Town of Stonington

                                         REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

 

The Town of Stonington (City), in cooperation with The Maine Department of Transportation (MaineDOT) is soliciting proposals for professional services for State Route 15 – Main Street and 15A Stonington Village Partnership Initiative, MaineDOT WIN 29652.00. Proposals must include a.) a technical proposal; and b.) a price proposal in a separate, sealed package. Price shall not be part of the technical proposal; otherwise, that proposal shall be rejected. Label Price Proposal in SEPARATE SEALED envelope with ‘Do Not Open’ clearly marked on the outside.

 

The City is undertaking this Village Partnership Initiative (VPI) planning study with funding from the Maine Department of Transportation (MaineDOT). This project is subject to applicable federal and state laws, regulations, policies and procedures, including but not limited to those described in the MaineDOT Local Project Administration Manual: http://www.maine.gov/mdot/lpa/manual/

 

1. APPENDICES:

Appendix A – MaineDOT Standards

Appendix B- Proposer’s Cost Proposal Form

 

2. PROPOSALS ARE TO BE RECEIVED NO LATER THAN:

Date Due: August 1st, 2025

Local Time: 3:00 PM

 

Any proposal, portion of a proposal, or unrequested proposal revision received by the Municipality after the time and date specified above will not be accepted.

 

3. COMMUNICATIONS:

Communications regarding the RFP must be submitted by email and directed to the RFP Coordinator listed below. The subject line must reference the project name, RFP title and Project WIN.

            Name and Title: Linda Nelson, Economic Development Director

            Office Phone: 207-367-2351

            Email: [email protected]

 

4. REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION/RFP AMENDMENTS.

All requests for clarification and additional information must be submitted by email to the RFP Coordinator listed above by 3:00 PM on July 11th, 2025. Late requests will not be accepted. When appropriate, responses will be placed on the municipality’s website: stoningtonmaine.org no later than the close of business on July 13th, 2025.

 

5. PROPOSAL SCOPE OF WORK and LOCATION MAP

 

Route 15 – Main Street – Downtown 

Stonington- Village Partnership Initiative – Planning Phase

 - Scope of Services -

 

Introduction & Scope of Work

 

The Town of Stonington (the Town) along with Hancock County Planning Commission (HCPC) and the Maine Department of Transportation (MaineDOT) are undertaking a planning feasibility study in the historic village district of Stonington.  While this study will evaluate safety and accessibility improvements, no comprehensive traffic modeling or intersection alternative analysis is anticipated. Specifically, this study will:

(1) Identify pedestrian and active transportation deficiencies within the study area;

(2) Assess ADA deficiencies within the study areas;

(3) Assess and recommend parking needs and usage of wayfinding to municipal parking lots;

(4) Gateway treatments along School Street and North Maine / SR 15 & 15A;

(5) Landscape and aesthetic treatments that complement the look, feel and character of historic Stonington;

(6) Assess stormwater drainage issues pertaining to the local geography, particularly Pink Street Culvert, and;

(7) Address potential impacts associated with storm surge and extreme weather events on the transportation system in Stonington (excluding the Wharf/Pier).

This study will identify transportation improvements that reduce congestion, improve pedestrian and traffic safety, compliment long-range land use planning goals, and align with economic goals for Stonington. This study will not only consider roadway safety and mobility issues, but also improvements to active transportation. It will also consider the alternatives that complement the look feel and character of the historic village of downtown Stonington and supporting accessibility for all modalities. No major traffic modeling or analysis is anticipated for this project, and parking needs assessments are not expected to be more than desktop screenings and recommendations based upon current usage patterns, projected trends, and evidenced based research in transportation planning.

 

Study Area

The study area begins on the School Street approach to town at the historic school / community center, follows Main Street / SR 15 to North Main / SR 15 terminated at the intersection of Granite Street and SR 15. It also extends to the waterfront district and public pier.

Scope of Work

The primary focus of this study is to improve active transportation connectivity and improve pedestrian crossings, pedestrian facilities, and streetscape improvements. Another component is improving access to pier and water-based transportation modes.

The consultant should consider the following alternatives:

• Minimum Alternatives

• Improvements to existing sidewalks / ADA compliance
• Active transportation connections to waterfront, community center / historic school.
• Concept level renderings for greenspace/park/public park along shoreline, see map inset.
• Wayfinding signage in the historic downtown
• Parking needs assessment and recommendations
• Storm surge impacts and HAT + 6’ scenarios for waterfront Stonington
• Stormwater drainage issues
• Gateway treatments at entrances to town along school street, and SR 15 / North Main St.

Task 1 – Project Kick‐Off Meeting

The consultant team will meet with the study team including representatives from the Town of Stonington and MaineDOT under a collaborative planning process as follows:

• Identify and understand local issues
• Identify and understand relevant state and federal regulatory requirements
• Finalize scope of work
• Identify previous related study efforts and available data
• Identify traffic data that will need to be collected
• Identify baseline environmental data that will need to be collected
• Identify existing and future Active Transportation uses and concerns
• Prepare preliminary study purpose and need

Deliverables: Meeting agendas, minutes, presentation materials at all study team and public or elected official meetings.

Task 2 – Review Available Data

The consultant team will review available information provided by the Town, MaineDOT, and other partners. These will include, but not be limited to, the following:

• Most recent Stonington Comprehensive Plan, other plans as available
• Stonington Zoning and Land Use Ordinances
• Recent MaineDOT traffic counts,

• Available land use and economic development information that could affect transportation in the study area provided by the Town
• Available Crash History Data and Information
• Other relevant reports, studies, and policies
• Collect additional traffic data as required

Deliverables: Summary of available data and documentation of site conditions as needed.

Task 3 – Assessment of Current Conditions

The consultant team will evaluate the existing and recent historic performance of traffic in the study area based on traditional forecasting and growth models. The assessment will include but not be limited to:

• Analysis of current traffic conditions of the study area. The analysis will include traffic patterns, capacity, speeds, and crash experience
• Identification of bicycle and pedestrian deficiencies in the study area.
• Identification of transportation vulnerable users and equity concerns.
• Analysis of existing land-use patterns and potential changes based upon land-use goals and development projections.
• Review analyses with team members and discuss possible recommendations and additional alternatives to be considered.
• Desktop screening of environmental and historical conditions to identify known resources in the study area, such as:
  • Registered historic properties, or eligible properties and historic districts
  • Public Parks and recreation areas
  • Wetlands
  • Endangered species, etc.
• Site-visit and safety audit with multiple partners anticipated to include but not limited to (town manager, public works, economic development director, consultant and MaineDOT, NMDC planner, local police, representative from the school department, etc.) within study area.

Deliverables: Technical memorandum on existing conditions including the following:

• Identification of concerns and opportunities
• Safety audit summary and results

Task 4 Assessment of Future Scenarios

The consultant team will evaluate future traffic volume based on traditional growth forecasts and

considering known development and land use changes underway and readily available data. No comprehensive traffic modeling or intersection alternative analysis is anticipated. It will include:

• A 2045 forecast of traffic volumes in the study area, based on historical traffic data and available MaineDOT traffic forecasts. 
• Evaluation of reasonable alternatives to improve accessibility for all transportation modes to include but not limited to:
  • Safety and speed-limit compliance while supporting economic growth
  • Improved sidewalks and ADA compliance improvements
  • Bump outs and curb extensions
  • Crosswalks with or without warning devices and signal timing alternatives
  • Adjusting lane widths
  • Refuge islands
  • Wayfinding and other signage, to include gateway signage
  • Landscaping
  • Decorative street lighting
  • Speed limit evaluations on approaches as appropriate

 

Deliverables: Matrix depicting alternatives for the two intersections, parking needs and projections based upon forecasts and trends and a list of other recommendations for the rest of the study area (non-intersection, non-parking) not dependent on intersection movements and parking.

Task 5 Develop Preliminary Recommendations & Public Engagement

Based on the analysis of alternatives determined in Task 4, the consultants will develop

recommendations based on the effectiveness of meeting the study area transportation needs. The consultant will develop an effective approach to educate and solicit meaningful feedback from the public. This can include a series of in-person, hybrid, or social media outreach. These recommendations may include low-cost improvements, a recommended roadway cross-section section(s) to improve the consistency of the study area corridor for its users, and other roadside or off-road improvement recommendations. MaineDOT assumes a minimum of two public meetings, one of which could be standalone project meetings or portions of town council meetings. Recommendations should include planning level cost estimates and narratives that discuss potential implementation issues and challenges related to local, state, and federal regulations. Recommended conceptual alternatives should be presented in plan, section, and perspectival views.

Task five will consist of the following and is not limited to:

• Develop recommendations for all transportation modes based on effectiveness and viability from a regulatory perspective. Measurements for effectiveness will include benefits to mobility and safety, cost and practicality of implementation, and ability to meet the purpose and need.
• The recommendations will include a discussion of the potential and degree of effort associated with environmental analysis, secondary, cumulative impacts, etc., including anticipated future costs of remaining planning, design, and construction phases.
• Develop cost estimates for recommendations (including construction and potential right-of-way costs).
• Develop a recommendation for prioritizing and phasing of implementation.
• Develop a technical memorandum to be included in a final report that contains the analysis of existing and future conditions, alternatives analysis, and recommendations, including a matrix summarizing recommendations along with an appendix of traffic and crash data.
• Develop basic conceptual renderings which will include a collection of plan, section, and perspectival views of recommended alternatives at specific places along the corridor.
• Presentation of preliminary recommendations and alternatives at public meetings for feedback and input to develop Draft Report.

Deliverables: Matrix of proposed alternatives, technical memorandum, and concept level renderings. Summary of public feedback and engagement.

Task 6 – Draft Report

The Tasks discussed above will be combined into a draft narrative report documenting the project.  At a minimum the report will include an executive summary, narrative of the study process, a description of the various alternatives considered, documentation of the evaluation criteria, and illustrations of conceptual designs (in plan and perspectival view) and cross sections for the preferred alternative. The final report will incorporate all applicable technical memorandums.

Deliverables: Draft Report with detailed cost estimating for any further environmental analysis, preliminary engineering, right-of-way, construction, and construction engineering. The report will include the required renderings.

Task 7 – Final Report

The consultant will create a final narrative report documenting the project and includes conceptual plans and renderings, and cost estimates.

Deliverables: Final Report

 

 

6. PROPOSAL RATING AND SELECTION PROCESS
   1. Technical proposals will be reviewed and scored using the responses to the criteria in the “Proposer Information” section below.
   2. This is a qualifications-based selection process, meaning that technical proposals alone will be used to select the successful Proposer. Upon selecting the successful Proposer, the City will open that Proposer’s price proposal and begin negotiations. Price proposals from all other Proposers will remain sealed during negotiations and returned unopened upon contract award.
7. PROPOSER INFORMATION
   1. Quality of Consultant Team – (25 points) How strong is the project team; are key personnel on staff or if subcontracted, are relationships well established? How will information be presented or published during the process? Has the consultant adequately defined the human resources necessary to complete the project? Who will be performing the key elements of the project?
   2. Project Understanding (25 points) – How well does the consultant understand all aspects of this project? What elements of the process require extraordinary focus to achieve meaningful recommendations and meet the schedule?
   3. Prior experience (25 points) – Has the consultant presented a proven history of study similar to that set forth in the scope of work?
   4. References (15 points) – Proposers should include contact information for similar projects completed within the last five years. Similar projects performed by personnel proposed for this study will be evaluated more favorably. Respondents should focus on projects that have progressed beyond planning to implementation.
   5. Schedule Quality (10 points)- The Proposal should demonstrate that the team has the availability and necessary human resources to respond to and deliver this project. The proposal should lay out timelines for the various elements and identify the responsibilities of all parties as they relate to schedule deadlines.
   6. Contact Information: Provide the name, address, phone number, and email address of the Proposer.
   7. Signature Page: Signature pages must be included with the technical and price proposals stating that “I certify that all of the information in this technical/price proposal is true and accurate.”
8. PACKAGING AND SUBMITTING YOUR TECHNICAL AND PRICE PROPOSALS

Organization and Format: Your technical proposal, which should be organized in the format and sequence indicated in these proposal instructions, must be submitted as outlined below.

1. 1. RFP Title. The Proposer’s full business name and address as well as the RFP title must be written on your proposal package, with reference WIN 029652.00.
   2. Hard Copy. Technical proposals must be submitted as follows: (6) copies of the technical proposal must be submitted in hard copy format accompanied by (1) electronic copies in .pdf format.
   3. Price proposal: The price proposal (Appendix B) must be provided in a separate, sealed envelope that will be opened only if the initial scoring of technical proposals results in a Proposer being ranked as best qualified. NO MENTION OF PRICE WILL BE INCLUDED IN THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL; OTHERWISE, THAT PROPOSAL WILL BE REJECTED.
   4. Proposal Package Submittal: Proposal packages must be mailed/delivered as follows:

Regular Mail Delivery

Hand Carried Delivery

Federal Express/UPS Delivery

 

Address to:

Town of Stonington

Attn: Linda Nelson

32 Main Street

Stonington, Maine 04681

 

Address to:

Town of Stonington

Attn: Linda Nelson

32 Main Street

Stonington, Maine 04681

 

Address to:

Town of Stonington

Attn: Linda Nelson

32 Main Street

Stonington, Maine 04681

 

9. TERMS & CONDITIONS / GENERAL INFORMATION

1. The contract type used for this project will be a stand-alone project contract, and the method of payment will be adjustable burdened hourly rate.
2. The initial contract term will be for one (1) year, commencing upon execution of the contract documentation. The City reserves the right to modify the initial contract term at its discretion, as well as to award additional phases of the Project.
3. This RFP does not commit the City to pay costs incurred in preparing and submitting your proposal.

10. PROPOSAL PRICING - Submitted Separately in a sealed envelope.

Price proposal and supporting data must be submitted on the standard Cost Proposal Form (Appendix B), which is available on the MaineDOT’s Local Project Administration website under the heading labeled Consultant Procurement- Consultant Price Proposal Form (Excel): http://www.maine.gov/mdot/lpa/lpadocuments/.

The price proposal must include the following:

• Project WIN, location, firm name and address, contact name, and contact email address.
• Employee Classifications and Direct Labor Rates:

The Proposal must include each employee’s classification and rate of pay. Note: A cap on direct labor of $62.00 per hour for the project manager, and $50.00 per hour for all other personnel, applies to this project.

• Overhead Rate:

The price proposal will reflect the Consultant’s latest Audited Overhead Rate approved by the MaineDOT’s Office of Audit. (Note: Use of a fixed commercial rate will be accepted for small firms without an Audited Overhead Report.)

• Fixed Fee/Profit:

The proposed fixed fee/profit is based on factors such as degree of risk, relative difficulty of work, and the size of the job. It must fall within the range of 6 percent to 15 percent.

 

• Direct Expenses:

This will consist of project expenses such as mileage (50 cents per mile), tolls, printing, postage, and subconsultant costs that are not included in direct labor, overhead and profit. Note: Markup on direct costs is prohibited.

• Total Proposed Cost:

This is the maximum amount proposed.

 

Section B: Proposal Pricing Attachments

• Insurance Certificates:

Insurance certificates for the coverages listed below must be included with the Consultant’s Cost Proposal Form:

• • Professional Liability.
  • Commercial General Liability, listing the Municipality as additional insured.
  • Automobile Liability.
  • Worker’s Compensation.
  • Excess/Umbrella Liability (if applicable).

 

Consultants must provide current insurance certificates by email to [email protected]

 

Section C: Subconsultant Proposal

If a subconsultant will work on the project, the prime consultant must submit the subconsultant’s proposal as supporting documentation.

11. DEBARMENT CERTIFICATION

The signature pages required in Section 7, “Proposer Information,” must have the following statement:

 

“By submitting to this RFP, I certify to the best of my knowledge and belief that the organization, its principals, and any subconsultants named in this proposal:

1. Are not debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, and declared ineligible or voluntarily excluded from bidding or working on contracts issued by any governmental agency.
2. Have not within three (3) years of submitting the proposal for this contract been convicted of or had a civil judgment rendered against them for:
   1. Fraud or a criminal offense in connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain, or performing a federal, state or local government transaction or contract.
   2. Violating federal or state antitrust statutes or committing embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, making false statements, or receiving stolen property.
   3. Are not currently indicted for or otherwise criminally or civilly charged by a governmental entity (federal, state, or local) with commission of any of the offenses enumerated in paragraph (b) of this certification; and
   4. Have not within a three (3) year period preceding this proposal had one or more federal, state, or local government transactions terminated for cause or default.”

Failure to provide this certification may result in the disqualification of the proposal.

12. FREEDOM OF ACCESS ACT: CONFIDENTIALITY.

Under Maine’s Freedom of Access Act, 1 M.R.S.A. §401, et seq., “public records” are available for public inspection and copying once an award notification has been made.

 

Information submitted in response to this RFP will be considered “public records” available for inspection and copying once an award notification is made. If a Proposer contends that parts of its Proposal fall under an exception set forth in 1 M.R.S.A. §402(3), the Proposer may submit those parts of its Proposal in a separate envelope marked “Confidential,” with each page marked “Confidential.” Included in the envelope should be a non-confidential statement of the basis for the Proposer’s claim that those parts of its Proposal fall within one or more exceptions to the definition of “public records.” Designating parts of a Proposal “Confidential” does not by itself ensure that they will stay confidential.

 

If the City receives a request to inspect or copy parts of a Proposal marked confidential, the City will notify the Proposer. Within 14 days of receiving the City’s notice, any Proposer claiming documents are confidential must send the City a list identifying each document that it claims is confidential. The City will notify the party requesting disclosure that the documents will be withheld. If the party seeking disclosure files a legal action to gain access to the confidential information, the Proposer must retain counsel and join the legal action to defend its position that the release of information should be denied. The proposer’s failure to join the action and defend its position will constitute a waiver of its claim that the information is confidential. The City will comply with the order issued by the court reviewing the case.

 

 

APPENDIX A

MAINE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Standards to be used in Soliciting Proposals for

Village Partnership Initiative Study

 

Any Transportation improvements would need to meet the following conditions if applicable:

 

1)      All design features must reflect MaineDOT design guidance for Highway Corridor Priorities (HCPs).

2)      All capacity, queuing, and level-of-service analyses will be done in accordance with the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodologies. Signalized and stop sign controlled intersections will be modeled using the latest version of Synchro/SimTraffic. Computer modeling showing the impacts of queuing and level of service will be provided to MaineDOT.

3)      The design hour volumes will be based on estimated 30th highest hourly volumes for the design year.

4)      Design year traffic estimates will be 2045.

5)      Design speed – match existing posted speed.

6)      Clear zone – per corridor priority 3 standards.

7)      Side slopes 4:1 or flatter or as approved by MaineDOT.

8)      Safety analysis of any proposed design will include an inventory of existing crashes, a prediction of crashes with the proposed design, and a comparative evaluation. Crash analysis will be based on the most recent five years of data available from MaineDOT. Safety analysis will generally follow Highway Safety Manual methodologies.

9)      Drainage – needs to match into surrounding drainage structures.

10)    Signing shall be in accordance with MUTCD (including potential changes to existing overhead signage in the area).

11)    Any proposed lighting shall meet minimum AASHTO light levels.

12)    The Design Vehicle for the major intersections shall be a WB-67, all other intersection shall be or a bus/fire truck.

13)    Any new traffic signal recommendations must be accompanied by a warrant analysis justifying the recommendation.

 

Appendix B

 

Cost Proposal