Request for Proposal - Rockport Harbor Resiliency Project - Engineering & Design of the East Side

TOWN OF ROCKPORT, MAINE

Request for Proposal

Project: Rockport Harbor Resiliency Project – Phase 1

Date of Issuance: January 9, 2026

Mandatory Site Visit: January 19th, 2026 at 10:30am (meet at the Rockport Boat Club)

Proposals Due: February 6, 2026,at2:00PM

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

This project is the first phase of the engineering, design and construction of sea level rise mitigation measures on Town-owned property located within Rockport Harbor, including Walker Park. To achieve this, the Rockport Harbor Resilience Concept Plan, dated October 7, 2025, was developed by Richardson & Associates, along with their partner, WSP. The Town of Rockport, Maine is requesting sealed Proposals for (i) design, (ii) bid cycle, and (iii) construction engineering and inspection services for all elements of the work proposed in the Concept Plan located on the east side of the Goose River, including all other requirements contained within this RFP. See Attachment A for a general description of these services. The project will be delivered on a fixed-fee basis in accordance with the Bid Form included as Attachment B.

Design and construction of the Concept Plan elements on the west side of the Goose River (including Marine Park and Walker Park) remain a priority; however, this work will not proceed until funding is identified.

FAQ's:

Site Visit date confirmation: Due to the Martin Luther King Jr. Holiday on January 19th, the Site Visit has been moved to the following day, January 20th at 10:30am. 

Attendees at Mandatory Site Visit: GZA, GEI, Woodard & Curran, WSP, Gartley & Dorsky, and Richardson & Associates. 

Questions Submitted: 

• Does the Town of Rockport (town) have any as-built drawings or other design information on the seawall?  We understand this is a historic structure and such information may no longer be readily available.
  • Answer: No.
• Has the town conducted any geotechnical or other subsurface investigations along the seawall, or other areas in the project area on the east side of the Goose River (e.g., prior studies by Gartley & Dorsky)?
  • Answer: No.
• The town has identified a priority for constructing a knee-wall at the toe of the slope generally north of the project site, especially along the “pinch point” behind the boat club building.  Is it the town’s preference that this wall be extended along the full length of the slope from roughly the pump station off Main Street to the MaineDOT right-of-way? 
  • Answer: Yes. 
• Pertaining to Section 2.a.x. and site walk reference to a basement/dry storage under the boat club:  this concept appears to be noncompliant with the Town’s Floodplain Management Ordinance Article VI.P.2.a, which states all new or substantial improvement shall be elevated on posts or columns such that flood waters can flow beneath the structure. Has a waiver already been approved? Should respondents to the RFP assume that this requirement will be waived by the Town? 
  • Answer:  The Harbor Strategic Plan calls for the new floor slab to be 4-feet above the new surrounding grade (i.e., 6-feet above current grade) and shows a block/concrete surrounding foundation wall. With the boat club on piers, and a block/concrete surrounding foundation wall, we should have about 3.5 feet of vertical elevation crawlspace between new base grade and the bottom of the Boat Club. This project will have to meet all required ordinances. For purposes of this RFP, assume the requirements will be granted a waiver.
• Is raising the pedestrian bridge on both sides of the Goose River included in the scope for Phase 1?
  • Yes.
• Permit submissions appear in the 90% Design Submission on September 30, 2026, outlined in Attachment A. In our experience, ACOE permitting of in-water work can take 6 months to complete. This could limit the construction season to October-December 2027 if the schedule is firm. Is this flexible to allow sufficient time for permitting and to get more favorable construction bids? 
  • We are re-evaluating when we need to submit for the USACE and DEP permits, as well as the design level requirements for the permit applications. For the purpose of the bid, please estimate the level of effort (and cost) for completion of the permit applications, but do not make any assumptions about the timing.
• During the site walk, the Town confirmed that design and permitting of the outfall extension on the west side of Goose River will not be included in the Phase 1 scope. Will a revised bid form be provided? 
  • Not a revised bid, but a point of clarity will be added to the bid page of the Town’s website.
• Is any dredging required or anticipated in the new pier area? 
  • For purposes of your proposal, assume that no dredging will be required. We acknowledge that this could change once the geotechnical work is completed at the conclusion of the 30% design.

• Does the Town have any bathymetric or hydrographic survey information pertaining to the harbor in the vicinity of the project area? 
  • No.
• Is any record drawing or design information available for the pedestrian bridge and its supports? 
  • Yes. Please see "Town of Rockport Bridge RevB (PE Seal copy).pdf", posted below.  
• Are any record plans available for the boat club building? 
  • No.
• Does the Town have any existing geotechnical borings within the project area that can be provided? 
  • No.
• Will the site survey (topographic and boundary) be provided to potential RFP respondents prior to the proposal due date? 
  • Yes. We have a PDF survey and two CAD drawings.  See "Survey Harbor.pdf" posted below.
    For the available CAD drawings, please request a copy.
• How many hard copies of proposals are required? 
  • Two. One for official records and the other for public viewing.
• The Conflict of Interest Disclosure appears to be missing. Please provide for inclusion in proposals. 
  • Document provided below.

• Pump Station – Does the Town anticipate that the existing pump station is adequate to serve current and proposed uses in its present condition and location, with only the modifications discussed today (new electrical panel and covered building, generator, grade adjustments, and minor interior adjustments to accommodate the grade adjustment)? 
  • Yes.
• Retaining Wall – Could you define where the Town anticipates the retaining wall will be, approximately located along the back slope? Is it the Town’s goal to have this wall extend the entire length of the back slope from Main Street to the MaineDOT bridge?  
  • Yes, from Maine Street to the MaineDOT bridge.
• Boat Club Building Foundation – Does the Town anticipate the Boat Club will be placed on a full frost-protected concrete foundation? If not a full foundation, what does the Town anticipate for a foundation? 
  • The Harbor Strategic Plan calls for the new floor slab to be 4-feet above the new surrounding grade (i.e., 6-feet above current grade) and shows a block/concrete surrounding foundation wall. With the boat club on piers, and a block/concrete surrounding foundation wall, we should have about 3.5 feet of vertical elevation crawlspace between new base grade and the bottom of the Boat Club. This project will have to meet all required ordinances. For purposes of this RFP, assume the requirements will be granted a waiver.
• Goose River Crossing – Some of the visual documents depict the grade of the east-side pedestrian bridge remaining at the current elevation, and that two-foot elevation changes stop just prior to this bridge. Does the Town anticipate adjustments to the pedestrian bridge crossing? Specifically, will we be required to incorporate changes to the landing on the west side of Goose River?  
  • Yes. The pedestrian bridge would need to be raised on both sides.  Please see "Town of Rockport Bridge RevB (PE Seal copy).pdf", posted below.  
• Public Involvement – Does the Town anticipate any public involvement or presentations in the design process? If so, how many public meetings are anticipated, will the Town coordinate these meetings, and when does the Town anticipate working them into the tight schedule? 
  • The 30% and 60% designs will be reviewed during the Task Force meetings, which are open to the public. Proposers may assume this will not affect the overall project schedule.
• Easements – Several Town items appear to be located on the abutting property, does the Town have a good working relationship with the abutter, and do they anticipate easements will be secured to make improvements, including the installation of a retaining wall, or must all improvements be made on the Town property, including relocating some of the existing poles and roadway that is on the abutter property? 
  • The Town does have a good relationship with the abutting landowner. The Town will work to secure any necessary easements for improvements.
• Permitting – Permitting is a critical component of this project and requires direct coordination with regulatory agencies regarding all proposed changes, including, but not limited to, seawall modifications, grade changes, building relocation requirements, additional structures within the setback, shoreline stabilization, and additional fill within the resource for the riprap placement. If the Town elects to handle the permitting components with a third party, how accessible will they be, and at what point will they be able to provide guidance and direction to the design process? 
  • If the Town elects to handle the permitting components with a third party, they will be accessible to provide guidance and direction to the design process.
• Schedule Concerns – I will again express my scheduling concerns regarding this project. The current schedule only provides sixty (60) days from the Notice to Proceed to the 30% Design Submission. This short window is insufficient to fit this into a firm’s busy schedule, prepare a base map, evaluate the habitat, including assessing the coastal wetlands within the proposed impact areas, begin coordinating with permitting agencies, and prepare a 30% design that will require extensive coordination with the board before completion. The expedited schedule increases design costs and makes it very challenging for firms that have not been working on this project for the past year to get up to speed and provide quality deliverables. 
  • All design reviews will be conducted and coordinated by the Task Force, which includes ongoing participation from town staff and the Select Board (i.e., formal Select Board approval for intermediate deliverables will not be sought). However, it is acceptable for the proposer to shift the schedule to meet timelines for intermediate deliverables (e.g., 30% design); however, the overall timeline shall be met.