX A). As per the Hydraulic Study, the plans will also be provided to the VTrans Bridge Inspection Unit. The arch and surrounding site design should be in accordance with the codes and standards which the town has agreed to adhere to, as laid out in the VTrans Orange Book.
(2) Specification of materials to be used should also be provided as part of the detailed working plans for the arch installation, wingwall extensions, and areas of bank stabilization.
● PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND CONSTRUCTION OVERSIGHT
(1) Preparation of the RFP and other documents necessary for putting the project out to bid for construction.
(2) Conduct the mandatory pre-bid site visit in conjunction with the Town.
(3) Conduct the bid review process in conjunction with the Town.
(4) Obtaining necessary local, state, and federal permits in advance of the project start date in conjunction with the Town.
(5) Working in coordination with the Town to provide suitable alternate routes for residents living above the bridge site during the construction period. This may involve arrangements for temporary bridge siting and installation.
(6) Overseeing all aspects of construction by means of on-site supervision and inspection during the project to ensure the contractor meets the specifications of the plans.
(7) Review of contractor submittals, RFIs, change orders, and other potential alterations to the structure plans.
(8) Coordination throughout the construction phase with the awarded contractor, Town Road Foreman, and FEMA Grants Administrator to ensure the project is on schedule, on budget, and remains in compliance with the plans.
(9) Performing a final inspection of the completed structure to ensure it meets the engineered specifications and warrants town approval and payment.
(10) Preparing final as-built drawings for the Town.
3. Proposal Requirements Interested firms should submit a proposal that includes:
(1) Firm background and relevant experience designing bridges or open bottom arch installations of similar scale, as well as managing projects of this sort. Especially relevant would be any projects where the firm has been on-site for a significant amount of the construction phase of the project.
(2) Qualifications of key personnel who will be assigned to the project.
(3) Description of how the firm would approach all three phases laid out in the Project Scope Above. Here, additional elements that the firm requires or recommends would be especially relevant.
(4) A projected timeline for completing each phase. Note here that the Town's preference would be to be able to put the construction of the replacement structure out to bid in November or December of 2026, and to have the project completed by October 1st, 2027.
This would provide time in the winter to obtain permits and to ensure the fabrication of a precast structure for the 2027 season. An inability to meet this preferred timeline will not disqualify a firm, but a timeline that can meet these preferences will be more favorably judged on that criterion.
(5) A cost estimate, separated out into an estimate for (a) PRELIMINARY SITE ANALYSIS AND DESIGN PHASE, and (b) PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND CONSTRUCTION OVERSIGHT. Where the estimate may not possible as a lump sum bid, please provide the hourly rate and the estimated hours you would be anticipating. Ideally, the Town could have some sense for fixed costs and variable costs based on your estimate.
(6) At least two references from similar projects. Best would be projects involving bridges or precast installations of similar scale, and project management similar in kind to that being asked for here.
(7) Proof of Insurance.
4. Evaluation Criteria Proposals will be evaluated based on the following:
● Demonstrated experience and qualifications (10%)
● Understanding of project scope and proposed approach (10%)
● Proposed timeline and availability (20%)
● Cost effectiveness and value (50%)
● References and past performance (10%) The Town reserves the right to reject any or all proposals, and to award the contract in the best interest of the community.
5. Mandatory Pre-bid Site Visit
A mandatory pre-bid site visit will be held on Thursday, May 21st at 9am. Interested engineering firms must attend or have a representative attend in order to submit a proposal. The visit will be held at the bridge site, roughly 200' from where VT110 intersects with the southern end of Poor Farm Road (GPS Coordinates 44.05154, -72.47343). Any alterations to the RFP made at the site visit will be sent out as addenda to email addresses collected on the sign-in sheet filled out at the beginning of the visit.
6. Optional Bidder Interview and Evaluation Meeting
Following the submission deadline, the Selectboard reserves the right to schedule an evaluation meeting and/or to establish a three person committee with representation from the Road Foreman, FEMA Grants Administrator, and a Selectboard member in order to evaluate all bids and make a recommendation to the full Selectboard within fourteen (14) calendar days.
The evaluation meeting, if held, will serve as an opportunity for the Selectboard to:
● Ask clarifying questions of one or more respondents;
● Evaluate presentations or proposals in greater detail;
● Facilitate open discussion on project approach, timeline, and capacity;
● Score and compare bids in accordance with the evaluation criteria outlined in this RFP. Participation in this meeting may be requested of any or all respondents at the Selectboard’s discretion. Respondents will be notified in advance if such a meeting is scheduled and are expected to make appropriate representatives available if invited.
7. Submission Instructions Submit sealed proposals by Monday, June 1st at 3:00 pm to: Town of Washington Poor Farm Road Bridge Replacement Proposal 2895 VT Route 110 Washington, Vermont 05675
Electronic submissions and late proposals will not be accepted.
Qualified small, minority, and veteran-owned businesses, women's business enterprises, and labor surplus area firms are encouraged to submit bids.
The Municipality is an Equal Employment Opportunity employer.
8. Contact Information Questions regarding this RFP are to be directed to: Ben Tiefenthaler, FEMA Grants Administrator ben.washingtonroads@gmail.com
9. Additional Information
(1) All work shall comply with codes and standards as laid out in the VTrans Orange Book and as indicated by the VTrans Bridge Inspection Unit upon review of the design plans.
(2) The selected firm will be required to comply with state and federal contract provisions.
(3) The 8.1.23 Hydraulic Study of the bridge site follows here as APPENDIX A.
Issued by: Town of Washington, Vermont
Issued by the Agency of Transportation Structures and Hydraulics Section:
Hydrology
The following physical characteristics are descriptive of this drainage basin:
Drainage Area 4.68 square miles
Land Cover Mostly Forested
Water Bodies and Wetlands (NLCD 2006) 0.36 %
Using the USGS hydrologic method, the following design flow rates were selected:
Annual Exceedance Probability (AEP) Flow Rate in Cubic Feet per Second (cfs)
50% 200
10% 410
4% 540 Design Flow – Local Road
2% 660
1% 790 Check Flow
Channel Morphology
The channel for this perennial stream is straight to sinuous with an estimated local channel slope of 2.5%. Field measurements of bank full width varied from 22 to 26 feet upstream and downstream of the structure.
Existing Conditions
The existing bridge structure was destroyed during the July 2023 flooding event. The temporary bridge in-place field measured 10-foot clear span by 5-foot clear height, providing a waterway opening of about 50 square feet. This structure results in a headwater depth of approximately 8.5 feet at 4% AEP design flood, with water overtopping the road just above the 4% AEP (25-year flood event).
Replacement Recommendations
In sizing a new structure, we attempt to select structures that meet both the current VTrans hydraulic standards, state environmental standards with regard to span length and opening height and allow for roadway grade and other site constraints.
Based on the above considerations and the information available, we recommend any of the following structures as a replacement at this site:
• A bridge or open bottom rigid frame with a minimum rectangular waterway opening of 24 feet clear span by 7 feet clear height, providing 168 square feet of waterway area. This structure results in a headwater depth of 4.3 feet at the 4% AEP and 5.6 feet at the 1% AEP. This structure provides 2.7 feet of freeboard at the 4% AEP and 1.4 feet of freeboard at the 1% AEP (100-year flood event).
It is a requirement that the bottom of abutment footings must be pinned to ledge or set a minimum of 6 feet below channel bottom to prevent undermining (scour).
• An open bottom arch with a minimum clear span of 24 feet and clear height of 8.5 feet, providing a waterway area of about 150 square feet. This structure results in a headwater depth of 4.9 feet at 4% AEP and 6.4 feet at 1% AEP.
The footing and/or stem wall will increase the capacity and were not considered in our analysis. It is a requirement that the bottom of abutment footings must be pinned to ledge or set a minimum of 6 feet below channel bottom to prevent undermining (scour).
Note: Any similar structure that fits the site conditions could be considered. Any structure with an open bottom requires a minimum of 1-foot of freeboard at the 1% AEP due to anticipated flood debris. To match the local stream slope, the structures recommended above have been modeled with a slope of 2.5% through the new structure.
Stone Fill, Type III should be used to protect any disturbed channel banks or roadway slopes at the structure’s inlet and outlet. The stone fill should not constrict the channel or structure opening.
Prior to any action toward the implementation of any recommendations received from VTrans, structure size must be confirmed by the VT ANR River Management Engineer to ensure compliance with state environmental standards for stream crossing structures. Regulatory authorities including the US Army Corps of Engineers may have additional concerns or requirements regarding this structure.
General Comments
It is always desirable for a new structure to have flared wingwalls, matched into the channel banks at the inlet and outlet, to smoothly transition flow and protect the structure and roadway approaches from erosion.