Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Procurement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Dickinson City outlines geotechnical RFP, timetable and testing expectations for 2026 infrastructure work
Summary
Dickinson City staff described the scope and schedule for a request for proposals (RFP) for geotechnical engineering services that will support multiple infrastructure projects planned for the 2026 construction season, including street and utility repairs, annual road maintenance, a Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) intersection project and a mill-and-overlay on First Street West.
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Procurement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Dickinson City staff described the scope and schedule for a request for proposals (RFP) for geotechnical engineering services that will support multiple infrastructure projects planned for the 2026 construction season, including street and utility repairs, annual road maintenance, a Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) intersection project and a mill-and-overlay on First Street West.
The RFP covers a bundle of work the city groups as the 2026 street-utility project — water-main replacement, lead service-line replacement, some sanitary-sewer lining and storm-sewer work — plus the city’s annual road maintenance program, testing and material work on several unpaved road segments, the Ninth-and-Fifth intersection safety project (an HSIP application), and a mill-and-overlay on First Street West from State Avenue toward Third Avenue West. City staff said the HSIP funding decision is expected in June and that most other projects are locally funded.
City staff said they expect firms responding to the RFP to perform borings at approximate locations listed in the RFP and to provide pavement cores before borings when possible so bidders and designers have full pavement-section visibility. “We prefer to get a pavement core first so that you can still see the full pavement section in the core log,” staff said during the pre-proposal meeting.
On moisture sampling, the RFP language sets a minimum of one moisture content test per boring for certain depths. Contractors on the call asked whether that was a minimum or a standard practice; one attendee said the typical approach on past projects was to take a moisture sample every foot in the top five feet. City staff said the RFP minimum should be treated as a floor and encouraged proposers to note in their submissions if they plan to provide additional moisture samples, particularly through the aggregate-base section.
The city also clarified reporting, scheduling and traffic-control expectations. Staff said monthly progress updates are planned and that preliminary geotechnical reports are requested by Sept. 8, with final reports by Oct. 6, as the city aims to have several projects bid-ready by October. For DOT-classified roads — specifically the Ninth-and-Fifth intersection safety project and the First Street West mill-and-overlay — work must meet North Dakota Department of Transportation design and traffic-control standards (the RFP references DOT Design Manual 7). Staff emphasized full traffic-control plans for those higher-classified routes; local-street work may use more limited signage and control measures.
The RFP separates a chip-and-fog-seal contract that will be bid separately; city staff said firms selected for geotechnical services may also be rolled into the construction phase for material testing if appropriate. The city named Civil Science as the firm already selected for the annual road maintenance project and said that other tasks in the RFP will be invoiced and reported independently by project.
City staff welcomed proposals that include alternative or supplemental technologies, such as ground-penetrating radar (GPR), if the proposer can explain how the alternative would add value or offset costs. “If doing GPR could offset the number of borings or add useful data, we’re more than interested in having the additional data and hearing what your proposal is,” staff said.
The meeting concluded with staff noting the recording will be posted on the city website and inviting email questions. The city did not announce contract awards at the meeting; no formal votes or decisions were taken during the pre-proposal session.

