Project Information

Bid Title

Request for Qualifications (RFQ 2025-02) for Beach Management- Alternatives Analysis

Issuing Agency

City of Isle of Palms

Location

South Carolina

Published Date

Nov 15, 2025

Closing Date

Dec 5, 2025

Government Level

State & Local

Status

Closed

Ref. #

RFQ 2025. 02.

Original Source

Join to Access Full Details

Bid Inquiries

Join to Access Full Details

Bid Documents

Join to Access Full Details

Project Description

RFQ 2025. 02. In compliance with the City of Isle of Palms procurement ordinance, the city is requesting qualifications from firms that specialize in managing beaches that suffer from erosion to provide City Council with an analysis of alternatives that could improve the performance of future beach renourishment projects. The deadline for submitting qualifications is Friday, December 5, 2025. Read the Request for Qualifications here.

Attachment Preview

City of Isle of Palms

Request for Qualifications (RFQ 2025-02) for

Beach Management- Alternatives Analysis

BACKGROUND

The city is requesting qualifications from firms that specialize in managing beaches that suffer

from erosion to provide City Council with guidance on specific beach erosion and management

practices, plans and policies. This analysis will inform council’s long-range planning as it

considers ways to preserve the planned 2026 major renourishment project.

The city has engaged with multiple professional firms already and those firms have identified a

number of options that could be considered to help slow down erosion on the two ends of the

island. Based on prior experience of dealing with eroded conditions and the future cost of beach

renourishment, the city would like to have a comprehensive analysis performed on specific

beach management practices and methods including, but not limited to:

- Stepping away from active beach management on all or part of the island’s beaches

- Beach renourishment only

- Beach renourishment plus adding shore perpendicular groins at key locations

- Beach renourishment plus adding breakwaters at key locations

- Beach renourishment plus adding geo-tubes at key locations

- Beach renourishment plus creative shoal manipulation to minimize damage of future

approaching shoals

- Projects focused on modifying the conditions within Breach Inlet and/or Dewee’s Inlet to

alleviate erosional currents (channel realignment, forced bypassing or other effort to

physically change inlet)

- Any combination of the above methods and any others deemed worthy of consideration

Each of the items listed above has considerations including but not limited to physically

changing the look and feel of the beach, initial cost, ongoing maintenance cost, likelihood of

being granted state and federal permits, likelihood of being successfully implemented, impacts

to wildlife and habitat, impacts to tourism, legal ramifications and negative downdrift impacts.

The city would like to engage a firm to analyze and provide guidance on each of the identified

methods, and others deemed viable but not listed. This request for qualifications is the first step

in the process of engaging a firm to provide such a report.

SCOPE AND DELIVERABLE OF ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS

The chosen firm will be expected to:

1. Review of existing data and information, including:

a. Reports and recommendations from Beach Ad Hoc Committee

b. Second Opinion from Foth Olson dated 9/29/2025

c. Prior beach management efforts

d. Planned future projects, including USACE projects on the southern end

e. Beach monitoring reports and surveys

f. Existing imagery to understand inlet shoal bypass events

g. See more here: https://www.iop.net/administration/beach-restoration

1

h. Meet with the US Army Corps of Engineers and gain an understanding of

future plans

2. Provide a written report that includes:

a. Opinions on the feasibility of each practice and method listed above

b. Opinions on possible benefits and detriments of each of the identified

alternatives

c. Opinions on the probability of successfully permitting and constructing

d. Opinions on the probable cost (initial and 20 years into the future) of each of

the identified alternatives

e. Opinions on lifespan of each of the identified alternatives before complete

replacement is necessary

f. Conceptual renderings or photographs of real-life examples of what the

alternatives would look like from the ground

g. Expected financial benefit or expense each alternative would achieve over

the course of ten years or other meaningful timeline

3. Present the findings, opinions, and recommendations to City Council and be

prepared to answer questions (expectation would be that this would be an in-person

meeting and last up to two hours, possibly longer).

REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS SUBMITTAL INSTRUCTIONS

Consistent with the purchasing procedures specified in Section 1-10-7 of the city code, the city

is requesting qualifications based on demonstrated competence and qualifications.

By the close of business on Friday, December 5th, 2025, please provide a document via email

to dkerr@iop.net that illustrates the firm’s qualifications and includes:

- No more than 6 pages

- A cover letter introducing the firm

- A description of the firm’s qualifications

- A description of the key personnel that would be involved in the project and a description

of their areas of expertise

- Examples of similar projects including references

EVALUATION PROCESS AND CRITERIA

To choose a firm to provide these services, a city committee (expected to be the Beach

Preservation Committee) or City Council will evaluate the qualifications of each firm that

responds and develop a method to determine an order of preference of which firm to engage.

The city may choose to interview firms as part of the process. The preferred firm will be

contacted, and an attempt will be made to negotiate a fair and reasonable cost for the project. If

a satisfactory cannot be negotiated with the firm considered to be most qualified, negotiations

with that firm shall be formally terminated and negotiations with the next most preferred firm will

begin and this process will repeat until an agreement is reached or the process is terminated or

modified.

2

Beach Preservation Ad Hoc Committee Report

January 2025

Committee Members:

Residents:

Tim Ahmuty

Dan Slotchiver

Cindi Solomon

Andrew Vega

City Council:

Katie Miars

Scott Pierce

Phillip Pounds

1

Page 3

Page 6

Page 22

Page 23

Page 24

Page 31

Beach Preservation Ad Hoc Committee Report

Table of Contents

Committee Recommendations to City Council

Exhibit 1- CSE Beach Management Planning Scenarios

Exhibit 2- Recommended Triggers to Initiate Consideration

Exhibit 3- Potential Revenue Opportunity Summary

Exhibit 4- Beach Nourishment Planning Model Assumptions

Exhibit 5- Folly Beach Code Provisions

2

City of Isle of Palms, SC

Beach Preservation Ad Hoc Committee Report

1-7-25

Introduction

The Beach Preservation Ad Hoc Committee was established by the City Council on January 23, 2024. Its

members include Mayor Phillip Pounds, Councilmember Scott Pierce, Councilmember Katie Miars, and

island residents Andrew Vega, Dan Slotchiver, Cindi Solomon, and Tim Ahmuty. Councilmember

Elizabeth Campsen was also part of the committee before her resignation from the Isle of Palms City

Council in August.

The committee's operations were supported by City Administrator Desirée Fragoso, Deputy City

Administrator Douglas Kerr, and Steven Traynum from Coastal Science and Engineering.

Throughout the year, the committee convened 24 times, engaging with a range of stakeholders,

including representatives from state and federal permitting agencies, as well as staff and elected

officials from other beach communities facing similar challenges.

The goals and tasks of this committee were to

1) Review overall beach restoration policies,

2) Develop recommendations for a more proactive response to beach erosion, and

3) Develop new and consistent funding mechanisms for future needs and projects.

Recommendations

The following recommendations are being presented to City Council for consideration:

1) Beach Restoration Policies

Recommendation

Consensus

(75% +)

General

Agreement

(50%-75%)

Divided

(Less than

50%)

Establish a minimum healthy beach volume profile per Exhibit

1, Figure 5, page 10 of this report (approx. 600 cy per foot

within the unstabilized inlet zones and 380 cy per foot

X

elsewhere on the beach)

Establish triggers for when Council should consider

authorizing construction of mid-scale and large-scale projects

X

(See Exhibit 2)

Consider becoming a US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)

X

managed beach

Repeal ordinance prohibiting hard erosion control structures

X

250' of mean high water

Modify ordinance prohibiting hard erosion control structures

X

250' of mean high water

3

Commodity Codes

• NAICS 541330Engineering Services
• NAICS 541611Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services
• NAICS 541618Other Management Consulting Services
• NAICS 541690Other Scientific and Technical Consulting Services
• NAICS 541990All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services

* Disclaimer: Government BidHub provides information on bids, RFPs (Requests for Proposals), and RFQs (Requests for Qualifications) solely for convenience and informational purposes. This site is not an official public notice board. For official details, responses, or inquiries, please contact the relevant government agency directly.