CITY OF GREENWOOD, ARKANSAS

REQUEST FOR UPDATED FEE PROPOSAL

CITYWIDE DRAINAGE STUDY

Issued To	Crafton Tull, McClelland Engineering, and Garver
Proposal Due	November 13th, 2026
Submission Method	Via Email @ hmikles@gwark.com
City Contact	Hunter Mikles, City of Greenwood

Budget Planning Document - 2027 Budget Consideration

 

 

1. Project Background and Purpose

The City of Greenwood, Arkansas, is seeking updated fee proposals for a citywide drainage study encompassing all areas within the existing municipal limits. Greenwood encompasses approximately 10.82 square miles and had a population of 9,516 according to the 2020 Census, as provided by the City.

The City wants a practical, long-term drainage planning resource rather than a report that only documents isolated complaints. The completed work should help the City understand existing drainage conditions, establish capital priorities, administer stormwater regulations, evaluate the drainage implications of future development proposals, and maintain editable GIS and engineering data for future use.

The City has evaluated this project during previous budget cycles but has not yet authorized the study. City Council recently directed staff to obtain updated pricing and project information for consideration during development of the 2027 budget.

2. Primary Project Objectives

• Develop a prioritized list of drainage improvement projects.
• Support the Planning Department's administration of stormwater regulations and review of future development proposals.
• Prepare planning-level cost estimates for recommended improvements and future budgeting.
• Establish a long-term drainage master plan and Capital Improvement Program (CIP).
• Create and deliver editable GIS datasets and hydrologic/hydraulic model files with full City ownership.
• Identify funding opportunities and projects that may be suitable for grant assistance.
• Distinguish maintenance needs from capital improvement needs and provide actionable maintenance recommendations.

3. Study Area and Study Conditions

• The study area is the entire area within the current Greenwood city limits, approximately 10.82 square miles.
• The study shall evaluate drainage systems that affect drainage within the City regardless of public or private ownership. Ownership may affect implementation responsibility, but it shall not be used to exclude a hydraulically relevant system or bottleneck from evaluation.
• The base scope shall evaluate existing conditions only.
• Future growth, future land use, and full build-out scenarios are not required in the base scope. A firm may separately identify such analysis as an optional service if it believes the service would provide material value.

4. Existing City Information and Resources

Information or Resource	Current Availability
City ESRI ArcGIS account	Available
GIS support through Western Arkansas Planning and Development District	Available; WAPDD provides most City GIS services
Water GIS layer	Available
Sewer GIS layer	Available
Zoning GIS layer	Available
Storm sewer GIS layer	Not available
Culvert inventory	Not available
Detention pond inventory	Not available
Drainage easement mapping	Not available
LiDAR/topographic data	City does not maintain a confirmed dataset; consultant should identify suitable public sources, including FEMA-related sources, if available
FEMA floodplain mapping	Available; primarily Zone AE mapping
Recorded drainage complaints	Partially available
Digital subdivision drainage plans	Partially available
Digital as-built plans	Partially available
CCTV inspection records	Not known to be available

 

The selected consultant shall review available City records and identify other suitable publicly available sources. Any anticipated data acquisition cost shall be disclosed in the proposal and included in the lump-sum fee unless expressly listed as a separate reimbursable or optional service.

5. City Staff Participation in Data Collection

The City is willing to participate meaningfully in field data collection to control cost and improve staff familiarity with existing drainage infrastructure. The consultant may assume reasonable City assistance collecting non-engineering information, including:

• Culvert locations and basic dimensions.
• Creek or channel widths at identified locations.
• Structure locations.
• Field photographs.
• Condition observations.
• Other readily obtainable data collected through ESRI Field Maps or a similar platform.

The consultant shall identify required data, establish the collection schema and quality standards, provide reasonable staff guidance, and identify when survey-grade or professional engineering data are necessary. The consultant remains responsible for all engineering judgments, modeling assumptions, calculations, quality control, and professional conclusions. The proposal shall identify any cost reduction or scope assumption tied to City participation.

6. Proposal Structure

To give the City Council meaningful budget choices, each firm shall price the following components separately:

Component	Pricing Requirement	General Intent
Base Scope - Preliminary/Planning-Level Citywide Assessment	Required	Fundable minimum study using available data, City-assisted collection, planning-level recommendations, required deliverables, and transferable digital files.
Alternate No. 1 - Comprehensive Drainage Master Plan Enhancements	Required separate price	More comprehensive citywide hydrologic/hydraulic modeling and technical analysis beyond the minimum base approach.
Alternate No. 2 - Concept-Level Project Recommendations	Required separate price	Conceptual layouts, estimated sizes or alignments, exhibits, and implementation considerations for recommended projects. Planning-level recommendations remain acceptable under the base scope.
Alternate No. 3 - Development Review Modeling Framework	Required separate price; highly desired	A living GIS/modeling framework into which future projects can be incorporated to evaluate site and downstream drainage effects.
Alternate No. 4 - Stormwater Asset Inventory and ESRI Field Maps Framework	Required separate price	GIS schema, forms, workflows, data standards, and optional consultant-assisted collection for a maintainable asset inventory.
Alternate No. 5 - Future Conditions/Growth Analysis	Optional separate price	Future land use, growth, or build-out analysis; excluded from base scope.

 

 

 

7. Required Base Scope of Services

7.1 Project Management and Coordination

• Conduct a kickoff meeting with City staff.
• Confirm study methodology, data needs, responsibilities, schedule, and deliverables.
• Coordinate with City staff, WAPDD as appropriate, and other relevant information sources.
• Maintain a decision and assumptions log sufficient to document the basis of the work.

7.2 Data Review and Compilation

• Review available City GIS layers, FEMA mapping, drainage complaints, digital development plans, available as-builts, aerial imagery, and other relevant records.
• Identify critical data gaps and distinguish information that may be collected by City staff from information requiring consultant fieldwork, survey, or engineering judgment.
• Develop an initial GIS framework for information used or created during the study.

7.3 Existing Conditions Evaluation

• Delineate drainage basins, subbasins as appropriate, and primary flow paths.
• Evaluate public and private drainage systems that materially affect drainage within the City.
• Identify known flooding areas, drainage constraints, significant crossings, detention facilities, channels, culverts, storm sewer systems, and other relevant conveyance features to the level supported by the selected scope.
• Identify apparent deficiencies, bottlenecks, and capacity limitations under existing conditions.

7.4 Hydrologic and Hydraulic Analysis

• Perform hydrologic and hydraulic analyses necessary to support the selected level of study.
• Document modeling methods, data sources, assumptions, limitations, and calibration or verification methods, if applicable.
• Evaluate interaction among public and private systems where relevant to citywide drainage behavior.
• Deliver all model files created under the project in editable, usable formats.

7.5 Drainage Improvement Recommendations

• Develop a prioritized list of recommended drainage improvements.
• For the base scope, provide at least a description of the deficiency, a planning-level recommended improvement, implementation considerations, priority, and opinion of probable construction cost.
• Use clear prioritization criteria, such as severity, public safety, affected properties or facilities, system benefit, feasibility, cost, maintenance burden, and grant potential.
• Identify improvements that may require coordination with private owners or other agencies.

7.6 Development Review Support

• Provide recommendations that help the Planning Department administer the City's stormwater regulations and review future development proposals.
• Identify how future applicants and their engineers should use the study data, basin information, and model outputs.
• Recommend minimum data submittal, documentation, and compatibility standards for future drainage analyses.
• Provide a practical procedure for assessing project-level and downstream drainage effects, even if the full living-model framework is not included in the base scope.

7.7 Capital Improvement Program

• Prepare a prioritized Drainage Capital Improvement Program.
• Organize projects into reasonable implementation tiers, such as short-, medium-, and long-term priorities.
• Provide planning-level cost estimates and identify key dependencies or sequencing considerations.

7.8 Funding Opportunities

• Identify potentially applicable state and federal funding programs or categories.
• Identify recommended projects that may be suitable candidates for grant or outside funding assistance.
• Clearly distinguish funding identification from preparation of grant applications, unless application services are separately proposed.

7.9 Maintenance Recommendations

• Distinguish deficiencies that may be addressed through inspection or maintenance from those requiring capital improvement.
• Recommend practical maintenance priorities, inspection practices, or recurring activities supported by the study findings.

7.10 Meetings and Presentations

• Include at least one kickoff meeting, one staff workshop or draft review meeting, and one City Council presentation in the base fee.
• Identify any additional meetings included and state the fee basis for additional meetings.

8. Required and Preferred Deliverables

Deliverable	Status	Minimum Expectation
Final report	Required	Methods, findings, assumptions, limitations, priorities, recommendations, cost estimates, CIP, maintenance considerations, and funding information.
Citywide drainage basin map	Preferred	Map of major basins and flow paths at a scale useful for planning and public presentation.
Prioritized project list	Required	Ranked or tiered improvements with transparent prioritization criteria.
Planning-level cost estimates	Required	Opinion of probable construction cost for each recommended project, including basis and contingency assumptions.
Capital Improvement Program	Required	Short-, medium-, and long-term implementation framework.
GIS dataset and mapping layers	Required	Editable, documented, ESRI-compatible files for features and analyses created under the project.
Hydrologic and hydraulic model files	Required	Editable files, inputs, outputs, assumptions, documentation, and software/version identification.
Interactive web map or dashboard	Preferred	Staff-facing or public-facing tool, separately identifying any recurring licenses or hosting costs.
Development review guidance	Absolutely required	Procedures, data standards, and guidance enabling the Planning Department to apply study results to future development review.
Grant-funding matrix	Required	Potential funding sources or categories and candidate projects.
Maintenance recommendations	Required	Maintenance priorities distinguished from capital projects.
Supporting files	Required	Calculations, exhibits, databases, metadata, and other supporting technical information developed under the project.

 

9. Ownership, Licensing, and File Requirements

All reports, GIS data, geodatabases, mapping products, model files, calculations, technical files, photographs, field data collected for the project, documentation, and other deliverables developed under the contract shall become the property of the City of Greenwood upon payment for the applicable services.

• All deliverables shall be provided in editable, non-proprietary or commonly used industry-standard formats whenever reasonably available.
• GIS deliverables shall be compatible with the City's ESRI ArcGIS environment and include metadata, field definitions, coordinate system information, and data dictionaries sufficient for continued use.
• Model deliverables shall include all necessary input and output files, assumptions, supporting documentation, software name and version, and instructions sufficient for a qualified future user to understand and update the work.
• Any proprietary components, restrictions, third-party licenses, hosting fees, subscriptions, or recurring software costs shall be clearly identified in the proposal.
• The City shall not be dependent on the selected consultant for routine access to or future use of project data. Professional reuse limitations may be stated, but they shall not prevent the City, its future consultants, or development professionals authorized by the City from accessing and using editable project files for City purposes.

10. Proposal Submission Requirements

• Completed Fee Proposal Form, including the base scope breakdown and separately priced alternates.
• One-page Consultant Approach Narrative using the required topics in the Fee Proposal Form.
• Proposed project schedule and anticipated total duration.
• Identification of proposed project manager, key personnel, and relevant municipal drainage master planning experience.
• Description of at least three comparable projects, with emphasis on studies used for ongoing development review or stormwater administration.
• List of assumptions, exclusions, requested City-furnished information, and recommended scope modifications.
• Hourly rate schedule and reimbursable expense schedule.
• Identification of subconsultants and their roles.
• Acknowledgment of City ownership and editable-file requirements.
• Proposal validity period of at least 120 days from the submission deadline, unless the firm clearly states a different period.

The City is obtaining updated budgetary proposals and reserves the right to modify the scope, select a combination of base and alternate services, request clarification, negotiate final terms, reject any or all proposals, or defer the project based on budget decisions and applicable procurement requirements.

 

 

City of Greenwood, Arkansas - Citywide Drainage Study

Consultant Information	Response
Firm Name
Primary Contact
Mailing Address
Phone
Email
Date Submitted
Proposal Valid Through

 

1. Base Scope Lump-Sum Fee

Item	Lump-Sum Fee
Base Scope - Preliminary/Planning-Level Citywide Assessment	$ __________________

 

2. Base Scope Fee Breakdown

Base Scope Task	Fee
Project management and coordination	$ __________________
Data review and compilation	$ __________________
GIS framework and database development	$ __________________
City data-collection schema and guidance	$ __________________
Existing conditions evaluation	$ __________________
Drainage basin delineation and mapping	$ __________________
Hydrologic analysis	$ __________________
Hydraulic analysis	$ __________________
Drainage deficiency and capacity evaluation	$ __________________
Planning-level improvement recommendations	$ __________________
Planning-level cost estimating	$ __________________
Development review guidance	$ __________________
Capital Improvement Program	$ __________________
Funding and grant opportunity evaluation	$ __________________
Maintenance recommendations	$ __________________
Final report and supporting documentation	$ __________________
Meetings and presentations	$ __________________
Other: ______________________________	$ __________________
TOTAL BASE SCOPE	$ __________________

 

The total shown above must equal the Base Scope lump-sum fee unless the consultant clearly explains the difference.

3. Separately Priced Alternates

Alternate	Fee	Brief Scope Reference
No. 1 - Comprehensive Drainage Master Plan Enhancements	$ ________________	Attach concise description of added analysis and deliverables.
No. 2 - Concept-Level Project Recommendations	$ ________________	Identify number/type of projects or exhibits assumed.
No. 3 - Development Review Modeling Framework	$ ________________	Highly desired living model/GIS framework for future project insertion and impact review.
No. 4 - Stormwater Asset Inventory and ESRI Field Maps Framework	$ ________________	Schema, forms, workflow, standards, training, and any collection assistance.
No. 5 - Future Conditions/Growth Analysis	$ ________________	Optional; state scenario and assumptions.
Other Recommended Alternate: __________________	$ ________________	Describe City benefit and deliverables.

 

4. Alternate Deliverable Descriptions

Alternate No. 1: ___________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________

Alternate No. 2: ___________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________

Alternate No. 3: ___________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________

Alternate No. 4: ___________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________

Alternate No. 5: ___________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________

5. Hourly Rate Schedule

Position or Classification	Current Hourly Rate	Rate Effective Through
Principal	$ __________ / hr	________________
Senior Project Manager	$ __________ / hr	________________
Project Manager	$ __________ / hr	________________
Senior Engineer	$ __________ / hr	________________
Engineer	$ __________ / hr	________________
Engineer Intern / Staff Engineer	$ __________ / hr	________________
Hydrologist / Hydraulic Modeler	$ __________ / hr	________________
GIS Manager / Specialist	$ __________ / hr	________________
Surveyor	$ __________ / hr	________________
Survey Technician / Field Technician	$ __________ / hr	________________
CAD Technician	$ __________ / hr	________________
Environmental Specialist	$ __________ / hr	________________
Administrative Support	$ __________ / hr	________________
Other: _______________________	$ __________ / hr	________________

 

State whether future annual rate adjustments may apply and, if so, identify the proposed adjustment method:

______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________

6. Reimbursable Expenses

The City prefers that all anticipated reimbursable expenses be included in the lump-sum fee. If any expenses will be billed separately, complete the table below. If none, state "Included in lump-sum fee."

Expense Category	Cost Basis	Markup	Estimated Amount
Mileage	________________	______ %	$ __________
Lodging	________________	______ %	$ __________
Meals/per diem	________________	______ %	$ __________
Printing/reproduction	________________	______ %	$ __________
Postage/shipping	________________	______ %	$ __________
Survey equipment or field equipment	________________	______ %	$ __________
Drone services	________________	______ %	$ __________
Data acquisition	________________	______ %	$ __________
Software/license/hosting	________________	______ %	$ __________
Subconsultants	________________	______ %	$ __________
Other: __________________	________________	______ %	$ __________
TOTAL ESTIMATED REIMBURSABLES			$ __________

 

7. City Staff Participation Assumptions

Describe the non-engineering data collection assumed to be performed by City staff, the consultant guidance to be provided, the estimated staff effort, and any cost reduction reflected in the proposal.

City-collected data assumed:
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________

Consultant training/guidance included:
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________

Estimated City staff effort:
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________

Cost or fee assumption tied to City participation:
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________

8. Deliverables Checklist

Deliverable	Status	Base Scope	Alternate / Exception
Final report	Required	[ ] Included  [ ] Not Included	________________
Citywide drainage basin map	Preferred	[ ] Included  [ ] Not Included	________________
Prioritized project list	Required	[ ] Included  [ ] Not Included	________________
Planning-level cost estimates	Required	[ ] Included  [ ] Not Included	________________
Capital Improvement Program	Required	[ ] Included  [ ] Not Included	________________
GIS database and mapping layers	Required	[ ] Included  [ ] Not Included	________________
Hydrologic model files	Required	[ ] Included  [ ] Not Included	________________
Hydraulic model files	Required	[ ] Included  [ ] Not Included	________________
Interactive web map/dashboard	Preferred	[ ] Included  [ ] Not Included	________________
Development review guidance	Absolutely required	[ ] Included  [ ] Not Included	________________
Grant-funding matrix	Required	[ ] Included  [ ] Not Included	________________
Maintenance recommendations	Required	[ ] Included  [ ] Not Included	________________
Editable supporting files and documentation	Required	[ ] Included  [ ] Not Included	________________

 

9. One-Page Consultant Approach Narrative

Attach a one page narrative that addresses the following:

• Understanding of the City's objectives, especially the Planning Department's need for a long-term development review resource.
• Technical approach to existing-conditions evaluation, citywide drainage assessment, public/private system interaction, modeling, deficiency identification, prioritization, and planning-level cost estimating.
• Approach to development review integration, including how GIS resources and models could be used, maintained, expanded, and applied to future projects.
• Approach to City-assisted data collection, including ESRI Field Maps or similar tools, quality standards, staff guidance, and anticipated cost benefits.
• Unique value, technology, methods, or relevant experience that distinguish the proposal.
• Clear distinction between what the base scope will accomplish and the added value of each proposed alternate.

The City is particularly interested in how the completed work will function as an ongoing planning, infrastructure management, and development review resource rather than only a one-time report.

10. Project Schedule

Milestone	Duration or Date
Notice to Proceed to kickoff meeting	________________________
Data review and collection plan	________________________
Existing conditions/GIS compilation	________________________
Technical analysis and modeling	________________________
Draft findings and priority workshop	________________________
Draft report submission	________________________
City Council presentation	________________________
Final report and digital files	________________________
Total project duration	________________________

 

11. Meetings Included

Meeting Type	Number Included	Format Assumed	Additional Meeting Rate
Kickoff meeting	_____	In person / Virtual	$ __________
Staff workshops or draft reviews	_____	In person / Virtual	$ __________
City Council presentations	_____	In person / Virtual	$ __________
Field/data collection training	_____	In person / Virtual	$ __________
Other: __________________	_____	In person / Virtual	$ __________

 

12. Assumptions, Exclusions, and Additional Services

Key assumptions:
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________

Services excluded from the proposed fee:
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________

Information or action required from the City:
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________

Potential additional services and fee basis:
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________

Subconsultants and assigned roles:
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________

13. Ownership and Editable-File Acknowledgment

The Consultant acknowledges that all reports, GIS data, databases, mapping products, model files, calculations, technical information, and project deliverables developed under the project will become the property of the City of Greenwood and will be delivered in editable electronic formats, subject only to expressly disclosed professional-use limitations that do not prevent City access and future authorized use.

[ ] Agree without exception     [ ] Exceptions attached and clearly described

14. Summary of Proposed Fees

Component	Proposed Fee
Base Scope	$ __________________
Alternate No. 1	$ __________________
Alternate No. 2	$ __________________
Alternate No. 3	$ __________________
Alternate No. 4	$ __________________
Alternate No. 5	$ __________________
Other Alternate	$ __________________
Estimated separately billed reimbursables	$ __________________
TOTAL IF ALL COMPONENTS ARE AUTHORIZED	$ __________________

 

15. Certification

The undersigned certifies that the proposal has been prepared in accordance with this request; that all costs necessary to complete the proposed services are included except as specifically disclosed; and that the signer is authorized to submit the proposal on behalf of the firm.

Certification Item	Response
Firm Name
Authorized Representative
Title
Signature
Date