Draft Plans, Projects and Developmental Codes

Request for Proposals

RFP 2024-001

Comprehensive Plan 2026 Periodic Update

Addendum 8/28/2024

1. Pg. 12 of the RFP outlines a set of deliverables, but they refer to the Climate Element work. I’m sure it was an oversight, but wanted to confirm that there were no Deliverables (Comp Plan) that we’re not already ID’d on pgs. 10-11.

For everyone’s convenience the RFP included the deliverable schedule of the Climate Grant work so that it was easier for a responding firm to develop a scope which included folding the work of the Climate consultant into the comp plan.

2. Are you looking to contract with firm located outside of WA?

We have had proposals in the past both in the immediate area and through the state. The selection will be based on the criteria in the RFP.

3. Page 6 of the RFP requests a “description of the work program including a description of deliverable activities and pricing by deliverable under Attachment A”. I’ve learned from the Department of Commerce PUG grant administration, that they would like PUG scope / budget deliverables not to exceed 30% of the total fiscal year budget. Would you like our proposal to address Commerce’s budget constraint, by breaking down deliverable budgets to meet this requirement (e.g. no deliverable more than $18,750)?

Yes. We just learned last week of the DOC policy and we appreciate the pivot to address this.

4. Page 2 of the RFP asks proposers to “Conduct a review of all Comprehensive Plan provisions, and if needed, revise the mandatory and optional elements consistent with Attachment A: Scope, Budget, and Deliverables.” Could you elaborate on this, and whether there the City has already identified possible revisions?

The housing allocation by income and other requirements of the GMA will necessitate updates to the Housing and Land Use Elements. For example, the new density requirements should be included in an updated land quantity and market analysis. There are likely other areas of the Plan that are impacted by the new legislation as well as integrating the work of the other consultants for Climate, Utilities and Transportation.

5. Page 5 refers to the “Market Analysis Study previously performed by Leland and Associates”. Can you confirm this is referring to Leland’s work in conjunction with the City’s Industrial Sub-Area Plan.

The 2023 plan relied upon a new Market Analysis prepared by Leland in 2021 and 2022. This analysis was for the greater West Plains area with detail on Airway Heights.

6. Page 8 list minimum qualifications which include “Are qualified to conduct business in the State of Washington and the City of Airway And, “If a corporation or limited liability company, it must be in good standing with the Washington Secretary of State.” How should proposers provide confirmation of these items? Would an up-to-date business license and/or SOS registration suffice? Or, are there other items that would verify these?

Evidence of an existing Washington State and Airway Heights Business license, or ability to receive them would be sufficient with information regarding the current registration as a business operating in the State of Washington.