Active SLED Opportunity · COLORADO · CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE
AI Summary
The City of Wheat Ridge seeks proposals from multidisciplinary consultant teams for planning, design, and construction documentation services to replace the outdoor community pool at Anderson Park. The project includes public engagement, infrastructure improvements, and potential facility expansion.
The City of Wheat Ridge is seeking proposals from qualified multidisciplinary consultant teams to provide professional planning, public engagement, design, and construction documentation services for the replacement of the City’s existing outdoor community pool at Anderson Park (4355 Field St. Wheat Ridge, CO 80033).
The new facility should provide a modern aquatic environment that serves residents of all ages and abilities, supports recreation and aquatic programming, and reflects community priorities identified through a comprehensive public engagement process.
The site footprint for this planning and design project may be similar to the current pool footprint. Depending on other city decisions, priorities, and timelines, there may be an opportunity to expand the footprint for the replacement pool to either the east (into the current parks shops and storage area) and/or the south (into the current soccer field). Phase 2-Concept Development has more information on this topic.
The selected consultant will lead the City through a structured planning and design process including concept development, community engagement, schematic design, design development, cost estimating, and preparation of final construction documents suitable for bidding and construction.
Consultants responding to this RFP shall provide a detailed scope approach, work plan, schedule, staffing plan, and fee proposal for completing the services outlined below.
The City of Wheat Ridge (the “City”) Municipal Building is located in the northwest Denver metropolitan area, with municipal offices at 7500 W 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, CO 80033. The City’s area consists of about nine square miles of rolling land adjacent to the Interstate 70 transportation corridor between Denver and the Rocky Mountains. The topography is somewhat unique, with a natural ridge traversing the City. The City is a suburban community of approximately 33,000 residents. Wheat Ridge is a home-rule municipality with an elected mayor and eight council members, and a Council- Manager form of government. Wheat Ridge recognizes the Best Value procurement model which allows the City to appoint suppliers that best meet the needs of the City, taking into consideration proposer qualifications, price, products, and service capabilities and other factors relevant to the City’s policies, programs, administrative resources, and budget.
Additional supporting documents. These documents are also available in the Attachments section.
Please use the See What Changed link to view all the changes made by this addendum.
Demonstrated understanding of the project goals, local community needs, regional conditions, regulatory environment, and aquatic facility design considerations. Quality and clarity of the proposed methodology and work plan.
Experience of the firm and project team with similar aquatic facility projects, particularly municipal outdoor pools and community engagement processes.
Qualifications, roles, and experience of key personnel assigned to the project.
Quality and creativity of the proposed public engagement approach, including strategies for inclusive participation.
Feasibility of the proposed schedule and effectiveness of project management approach.
Reasonableness and transparency of the proposed fee relative to the scope of work.
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination of the basis of race, color or national origin by any entity receiving Federal financial assistance.
The City of Wheat Ridge is a recipient of Federal financial assistance and as such, it—as well as all of its responsible agents, contractors and consultants—is required by the United States Department of Transportation Title VI Regulations at 49 CFR Part 21 (the Regulations) to assure nondiscrimination. The City of Wheat Ridge assures that no person shall be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination on the grounds of race, color, or national origin under any program or activity conducted by the City.
All bidders are hereby notified that the City of Wheat Ridge will affirmatively ensure that disadvantaged business enterprises will be afforded full opportunity to submit bids in response to all invitations and will not be discriminated against on the grounds of race, color or national origin in consideration for an award. This applies to all solicitations for bids for work or material subject to the Regulations, and for all proposals for negotiated agreements.
By clicking "Please confirm" below, the bidder agrees as follows:
The Contractor, of lawful age, being duly sworn, on oath says that (s)he is the agent authorized by the Bidder to submit the attached bid. Affidavit further states that the Bidder has not been a party of any collusion among Bidders in restraint of freedom of competition by agreement to bid at a fixed price or to refrain from bidding; or any Federal, State or Municipal official or employees as to quantity, quality, or price in the prospective Contract, or any other items of said prospective Contract; or in any discussions between bidders and any Federal, State or Municipal official concerning exchange of money or other thing of value for special consideration in the letting of a Contract.
By clicking "Please confirm" the contractor agrees to the above.
Name, position, and address of contract person regarding the information on this form.
Previous firm names and / or partnerships (or firms you have had any interest in), and number of years of each name
Attach a list of all major accounts for the past two (2) years. For each account indicate the following:
List major equipment, facilities, number and type of employees available for City contract work. Specify type of work normally done by your forces, and type of work you normally subcontract.
This qualification process is not intended to restrict competition. The intent is to protect the City’s legitimate interests by ensuring that vendors are competent, capable of quality work, and financially able to complete the work awarded.
If “Yes” is answered to any of the following questions in Sections IV, V, or VI, please provide details—including a brief summary of cause(s) of action, indicating if applicant firm, owner, or affiliate firms were plaintiffs (P) or defendants (D); define charges explicitly, identifying by what authority, court, or jurisdiction charge(s) were made. Complete details are required.
NOTE: For Sections IV and V below, the definition of an “investigation” includes:
I, the vendor, swear or affirm under penalty of perjury, and under the laws of the State of Colorado, that: (select an option below)
I understand that this sworn statement is required by law because I have applied for a public benefit. I understand that State law requires me to provide proof that I am lawfully present in the United States prior to receipt of this public benefit. I further acknowledge that making a false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation in this sworn Affidavit is punishable under the criminal laws of Colorado as perjury in the second degree under C.R.S. 18-8-503 and it shall constitute a separate criminal offense each time a public benefit is fraudulently received.
City of Wheat Ridge prohibits contracting with firms that employ certain relatives of City employees, unless the City Council determines that the making of such a contract is in the City’s best interest. No City Council member, member of a City Board or Commission, Municipal judge, City Manager, City attorney(s), or employee of the City of Wheat Ridge—or any such person’s spouse, child, parent, brother, sister, dependent or person assuming a relationship being the substantial equivalent of the above—has an existing or pending (direct or indirect) financial, pecuniary, or personal interest in the proposing firm or this Request for Proposal (RFP)
I authorize the City of Wheat Ridge to contact the following listed references.
Reference Contact Name
Brief overview of projected completed.
Reference Contact Name
Brief overview of projected completed.
Reference Contact Name
Brief overview of projected completed.
Additional document copies to be submitted with this application:
Enter the contract term for your project.
Example: one (1) year with the option to renew for four (4) one-year periods
Q (Documentation):
A: Is the "2023 Technical Facility Audit" available? Yes, it's available here: https://ciwheatridgecous-my.sharepoint.com/:b:/g/personal/baltenburg_wheatridge_gov/IQDzVr4UAUUqQZ2V1GUw1NvlAX-620DI9rXg-Ie3vIkBUu8?e=lSc0iE .
Q (Surveys):
A: The RFP states that existing survey is available and additional may be required. Can the City confirm that only supplemental survey will be required? Or should offerors assume a full topographic and utility survey of the site will be required? Yes, we anticipate only supplemental survey being required. We are uploading the most recent survey (2017) of the entire park, including the pool area and areas west and south of the current pool.
Q (Floodplain ):
A: Clear Creek’s existing 100-year floodplain inundates areas within the fenced perimeter of the pool, as well as the surface parking lots. Is the City anticipating any FEMA permitting or reviews as part of the potential designs? The proposed 2028 updated FEMA mapping would remove the entire pool area and adjacent parking from the floodplain. If those proposed maps are accepted/approved and construction doesn't begin until 2028 or later (which is very likely), we may not need to do FEMA or floodplain permitting. Under the current 100-year floodplain, as the question indicates, portions of the pool and parking areas are within the floodplain. If the proposed maps are delayed, or not approved for some reason, we would need to follow the floodplain regulations and permitting processes. Added the below on 4/21 at 9am: -City floodplain Permitting is required for the project in the current floodplain. -City floodplain permitting will not be required for the future floodplain update. -In any scenario, no FEMA review of LOMR is anticipated, unless fill in floodplain over 6 inches is proposed.
Q (Drawings):
A: Does the city have original structural drawings of the facility? We have structural drawings from the 2007-2008 renovation, which we are uploading for your reference.
Q (Topo Survey for Expansion Concept): Should the scope include a topo survey and utility locates for the larger pool park concept that expands west and/or south?
A: We have a topo survey and utility survey from 2007 that are being uploaded. These surveys include the areas outside of the pool to the west and south. In short, "no" to your question on scope.
Q (Documentation): Regarding the drawings for the Phase 4 – Preliminary Design Options (10% complete design) submittal…. should this submittal include refined/revised hand-drawn plans and illustrations for the 2-3 options incorporating public comments received, or is the city expecting CAD drawings for the 2-3 options?
A: For that phase, we would like to see refined/revised hand-drawn plans and illustrations for the 2-3 options incorporating public comments received. CAD drawings would be needed in Phase 6 at the 30% design level.
Q (Construction Administration Scope): The scope of work does not mention Bidding Assistance and Construction Administration. Will the scope/fees for these services be negotiated with the successful team after the extent of Phase 1 improvements are determined, or should the design team provide an estimate of these fees?
A: It would be helpful for the design team to provide estimates for those Bidding Assistance and Construction Administration fees
Q (Vendor Response): Does the Vendor Response (starting on Page 24 or the RFP) need to be completed and submitted with the RFP response?
A: Yes, the Vendor Response is required as part of the RFP submission. The response is completed and submitted directly within the OpenGov platform. Vendors do not need to upload a separate document for this section.
Q (Contractor Engagement): If submitting team enlists a general contractor for budgeting support, would that contractor then be precluded from bidding on the full construction of the project?
A: No, they would be allowed to bid even if they worked on a team during the design phase.
Q (Qualifications Document Submittal ): Can you please clarify where/how to submit the Qualifications PDF document? There is no upload link for it within the questionnaire.
A: Proposals may be uploaded to the Pricing Proposal Section at the end of the questionnaire.
Q (Program Clarification): Are any of the program spaces listed in section 1.3.3 adequately accommodated in the existing building or should they be assumed to be new construction or renovated within the existing facility? (Specifically, storage, staff offices and lifeguard break rooms, equipment and maintenance supply storage, mechanical room)
A: -Some storage, the lifeguard break room, and mechanical rooms are currently in the building. Storage space is inadequate (storage is supplemented through temporary buildings or items are stored on the pool deck) and will need to be expanded, and the lifeguard break room is quite small for standard staffing numbers. -The existing mechanical rooms will need to be completely gutted, and the space they are in is not adequate for renovation/reuse as mechanical spaces so the mechanical room should be assumed new construction. -The gutted existing mechanical spaces could be renovated into adequate storage, expanded staffing space, first aid rooms, etc. -There is no administrative office space dedicated to aquatics staff. This could be looped in with the new construction of the mechanical room or could be renovated within the existing facility.
Q (Qualifications Document Requirements): Can you please confirm that the required components of the Qualifications document are those listed as bullet points under 2.1.1 Evaluation Process?
A: Proposals should answer all questions listed in the request. At a minimum, documents listed in 2.1.1 are required to be considered for the opportunity.
Q (Pool Hours):
A: With the improvements being made to the pool, will the pool facility be open more hours for community use? Potentially, this is a future decision. Some considerations: if the construction budget allows for lighting, if the operating budget allows for increased staffing, if public demand warrants increasing hours
Q (No subject):
A: Have there been any noticeable issues related to the water supply, sewer lines, electrical system, HVAC since 2019 to any other areas of the site? Much of the electrical for the buildings is out of code and some of the panels are no longer certified due to age. We have brought up to code as needed when electrical was impacted. Electrical overheats in the mechanical spaces on hot days and parts will shut down. This has reduced with new fans that were installed in the mechanical rooms, but has not fully resolved the issues. Sewer has occasional problems that seem to be related mostly to patron misuse of toilets. Sewer lines are jetted either twice per year to keep sewer backups from happening. From my experience all sewer backup incidents are due to abuse. Since we’ve started 2x per year jetting issues have been reduced significantly. We have heard sewer lines are improperly sized and sloped but we have not confirmed that. Heating and cooling systems have a difficult time keeping up with demands of the lobby space due to poor design and materials. (i.e. the lobby is basically a canopy that was enclosed with single pane glass). This project scope does not include the lobby. No water supply issues recently since 2019.
Q (No subject):
A: Have any improvements been made to the existing building elements and path of travel since the Anderson Park Renovation in 2019? The building envelope has remained untouched except for needed repairs (like caulking etc.). Internally we have replaced hot water boiler, heat boiler, both furnaces, and now both heaters in the gym, in the last 3 years. All improvements have been building related and do not impact the pool itself or the pool equipment.
Q (Improvements):
A: Have any improvements been made to existing mechanical and chemical systems since the audit was completed? If so, is there any desire to reuse any of those elements? Yes – multiple improvements have been made over the past several years, but some were temporary solutions knowing that a rebuild would be coming soon. We are open to reusing our Pulsar machines if they are sized appropriately for the new facility but not the associated booster pumps (machines replaced July 2024 – one Pulsar Precision HCE, one Pulsar Precision 30), two BECSys5 controllers (replaced October 2025), and the slide motor (replaced February 2026) as long as the hp/sizing is still appropriate in the new application.
Q (Insurance):
A: Often Architectural Insurance prohibits the Architect from contracting Geotechnical services, would the City be willing to contract the Geotechnical Engineer? It is understood that the design team would help identify boring locations and coordinate with Geotech findings. Yes
Q (Public Engagement):
A: For public surveys, will the team be able to utilize existing City platforms? Yes, we typically use WhatsUpWheatRidge.com for community engagement including public surveys. It's now a Granicus platform. We can also use city websites, social media pages, and physical parks and rec locations to promote surveys.
Q (Permits):
A: Can the City please clarify if they will expect the design team to submit for permit? Yes, we would like the design team to manage the permit submittals. Internal city permit costs, such as building and floodplain, would be waived/zero dollars as this is an internal city project.
Q (Scope of Work):
A: Can you please detail the scope expected as it relates to architectural services? Are you seeking to expand an existing building to accommodate current needs or are you looking for a new structure independent of existing buildings? The RFP states that it is hoping to expand the staff offices and storage space. Please clarify this scope of work. We are looking for a replacement (new) structure for the concession stand and park restrooms in the southeast corner of the pool area (also along the park street). This new structure could be an option to hold new mechanical spaces and administrative office spaces if that is a better option than expanding/replacing the current spaces connected to the main Anderson Building. As for expanding, adding to, or replacing the current building locations housing staff offices and storage along the northern edge of the Pool, we are open to any of those options. Cost/benefit analysis will be a major factor in determining whether expanding existing buildings, replacing existing buildings, and/or adding additional buildings end up being the desired path forward.
Q (Scope of Work):
A: Do you anticipate new pool pump, chemical, heating equipment will be housed within the existing pump room(s) or should they be within the new building addition/ structure The current space is not appropriate for mechanical use as-is, and the mechanical spaces should be housed within the new structure replacing the concessions stand and restrooms. The existing mechanical rooms could be repurposed for storage space or expanded staff space.
Q (Available Plans):
A: Are there current plans, floor plans of the existing facility (pool, building and grounds) available? Yes, added for your reference
Q (Swim Lanes):
A: Is the city looking to keep the 9 lane(s), reduce, or expand? The current pool has 8 lanes, which has generally served community needs well. The design should be responsive to the priorities identified through the community engagement process. Unless the community engagement identifies a strong community desire to reduce or expand lap lane space, city staff would prefer to maintain 8 lanes.
Q (Pool Area):
A: Does the city want to keep the pool to deck area ratio the same? Current users seem to use the pool and the deck/grassy areas roughly equally, so we anticipate that maintaining deck space and grassy areas are a priority of the community as a part of this design. We are seeking a design approach that is responsive to community priorities - the appropriate balance between pool area and deck or grassy space should be informed by the results of the community engagement process along with best practices and the design team's professional recommendations.
Q (Site):
A: Are there any known environmental concerns within the site? Generally, not to our knowledge. Asbestos was identified and removed from the concessions building in 2018.
Q (Site):
A: Phase 2 - What is the intent of the 3rd pool and how would it’s use differ from the other 2 pools? For Phase 2, we are asking for bids to develop 2 concepts for new pool(s) within the current pool footprint. We are also asking for an add alternate line item bid/cost for a potential 3rd concept that would expand the current pool footprint to either the west (more likely to be considered) or the south (unlikely to be considered). We are not asking for 2 or 3 pool structures, we are asking for at least 2 and potentially 3 concept options during Phase 2.
Q (Parking):
A: Does the city anticipate needing to increase the number of parking spaces if the facility grows? Does the current facility meet city parking requirements? The city does not anticipate needing to increase the number of parking spaces if the facility grows. The current facility meets city parking requirements. Addressing parking is not part of the scope for this design phase.
Q (Future State):
A: Does the city own the parks shops & storage site (west) that could accommodate potential area expansions? Yes
Q (Surveys):
A: Would the City consider carrying Civil, Survey and Geotechnical services as a direct contract with the city. Yes
Q (Insurance):
A: Do all team members need to meet the minimum insurance requirements? All team members need to be covered by the insurance policy that names the City as additionally insured.
Q (Construction):
A: Is the intent to have the construction completed in one season, 2027? We hope that the demolition and construction can be completed in one season, but do not anticipate that being in 2027. 2028 or beyond is more likely
Q (Funding):
A: Has the city procured funding for the pool improvements / expansion? Only the design phase is funded at this time
Q (General):
A: Will inclusion of a General Contractor on a design team preclude them from the opportunity to bid on the future construction solicitation for Anderson Pool? No, they would be allowed to bid even if they worked on a team during the design phase.
SLED stands for State, Local, and Education. These are solicitations issued by state governments, counties, cities, school districts, utilities, and higher education institutions — as opposed to federal agencies.
SamSearch Platform
AI-powered intelligence for the right opportunities, the right leads, and the right time.