[image: top.apa.gif] Consultant Services / [image: apa.print.gif]Printer-Friendly Format [image: rc.consult.search.01.gif] [image: spacer.gif] Research Legislation & Policy Your Community Publications Knowledge Exchange Consultant Services
[image: spacer.gif] About APA News Education Jobs & Careers Conferences & Workshops APA Store Member Services Login
RFP & RFQ
APA provides these listings as a free service to its members and to the public. APA is not affiliated with the parties listed here, and the fact that they are listed should not be taken as any kind of an endorsement, guarantee, or warranty by the APA. APA assumes no responsibility or liability for any acts or omissions by persons or entities in these listings.
AICP has adopted the following policy:

The AICP Commission requests that entities soliciting planning consultants follow a two-part RFQ/RFP selection procedure. Click here to read a description of such a two-part process in PAS Report 443, Selecting and Retaining a Planning Consultant: RFPs, RFQs, Contracts, and Project Management, by Eric Damian Kelly, FAICP. To view more excerpts from the report, click here.

Click here for guidelines on submitting an RFP or RFQ for this page.
Request for Proposals — Consultant Services
User-based Microanalysis, State Route 1 (SR1), Pacific Coast Highway (PCH) Corridor Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Submittal Deadline: September 30, 2008
RFP Number: 09-011
ABOUT SCAG Over the past four decades, the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) has evolved as the largest of nearly 700 councils of government in the United States, functioning as the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for six counties: Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Ventura and Imperial.
As the designated MPO, SCAG is mandated by the federal government to research and put together plans for transportation, growth management, hazardous waste management, and air quality.
SCAG relies heavily on outside consultants and vendors to help accomplish the overall mission and objectives of SCAG. We are always striving to increase the breadth and depth of talent in our pool of potential consultants and vendors, and are especially interested in bringing more certified DBEs into the database.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is soliciting proposals in response to the Request for Proposal (RFP) No. 09-011, User-based Microanalysis, State Route 1, Pacific Cost Highway (PCH) Corridor. Pacific Coast Highway Corridor is one of the principal corridors serving employment sites and activity centers in the South Bay Subregion.  Traffic congestion in the corridor is increasingly severe during commute hours, and significant congestion is experienced by travelers even during off-peak periods.  Consultant services are sought to assemble in one place existing data on characteristics and performance and the various management practices along the corridor;  survey a community of PCH drivers for their observations about corridor conditions and impediments; and combine and analyze the various data sets in order to produce a Corridor Improvement Plan that will include a list of any short range, low cost improvements that appear feasible while also anticipating tomorrow’s congestion that might arise out of a more mixed-mode future.
COMPLETE RFP PACKET MAY BE DOWNLOADED AT http://www.planetbids.com/SCAG/QuickSearch.cfm
PROPOSALS DUE: 1:00 p.m. (Pacific) on September 30, 2008
This requires that you have a sign-on and password to download the RFP.  There is no cost to register with our bid management system.
Contact
Ranjini Zucker CPA, MBA Senior Contracts Administrator Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) 818 W. Seventh Street, 12th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90017 zucker@scag.ca.gov (P) 213-236-1887 (F) 213-236-1825
Request for Qualifications — Consultant Services
Master Plan Update Rio Blanco County, Colorado Sumittal Deadline: September 15, 2008
Rio Blanco County, Colorado is soliciting Statements of Qualifications (SOQs) from professional Planning and Land Use consulting firms to perform the task of updating the existing Rio Blanco County Master Plan.
Statements of Qualifications should include the following:
• Experience of the firm in performing master/comprehensive planning work with citations of specific projects and names of clients and periods of performance. • Experience of the firms work in rural and county planning, with citations of specific projects and names of clients and periods of performance. • Resumes of all individual professional staff members who would be performing the work, with relevant qualifications and experience. • Three (3) reference of clients for whom the firm has performed similar work.
Rio Blanco County will select up to five (5) firms based on their SOQs and invite them to submit formal bids in a Request for Proposal (RFP) process.  The RFP will provide more detailed information regarding the project, including statement of work, period of performance and project deliverable.
Please send three (3) copies of the SOQ to:
Teresa D. Anderson Rio Blanco County P.O. Box i Meeker, CO 81641
SOQ's must be postmarked no later than September 15, 2008.  Any SOQ received after this deadline will not be opened.
If you have questions please contact Rio Blanco County Planning Department, Jeff Madison, jmadison@co.rio-blanco.co.us. or 970-878-9580, for further details.
Request for Qualifications — Consultant Services
Pre-Visioning / Visioning Consultant The City of Shreveport, Louisiana Submittal Deadline: September 26, 2008
Introduction Expansion and contraction are a natural part of the life cycle of any community.  Over the years and decades Shreveport has experienced such transformations, including population shifts, new economic drivers and even successive waves of new leadership.  During these years Shreveport's Comprehensive Plan, although enjoying early success, would have required frequent amendments that did not occur to respond to the community's changes.
In addition, there are potential or inevitable changes on the community's horizon that require a completely new response and plan for Shreveport.  Not only has the community changed, but these changes have perhaps brought about less than desirable consequences, such as the growth of suburban communities spawning congestion, stressed infrastructure, and unsustainable land use patterns.  Older urban communities, on the other hand, have lost jobs, population, recognition, and political strength.  As a result, the ideas and desires of these communities have been overlooked altogether, or given very little credence at best.  However unintended, these neighborhoods and older communities have been largely excluded and denied meaningful participation in any broad process.  Plans that might be produced through such a similarly flawed process would not completely reflect the goals, desires and aspirations of the community at large and, therefore, lack the political backing necessary for meaningful implementation, progress, or even responsive amendments.
The pending changes are potentially so transformational that the planning process can no longer afford to exclude from participation previously under-represented voices in the community.  These voices, however, present certain challenges to the creation of a meaningful and sustainable planning process in a community such as Shreveport and Caddo Parish.  Foremost among these challenges is an effort to discern the right mechanisms that will ensure meaningful and broad community participation.  Once the comprehensive planning process in Shreveport and Caddo Parish begins in earnest (progressing intensely), the one chance to "get it right" from the perspective of widespread community involvement and support, may have realistically "come and gone."
For this reason, the Shreveport Metropolitan Planning Commission of Caddo Parish has prepared this Request for Proposals (RFP) which seeks submittals from qualified consultants detailing a pre-visioning and early visioning process that will define, test, refine, and validate methods that will ensure broad community participation in the comprehensive planning process.  It will begin with this effort, but become more focused and intense when a group of strategies and methods have subsequently been proven to be successful.
The importance of the pre-visioning process is vital for the ultimate success of the comprehensive planning effort.  To be successful, the planning effort must validly and in a meaningful manner, engage a broad cross-section of the community during the early stages of the process to develop the plan's overall vision, its goals, and its objectives.  Without such involvement, decision-makers cannot be assured that the plan completely represents the will of their specific constituencies.  Lacking this assurance, the political will to implement the plan, and the continued "push" from the community to do so, cannot be sustained.
The pre-visioning process is anticipated to require from three to six months, but this time will be invested to set the stage for a process designed to permanently and constantly address or anticipate the needs of the community.  Moreover, it is intended that the effort itself will help prepare the community to participate effectively in the more focused efforts that will follow.  While a separate RFQ (request for qualifications) is being issued simultaneously for the primary consultant firm that will lead the comprehensive planning effort, there is nothing that should be implied to preclude a single firm or team of consultants from pursuing both roles.  Simultaneous outreach and engagement support (marketing and branding) will be provided, but coordinated under the direction of the pre-visioning / visioning consultant team and the primary planning consultant.  That support will be provided through a qualification based selection process that will be concluded prior to the selection of these other consultants.  In addition, a brief profile describing the historic development of the community and its current demographic profile will be commissioned and available to the consultant team very early in the process.  Moreover, a local demographic consultant will be made available to the consultant team at all times.  GIS services, including but not limited to neighborhood mapping (already completed) will be provided to the consultant as requested.
Scope of Services The proposal should adequately describe the consultant's approach to providing services in each of the following task areas defined herein as the Scope of Services. 
•Task 1:  Pre-approval of Community Outreach Methods
The Shreveport Metropolitan Planning Commission of Caddo Parish will provide a project manager, who along with a citizen based committee of some form and the primary planning consultant will work with the selected specialist to pre-approve methods of outreach to be tested and validated in the community.  It is anticipated that the citizen's committee will permanently provide oversight, participate in consultant selection, recommend funding levels and sources, and evaluate both the progress and effectiveness of the process.  The proposal itself should include recommendations on how the citizen's committee should be staffed and structured.
The purpose of this task is to detail the outreach methods to be tested, define the neighborhoods to serve as test beds for particular methods, describe why a particular method may work in one neighborhood or community and not others, and describe precisely how such methods will be employed, tested, and results reported.  The purpose of these various outreach methods is to ensure at least one method can effectively induce participation of the selected neighborhood or community in the planning process.  Success in this area means that each segment of the community will be heard.  This effort will set the stage for more detailed issue development during the more focused comprehensive planning process that will utilize additional consultants.   It is anticipated that the community outreach methods, at a minimum, will include neighborhood / community meetings, public hearings, phone surveys, web-based methods, door-to-door canvassing and informational kiosks in work centers and similar areas.
Particular attention must be given to the development of a website or web-based method for effective community input, on-going involvement, and feedback.  Existing governmental websites may be suitable hosts for this method and should be explored. It is of particular interest to the community whether there is a benefit to treating this as a permanent asset to be shared among various governmental, private and / or non-profit entities.  Finally, we would expect a recommendation or evaluation of various alternative technologies or vendors currently providing a suitable solution.
The consultant is free to propose other methods for consideration by the project manager, the primary planning consultant and citizen's committee, but must be prepared to describe them in detail, as stated above.  The product of this task will be a technical memorandum.
•Task 2:  Neighborhood / Community Deployment and Issue Development
This task will actually deploy the pre-approved methods in appropriate neighborhoods and communities, using them to gather initial information about community ideas, concerns, desires, etc., on a variety of topics including among others housing, economic development, transportation, land use, schools, etc.  The consultant will specify the issues to be discussed, data collection methods, and how records will be maintained in a technical memorandum.
•Task 3:  Assessment of Results
In this task the selected consultant will provide an assessment of the results of the previous task.  This will involve a detailed comparison of neighborhoods, methods, and issue development.  The work product of this task will be a technical memorandum
•Task 4:  Refinement of Methods
The assessment of results in Task 3 will suggest how methods might be refined to produce better results.  The consultant, after discussing possible refinements with the Project Manager and citizen's committee, will deploy an agreed upon number of method refinements in appropriate neighborhoods and report on results in a technical memorandum.
•Task 5:  Pre-Vision  / Vision Report
Combining and summarizing the technical memoranda and findings of this effort, the consultant will produce a final report that will set the stage for more detailed and further issue development to be performed in partnership with additional consultants during the balance of the initial comprehensive planning effort.  This report will describe in detail the community involvement process necessary to ensure cross-sectional involvement throughout Shreveport and Caddo Parish for the subsequent comprehensive planning process.  The report will detail which methods worked in which neighborhoods, which did not, and why.  This report must demonstrate which combination of outreach methods will be effective in securing broad and adequate community participation throughout the balance of the planning process.  In this manner over-representation of one group, neighborhood, or community, and conversely, the under-representation of others can be avoided prior to the engagement of a variety of additional consultants and the initiation of a much more intense effort has begun.
Requirements It is anticipated that the form of compensation to be included in the executed contract will be a stipulated sum, the basis of which must be described or estimated in some form in the proposal.  However, should the services provide the desired results and additional services be required during the remainder of the effort, it is anticipated that the consultant will be engaged to continue.  As such the response should include some description of expected profit and overhead rates and the level of compensation for each category of personnel that the successful candidate might employ.  It is understood that some equitable and mutually agreeable method of escalation will be employed for work beyond the initial term of the agreement or any extension.
Except as contained herein, there are no specific or formal submittal requirements for responses, which should be received no later than 3:00 P.M. on September 26, 2008 at the following address:

Attn:  Diane Tullos

Shreveport Metropolitan Planning Commission of Caddo Parish

505 Travis Street, Suite 440

Shreveport, LA 71101

However, it is expected that the following information will be included in some manner:  1) primary contact information for the firm or team of consultants; 2) the form of ownership structure and all key principals, officers or directors; 3) a statement of the qualifications of both the firm and all key personnel intended to perform services; 4) a brief explanation of the capacity of the firm or consultant team and the availability of key personnel; and 5) a list of relevant projects and clients who may be contacted for references.  If it is the intent of the proposal to engage local firms or individuals as facilitators to supplement capacity, it should be clearly stated in the proposal although it is not necessary to identify the specific individuals or entities at this stage of the process.
As an agency that serves both the City of Shreveport and Caddo Parish, the contract to be executed will require insurance and/or indemnifications that meet the minimum requirements for both of those governmental entities.  A copy of those requirements will be provided upon request.  The City of Shreveport also maintains a policy of providing and ensuring contracting opportunities for small and economically disadvantaged businesses (Fair Share).  While it is not anticipated that each individual contract will require a specific level of participation, it is intended that the sum of all contract services performed in association with the comprehensive master plan effort meet the desired goal.  As such, a firm's ability to help meet this goal either directly or through the association of third parties is relevant information that should be included in the response.
Requests for clarifications or additional information should be directed to Roy Jambor, AICP 318-673-6464. For more information: http://www.ci.shreveport.la.us/dept/mpc/masterplandocs/Pre-Visioning%20Scope.pdf
Request for Qualifications — Consultant Services
Primary Comprehensive Planning Consultant The City of Shreveport, Louisiana Submittal Deadline: September 26, 2008
The initial comprehensive master plan for the City of Shreveport and Caddo Parish was completed in approximately 1957.  Although enjoying a significant degree of early success, it would have required frequent amendments that did not occur in order to adequately respond to the community's changes.  In addition, there are potential or inevitable changes on the community's horizon that require a completely new response and plan for Shreveport.  Not only has the community changed, but these changes have perhaps brought about less than desirable consequences, such as the growth of suburban communities spawning congestion, stressed infrastructure, and unsustainable land use patterns.  Older urban communities, on the other hand, have lost jobs, population, recognition, and political strength.  As a result, the ideas and desires of these communities have been overlooked altogether, or given very little credence at best.  However unintended, these neighborhoods and older communities have been largely excluded and denied meaningful participation in any broad process.
As documented most recently in the 2008 Community Counts study published by the Community Foundation of Shreveport-Bossier, our local citizens as a group are not nearly as engaged as they perhaps should be.  This presents a most daunting challenge to the current efforts of the Shreveport Metropolitan Planning Commission of Caddo Parish to craft and maintain a continuously current comprehensive master plan for the community.  Perhaps even more significant, the statistics contained within that study indicate that a major source of this lack of involvement is a feeling of disenfranchisement.  The survey found that 32 percent of citizens felt people did not have an equal opportunity to participate in community decisions, and 26 percent said the government was not accountable to citizens.  Yet at the same time, there is currently both broad-based and political support for a current and meaningful comprehensive master plan to help guide the future of the community.
Plans that do not directly address this challenge could not completely reflect the goals, desires and aspirations of the community at large and would therefore lack the political backing necessary for meaningful implementation, progress, or even responsive amendments.  For this reason, the Shreveport Metropolitan Planning Commission of Caddo Parish has prepared this solicitation to initiate a qualification-based process to select a primary planning consultant to lead and coordinate an effort which addresses these historic difficulties and results in an efficient and effective process and ultimately, a current comprehensive master plan that reflects the values of the entire community.  A number of reasonably recent essays prepared by the staff that generally discuss historic and potentially current impediments to the process will be provided upon request.
The Shreveport Metropolitan Planning Commission of Caddo Parish will provide a project manager, who along with citizen based committees of some form and representatives of the Planning Commission itself will conduct all current and future consultant selection in addition to providing insight, recommend funding levels and sources, monitor progress and provide continuous performance evaluation.  While it is not viewed as necessary or even desirable to attempt to predetermine all areas of expertise that will ultimately be required, it is fairly clear from staff compiled public input and existing study data that the following general areas and specific issues will be significant and should be addressed in at least some manner in the initial response.
•Environmental concerns / resource conservation (infrastructure and growth management, wetlands and open space preservation, transportation mode options, drainage and water resources - particularly in rural areas, etc.) •Housing (affordable housing, alternative housing forms, rural and urban density, the relationship of various supporting commercial uses, etc.) •Economic development (generally as well as it specifically relates to its impact on physical development) •Education (as it relates to the neighborhoods that the various facilities serve and economic development strategies whose success ultimately depend on the quality and variety of that service) •Neighborhood planning and / or revitalization (including both vital and blighted inner-city neighborhoods that are not currently viable)
While a separate RFP (request for proposal) is being issued simultaneously to pre-determine the combined specific and effective public engagement strategies and methods that will be necessary for an effective outcome, there is nothing that should be implied to preclude a single firm or team of consultants from pursuing both roles.  Outreach and engagement support (marketing and branding) will be provided, but coordinated under the direction of the selected consultant team.  That support will be provided through a qualification based selection process that will be concluded prior to the selection of any other consultant.  In addition, a brief profile describing the historic development of the community and its current demographic profile will be commissioned and available to the consultant team very early in the process.  All recent demographic and relevant data from other studies will be compiled by the staff and provided to the successful consultant team.  Moreover, a local demographic support consultant will be available to the consultant team at no cost.  GIS services, including but not limited to neighborhood mapping (already completed) will be provided to the consultant as requested.
Except as contained herein, there are no specific or formal submittal requirements for responses, which should be received no later than 3:00 P.M. on September 26, 2008 at the following address:

Attn:  Diane Tullos

Shreveport Metropolitan Planning Commission of Caddo Parish

505 Travis Street, Suite 440

Shreveport, LA 71101

However, it is expected that the following information will be included in some manner:  1) primary contact information for the firm; 2) the form of ownership structure and all key principals, officers or directors; 3) a statement of the qualifications of both the firm and all key personnel intended to perform services; 4) a brief explanation of the capacity of the firm and the availability of key personnel; and 5) a list of relevant projects and clients who may be contacted for references.  The intended schedule is rather ambitious and will require significant capacity.  In addition, it is anticipated that an unknown number of neighborhood or district specific efforts will be conducted simultaneously.  If it is the intent of the proposal to associate with or engage local firms, individuals or other third-party entities to supplement capacity or increase efficiency, it should be clearly stated in some manner in the response.  Moreover it would be necessary to include such information as described above for all associated firms or individuals in order to evaluate the overall qualifications and capacity of the submitting entity.
It is anticipated that the form of compensation to be included in the executed contract will be based on a fixed formula for professional time and expenses.  As such the response should include some description of expected profit and overhead rates and the level of compensation for each category of personnel that the successful candidate might employ.  It is understood that some equitable and mutually agreeable method of escalation will be employed for work beyond the initial term of the agreement.
As an agency that serves both the City of Shreveport and Caddo Parish, the contract to be executed will require insurance and/or indemnifications that meet the minimum requirements for both of those governmental entities.  A copy of those requirements will be provided upon request.  The City of Shreveport also maintains a policy of providing and ensuring contracting opportunities for small and economically disadvantaged businesses (Fair Share).  While it is not anticipated that each individual contract will require a specific level of participation, it is intended that the sum of all contract services performed in association with the comprehensive master plan effort meet the desired goal.  As such, a firm's ability to help meet this goal either directly or through the association of third parties is relevant information that should be included in the response.
Requests for clarifications or additional information should be directed to Roy Jambor, AICP at 318-673-6464. For more information: http://www.ci.shreveport.la.us/dept/mpc/masterplandocs/RFQ%20-%20Primary%20Planning%20Consultant.pdf
Request for Proposals — Consultant Services
Community Mobility Studies Nassau County, New York Submittal Deadline: September 26, 2008
Nassau County, New York (the "County") is currently seeking proposals from qualified individuals and entities authorized to do business in the State of New York, to provide targeted Community Mobility Studies (the "Project") throughout the County.  As part of the County Executive's vision for "New Suburbia," Nassau County is assisting certain communities to develop distinct "visions".  The purpose of this RFP is to solicit proposals from qualified vendors with the intent of identifying and addressing the transportation issues and needs of the Visioning communities and others, and to provide professional expertise to help these communities address their mobility issues within the "visioning" framework. 
A copy of the complete RFP may be obtained by visiting Nassau County's website and registering as a vendor at https://eproc.nassaucountyny.gov/SupplierRegister
All inquiries regarding the RFP should be made in writing to:

Denise Ramirez

Planner II

Nassau County Planning Commission

100 County Seat Drive

Mineola, NY 11501

dramirez@nassaucountyny.gov

Date RFP is to be posted (Effective Date): August 29, 2008
Due Date & Time for Responses: September 26, 2008 by 4:00 PM
Request for Proposals — Consultant Services
Comprehensive Master Plan Update Nassau County, New York Submittal Deadline: September 26, 2008
Nassau County, New York (the "County") is currently seeking proposals from qualified individuals and entities located and authorized to do business in the State of New York, to coordinate, prepare and issue a Comprehensive Master Plan Update for Nassau County (hereafter, "Comprehensive Plan") as required by the Nassau County Charter, including interim deliverables during the course of the process.  The purpose of the RFP is to provide the County with proposals for a broad, extensive, participatory and innovative comprehensive planning program which will provide the framework and tools required for the long, medium and short-term, inclusive and comprehensive policy-making needed to guide and sustain the County and its 1.3 million residents through the next 25 years. 
A copy of the complete RFP may be obtained by visiting Nassau County's website and registering as a vendor at https://eproc.nassaucountyny.gov/SupplierRegister
All inquiries regarding the RFP should be made in writing to:

Robert Piazza

Deputy Commissioner of Comprehensive Planning

Nassau County Planning Commission

100 County Seat Drive

Mineola, NY 11501

rpiazza@nassaucountyny.gov

Date RFP is to be posted (Effective Date): August 29, 2008
Due Date & Time for Responses: September 26, 2008 by 4:00 PM
Request for Qualifications — Consultant Services
Implementation of the Provisions of Act 24 of 2008 — The Pennsylvania Appalachian Trail Act Cumberland County, Pennsylvania Submittal Deadline: September 8, 2008
The Appalachian National Scenic Trail (A.T.) is a unique unit of the National Park System (NPS) passing through fourteen eastern seaboard states as it winds it 2,175 miles from Georgia to Maine.
With the recent passage of the Act 24 of 2008 (amending the 1978 Pennsylvania Appalachian Trail Act) the fifty-eight Pennsylvania municipalities within which the Appalachian National Scenic Trail runs will be required by law to use their zoning authority to preserves the trail and protect the natural, scenic, historic and aesthetic values along the trail. If the municipality does not currently have a zoning ordinance, the legislation requires the municipality to pass one (at least covering the area of the trail.) In order to provide municipalities with assistance on implementing this legislation an interagency task force with representation from the Pennsylvania Departments of Community and Economic Development (DCED), Conservation and Natural Resources (DCNR), Environmental Protection (DEP) and their non-governmental partner, The Appalachian Trail Conservancy, was convened.  The AT Zoning Task Force recommends engaging a consultant to develop of a set of resource materials and to assist with developing a strategy to implement the provisions of Act 24 of 2008.
The AT Zoning Task Force is accepting qualifications and a summary of approach for consulting services for a one time contract to develop a set of resource materials (e.g. handbook, training, etc.) to assist the municipalities in a review and assessment of the adequacy of their existing ordinances (or the creation of a new ordinance) related to the intent of Act 24. Such review will ascertain the efficacy of land use planning as it pertains to adequate protection of the natural, scenic, historic and aesthetic values along the trail mandated in Act 24 of 2008.
This Request for Qualifications and Summary of Approach is designed to allow the Task Force to identify several consultants to interview regarding their approach to the needs described in the following sections. As part of their response to the RFQ, consultants should provide suggestions of approach to the following questions and examples of previous work that illustrates their experience in developing zoning ordinances for landscape and resource protection, and experience with creatively solving complex planning and zoning projects. The Task Force is not seeking a formal proposal at this time; however, formal proposals will be sought from a select group of consultants based on the responses to this RFQ. Funding levels for this project have not been specifically established; however, DCED and DCNR have committed to fund the development of this resource at appropriate levels.  Budget discussions will begin once a small group of firms have been selected to submit formal proposals. It is anticipated that the selected consultant will enter into a contract with a county municipality to be specified shortly.
The formal RFQ, including the scope of services, response content and selection procedures, is located at the Cumberland County Planning Department's website: www.ccpa.net/planning
Proposals must be received no later than 4:00pm, Monday, September 8, 2008 to be eligible for consideration.  Any questions on the request should be directed to Ed LeClear, 888-223-6837, eleclear@state.pa.us.
Request for Proposals — Consultant Services
Developing Design Guidelines The City of Fresno, California Submittal Deadline: September 12, 2008
The City of Fresno is soliciting proposals from qualified firms with recent experience in developing design guidelines. The deadline for submission of proposals for this work is 5:00 p.m. on September 12, 2008.  Please send 3 copies of your proposal, marked clearly on the outside "Consulting Services: Downtown Design Guidelines" to:

City of Fresno

2600 Fresno Street, RM 3065

Fresno, CA 93721

Attention: Trai Her, Executive Assistant

The City of Fresno hereby notifies all proposers that no person shall be excluded from participation in, denied any benefits of, or otherwise discriminated against in connection with the award and performance of any contract on the basis of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, marital status, sex, age, sexual orientation, ethnicity, status as a disabled veteran or veteran of the Vietnam era. The City reserves the right to reject any and all proposals.
SECTION 1
BACKGROUND INFORMATION The City of Fresno is soliciting proposals from qualified firms with recent experience in developing design guidelines for Downtown Fresno, Ca.
Background  Adoption of design guidelines for downtown Fresno was originally called for in the 1990 Central Area Plan.  Comprehensive Downtown Fresno Design Guidelines are needed to encourage increased private investment and to support existing and proposed major public improvement projects.  Design guidelines can serve as tools for creating or maintaining distinct neighborhood and district identities within the Fresno Central Area (known as the downtown triangle); improve the quality of private improvements; and help a district achieve an integrated design over time.
SECTION 2
SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED
Scope of Work The selected Consultant is expected to provide expertise, advice and services pertaining to the developing design guidelines for Downtown Fresno, Ca.  As such, the City will expect the Consultant to provide the following elements.
•A mapping study of existing plans and district boundaries within downtown Fresno •Identify architectural themes and historic properties within each identified district. •Develop specific design guidelines for the Fulton Mall within the Downtown area to include but not limited to:
•Design Criteria: Recommendations for maintaining, enhancing and rehabilitating buildings and the physical environment of the Fulton Mall. •Storefront Guidelines: Identify typical storefront features and types located on the Fulton Mall and recommend façade improvements and appropriate building rehabilitation. •Historic Building Guidelines: Include a step-by-step approach to building rehabilitation consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards. •New Construction Guidelines / Mixed-use Guidelines: Include guidelines for new construction infill and mixed-use development, including provisions for adaptive reuse of an existing building. •Maintenance: Recommendations for exterior maintenance, cleaning and rehabilitation techniques for the varying architectural materials and features. •Case Studies: Illustrative examples of how the Design Guidelines could be applied to specific buildings on the Fulton Mall.
The City expects the Consultant to detail a specific Scope of Services to be provided in their proposal.
Contact For more information contact Trai Her at 559-621-8003 or trai.her@fresno.gov.
Request for Qualifications — Consultant Services
Water Recreation Facility Feasibility Study The City of Pleasant Hill, Iowa Submittal Deadline: September 19, 2008
COMMUNITY PROFILE The City of Pleasant Hill, Iowa is a relatively young community experiencing the challenges of serving a fast growing population.  Pleasant Hill is located directly adjacent to the east corporate limits of the City of Des Moines and sits at the intersection of the U.S. Highway 65 bypass and U.S. Highway 163.  The City was incorporated in 1956 and experienced modest growth for several decades but is now experiencing a large influx of new residents through new development as well as some annexation.  The current population is estimated to be 8,000+ residents.  In 2005, the City performed a special census that moved the population count to 6,961 persons from the 2000 Census figure of 5,070.  The initial growth during this period was primarily housing, but the City is now seeing new commercial building to serve the growing population.  Data from Iowa State University shows that total retail sales in Pleasant Hill have increased more than 91 percent since 2000; this increase is the 7th-highest growth for cities during that period in the State.  More recently, the City experienced total retail sales growth of more than 15 percent in the last fiscal year.
To accommodate the needs and desires of a changing and growing demographic of young families and children, the City's Park and Recreation Commission recently performed a survey of residents regarding a wide range of recreation and quality of life issues.  The survey showed support for a variety of programming and physical improvements with the development of some form of water recreation facility identified as the most desired new facility or improvement.  The City is in the midst of constructing and planning for many new capital improvement projects including an outdoor sports and recreation campus. Further information regarding the costs, feasibility, and programming of a potential aquatic center are needed. The next step in the City's process is to retain the services of a qualified consultant to identify the community's needs, opportunities, and challenges for the development and long-term operation of a water recreation facility.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION The City of Pleasant Hill does not currently provide any public water recreation and is not aware of any private water recreation facilities currently in operation within the City.  At this time, there is significant public interest in the development of a new facility to meet the aquatic needs of the City.  The City is interested in reviewing the possibilities to meet those needs while considering the opportunities to capture usage by residents from outside the community as well as the challenges the community might face from outside neighboring competition.   Pleasant Hill is part of the greater Des Moines metropolitan area that contains many opportunities for water recreation.  The nearby communities of Des Moines, Altoona, and Ankeny all have municipally operated outdoor aquatic centers.  Adventureland, a destination scale private amusement park located in Altoona, has recently added high end water park features to its operations and a long time privately operated water park in Pleasant Hill has recently ceased operations.
This project is envisioned to provide assistance to the City in evaluating the current and future needs for a new water recreation facility with the following project objectives and goals:
• Provide guidance regarding current trends, programming elements, and amenities. • Identify the market conditions to include potential users and competition to recommend an appropriately sized water recreation facility. • Consider the form and potential partners for a new water recreation facility — i.e. indoor vs. outdoor, other public or private partners with shared interests. • Develop cost estimates and potential phasing for a new aquatic facility. • Evaluate an existing water park facility in the community for potential adaptive re-use.  • Determine specific recommendations for immediate, short and long-term action items. • Integrate the public and stakeholders in the planning process. • Provide recommendations regarding potential locations through the development of site selection criteria and consider the possibilities for the project acting as a catalyst for redevelopment of an existing site or to spur new construction in an undeveloped portion of the community.
The specific components of the project will be negotiated with the selected consultant and the City is considering proceeding with the study in two phases.  The first phase would take the City to a point where cost estimates and site selection criteria are developed; the second phase would involve the review and selection of a potential site.
More information is available on the City's Website www.ci.pleasant-hill.ia.us or by contacting:
J. Benjamin Champ, AICP, ASLA Community Development Director City of Pleasant Hill 5160 Maple Drive, Suite A Pleasant Hill, IA 50327 (P) 515-309-9460 (F) 515-262-9570
Request for Proposals — Consultant Services
Methodology to Re-write Redmond Zoning & Subdivision Codes (Redmond Community Development Guide) The City of Redmond, Washington Submittal Deadline: September 18, 2008
Purpose The Redmond Planning and Community Development Department is inviting qualified planning consultants, urban designers and multi-disciplinary firms to submit a proposal to provide professional services for the purpose of evaluating the various land use regulatory methodologies and alternatives appropriate for updating the City's existing zoning and subdivision ordinances — known as the Redmond Community Development Guide (RCDG).
The primary scope of work for this RFP is to evaluate the latest regulatory techniques employed in the writing of zoning codes to allow the City staff, once this first phase is complete, to produce a document that is reduced in size, easier to understand, simpler to administer, and clearly structured to promote achievement of adopted policies.  This will result in a clearer understanding of the City's land use goals, development regulations, environmental standards, design criteria, and review process.
Existing Situation The City completed major updates of the Redmond Community Development Guide (RCDG) in 1978, and in 1996.  Since that time, the City has amended the code on numerous occasions to keep up with State mandates, the changing goals and vision of the City, as well as issues of concern to the community. The code in use on a daily basis by staff and the public is the result of several years of amendments that are at times unrelated, confusing, lengthy and/or contradictory.  It is difficult to read, has conflicting standards, and has complex procedures.  These attributes contribute to a difficult and confusing process for those who want to develop property in Redmond, and for citizens who want to participate in the review process.  The code is in need of a comprehensive restructuring to update and improve overall clarity, conciseness and usability.  The need for this project has been voiced by a wide range of interested groups that include residents, developers, representatives of the business community, City Council members, Planning Commissioners, and City staff.  Interest in undertaking this work has been reinforced recently through feedback from the community and Council members.
Deliverables The consulting firm shall provide, at a minimum, the items listed below.  This list is not meant to be all inclusive.  However it is expected that responses focus primarily on deliverable #1, with deliverables 2-5 being considered secondary elements of the proposal. Consulting firms have the opportunity to distinguish themselves through the description of deliverables in this proposal.
•A written report outlining the recommended zoning method(s) best suited to the needs, goals, and character of the City based upon:
•A comprehensive assessment and analysis of the City's existing RCDG, including the most recent and proposed amendments, to determine which of the available methodologies are best suited for the rewrite and restructuring of the RCDG. •A two-phase interview process with selected City staff, senior City management, elected and appointed City officials, members of the business and development community, and citizen and agency stakeholders to help the City define the most important qualities that the zoning code should exemplify. •A thorough review of the various land use regulatory methodologies and strategies available, including an evaluation of each method, its benefits and challenges. •A survey and analysis of various cities of similar size, character and/or demographics that are nationally recognized as having used the various methodologies, together with an analysis of the benefits and challenges that each city has experienced in implementing their chosen methodology. •Principles to guide the selection of appropriate land use management methods that are defined through the processes noted above.  These principles should be used in guiding the recommendation.
•Specific recommendations on how to:
•Streamline and improve regulations pertaining to development review and approval processes, given the requirements and provisions of Revised Code of Washington Section 36.70B (Regulatory Reform) •Integrate sustainability initiatives into the RCDG
• Specific recommendations on developing a work program strategy, including work program sequencing  and prioritization of issues/elements, for staff to successfully accomplish the comprehensive re-write inclusive of the items listed above as well as:
•How to successfully transition from the current RCDG framework to the new methodology/methodologies recommended for the re-write; •Integration and coordination of the various regulatory documents/approval procedures; •Recommendations to retain, amend or discard sections of the code as necessary; and recommendations of new sections needed to improve clarity and user-friendliness; •Recommendations as to how to structure the public participation and involvement process during the comprehensive re-write of the RCDG to successfully educate and involve the public in a meaningful and effective way; •Additional items identified by the consultant and City staff either before or during the course of the work.
...