SLED Opportunity · CALIFORNIA · CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON
AI Summary
The City of American Canyon seeks professional design services for a new 0.7-acre neighborhood park along Melvin Road. The project includes park design concepts and construction documents preparation. Proposals are due by April 3, 2026.
The City of American Canyon is seeking professional design services for the planning and design of a new neighborhood park on a vacant City-owned parcel along Melvin Road. The approximately 0.7-acre site is intended to be developed as a neighborhood-scale park providing recreational amenities and gathering spaces for the surrounding residential community.
The project site is bounded by Melvin Road to the west, the Napa Cove Apartments to the east, residential properties to the north, and existing City tennis courts and a small playground to the south. The site is currently unimproved and generally flat, with a grade differential along the northern property line where adjacent residential properties are at a lower elevation.
The City intends to retain a qualified consultant to prepare park design concepts and complete construction documents (PS&E) suitable for public bidding. Construction services will be procured under a separate contract.
Existing adjacent infrastructure, including sidewalks, lighting, and a stormwater pump station, will remain in place and shall be accommodated within the park design.
Each qualified Proposer is to submit a proposal in conformity with the terms of this Request for Proposal ("RFP") by the deadline below ("Proposal"). The Proposer selected by the City pursuant to the terms of this RFP and the City's contracting procedures, if any is selected, is referred to herein as "Consultant."
SYNONYMOUS TERMS
Unless the use indicates otherwise, as used throughout this bid and its attachments, the following terms are synonymous:
a. Firm, Consultant, Supplier, Vendor, Contractor, Successful Bidder, Offeror
b. Purchase Order, Contract, Agreement
c. Services, Work, Scope, and Project
d. Pricing proposal/sheet, Cost proposal/sheet, Rate table/sheet
Please use the See What Changed link to view all the changes made by this addendum.
Information and completeness of a Proposal Transmittal Letter in conformity with the requirements in the RFP.
Qualifications and experience of the Proposer and members of the team that may be assigned tasks within the Scope of Work.
Ability to complete the Scope of Work, as described in the Proposal, including experience completing projects for public agencies similar to the City.
Operational and organizational approach to complete the Scope of Work.
Ability to accept the City’s Standard Contract with little to no changes.
Cost-effectiveness to complete the Scope of Work. Note that the City’s evaluation process is intended to identify the Proposer with the best combination of attributes; cost is not the exclusive attribute and the lowest Proposer is not guaranteed to be offered a Contract.
Please confirm that you have read and met all of the Proposal Requirements.
Please enter the full legal company name and any other business names related to this proposal registered with the Secretary of State to conduct business in the State of California.
Please confirm your form of business.
Please provide your Contractors License #, if applicable.
Please upload all of the following Proposal Documents here and in the following order, WITHOUT any Cost Proposal documents.
Please upload ONLY your Cost Proposal documents here. The Cost Proposal must be uploaded separately from the rest of the proposal.
The bidder acknowledges that a Cost Proposal must be completed using the electronic pricing table provided in the City’s e-Procurement Portal and that this information will be kept separate from the rest of the response. The bidder further acknowledges that all pricing and related costs will be based solely on the information entered in the electronic pricing table. The City will not be responsible for any errors, omissions, or discrepancies contained in any additional or supplemental pricing documents submitted by the bidder.
Please upload your entire Proposal response documents here, including any pricing information.
If the Proposer seeks any contract modifications, they must upload a redlined version of the contract provided in the Attachments, clearly identifying the specific language at issue and the proposed revisions in a Word document.
If no modifications are submitted, this question may be skipped and no upload is required. In the absence of any submission, the Proposer will be deemed to have accepted the Contract terms in full and to be capable of performing the Scope of Work, along with all related managerial responsibilities, without reservation.
The Proposer acknowledges the City's insurance requirements and endorsements as outlined in the Insurance Requirements (exhibit C) in Attachments. Any Proposal unable to meet the Insurance requirements shall be considered nonresponsive and ineligible for Contract award.
Proposer shall be required to provide proof of requisite insurance prior to Contract execution. Failure to do so shall be just cause for forfeiture of the Proposal guaranty and/or rejection of the Proposal.
The City performs a SAM.GOV verification check to confirm debarment status. Please download the attached document, complete the form, and upload.
A unique entity identifier is requested for contracts greater than $25,000 or funded with Federal dollars. Your entity may register for a unique entity identifier on SAM.GOV at the following link https://sam.gov/content/entity-registration.
For all other proposers, the completed form is sufficient.
Proposers responding to federally funded projects must register on SAM.gov and provide proof of registration.
On April 4, 2022, the unique entity identifier used across the federal government changed from the DUNS Number to the Unique Entity ID (generated by SAM.gov). Please supply SAM.gov Unique Entity ID number.
If you have applied for your SAM.gov registration, but have not yet been issued a SAM.gov Unique Entity ID number, please type "Applied." https://sam.gov/content/entity-registration
For proposers responding to federally funded projects exceeding $100k, please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
Please upload additional documentation required by this RFP here as well as any additional documentation that you feel would be a value to your submitted proposal. For example: Awards, Licenses, etc.
Please provide the name, title and email address of the authorized contract signer.
Please provide the estimated value of this project. Please note that this should be the total value of the contract, including initial term, but not including any optional extensions.
Please confirm if you would like to state the estimated project value on the solicitation.
Please indicate if this has already been included in the fiscal year budget.
If this project is expecting to come in over the Council approved budget, please provide a general estimate of additional funding that may be needed.
Please provide the cost center (fund-activity-object code) intended to fund this project. Please note that this must be completed as we perform review of the solicitation and any legal costs related to review will also be billed to this cost center.
Please indicate the work that will be provided under this project.
Please select the contract template that corresponds with your services and funding.
Please select the contract template that best suits your funding source.
Procurements over $50k that were not approved by Council in the Fiscal Year budget, or Procurements surrounding policy considerations will require Council approval.
If procurement is over $50k or a new request that was not approved as a line item in the Fiscal Year budget, please indicate the anticipated Council date.
If this was approved in the Fiscal Year budget, you may skip this question.
Please provide the name of any Grant funding that will be applied to this project and attach to the solicitation in Scope of Work
Please forward any Grant documentation to the Purchasing Manager.
Is this project subject to LAPM requirements?
Will this project use Federal Funds or provide a City Match to Federal Funds?
Please indicate any Grant Funds or funding requirements for this project.
Please advise if this is a Federally assisted Department of Transportation project, and subject to Disadvantaged Business Enterprise requirements.
Please note that an independent cost estimate must be completed for any Federal projects over $200k. Please save a copy of the independent cost estimate to the attachments page as an internal attachment.
Federally funded projects require bid advertisement.
Please confirm that the project must be advertised as required and ensure proof of publication is included as an the internal attachments in OpenGov to be saved to the procurement file.
Davis-Bacon Federal Prevailing wage rates are required on Federal projects and a copy of the wages must be attached to the solicitation at time of release. 10 days PRIOR to close date, you must check to see if the wages have been updated. If they have been updated, a new copy of the revised rates must be posted in an addendum and included in the contract before execution.
The payment of federal prevailing wage rates on federal-aid contracts is derived from the Davis-Bacon Act of 1931 and is prescribed by 23 USC 113. Contractors and subcontractors must pay laborers and mechanics employed directly upon the site of the work at least the locally prevailing wages (including fringe benefits) for the work performed.
Please confirm you will upload the applicable federal prevailing wage documents for inclusion in the solicitation.
The federal prevailing wage rates are available directly from the System for Award Management (SAM) Home Page at https://sam.gov/content/wage-determinations and may be uploaded to the attachments section of the solicitation or released as an addendum.
More information regarding Davis Bacon can be found below: https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/government-contracts/construction/faq
The non-Federal entity must take all necessary affirmative steps to assure that minority businesses, women's business enterprises, and labor surplus area firms are used when possible. (2 C.F.R. § 200.321
The following affirmative steps must be taken to include and solicit small and minority businesses, women’s business enterprises, and labor surplus area firms?
Please indicate which steps will be taken and save all documentation.
Would you like one response document, or separate proposal and pricing documents? Please note that for sealed bids, cost proposals should be kept separate and can be opened at any time.
Please indicate if you would like to use the system electronic pricing table for costs to be completed by vendor and compared automatically. The system has the ability to auto tabulate for easy comparison and ensure there are no errors in manual calculations or copy and paste.
This is useful if you have items for comparison that can be organized by tasks, items, or any other comparable metric. Excel tables can also be uploaded using the system generated column formatting.
If you do not use the electronic pricing table, Cost proposal documents may be uploaded separately by Vendor and reviewed outside of the system.
Is this a Public Works project or project subject to prevailing wages?
CA prevailing wage applies to the “Construction, alteration, demolition, installation, or repair work done under contract and paid in whole or in part out of public funds” or a “public work.”
DIR web site: https://www.dir.ca.gov/public-works/publicworks.html
If so, additional language will populate related to use of Virtual Project Manager software.
Will this project be for landscaping services, janitorial services, or food service products? If so, additional language must be included in both the solicitation and subsequent contract to abide by SB1383 requirements.
Please list your proposal page limit in the following format:
twenty-five (25)
Q (Available Documents): Has a boundary or topographic survey and/or geotechnical report already been done for the project site?
A: The City does not have a boundary survey, topographic survey, or geotechnical report for the project site.
Q (No subject): Under Section 4.3, Proposer's Mandatory Qualifications and Experience, Item C (Public Agency Experience) asks whether the proposer has any experience working for the City of West Sacramento. I just wanted to confirm whether this is a typo and if it should instead refer to the City of American Canyon.
A: Yes, Under Section 4.3, Proposer's Mandatory Qualifications and Experience, Item C (Public Agency Experience) were the question asks whether the proposer has any experience working for the City of West Sacramento It should say City of American Canyon. I have issued Addendum #1 to correct that.
Q (No subject): Is new site lighting desired?
A: No, there is no site lighting anticipated
Q (Electrical): Is new electrical service anticipated to be needed?
A: Yes, for irrigation
Q (Outreach): Is any community engagement anticipated for this project?
A: No, the RFP does not identify a formal community engagement component.
Q (No subject): Has CEQA compliance already been completed for the project, or will the consultant be expected to support environmental review or documentation?
A: The City would like to clarify its previous response regarding CEQA compliance. Yes, CEQA compliance has already been completed for the project No additional environmental review is anticipated at this time, and the consultant will not be expected to prepare CEQA documentation
Q (No subject): Please confirm whether any improvements within the public right‑of‑way are anticipated. If ROW improvements are included as part of the project, should they be documented as a separate improvement plan set for permit review, separate from the on‑site improvements?
A: Improvements within the public right-of-way are not anticipated as part of this project. Existing adjacent infrastructure will remain in place and shall be accommodated within the park design
Q (No subject): Are the shade structures and pergola stye park entry features intended to be pre-engineered items or custom structures?
A: The RFP does not prescribe whether these elements are to be pre-engineered or custom. Proposers should refer to Scope of Work – Anticipated Park Improvements (Page 6) and develop recommendations consistent with the project budget
Q (Professional Services Agreement): Will the City consider accepting revisions to the Professional Services Agreement, specifically regarding: a. Indemnification language b. Prevailing wages do not apply
A: Proposers should refer to Proposal Requirements – Proposal Transmittal Letter (Page 9) and Standard Contract Information (Page 13). Any requested revisions to the City’s standard contract, including indemnification provisions, must be submitted in redline as part of the proposal for City consideration.
Q (No subject): Is it preferred that the A. Proposal Transmittal Letter, B Proposer's Mandatory Qualifications and Experience and the C. Technical Project Approach be uploaded as one combined PDF or three separate PDFs?
A: Proposers may submit these documents as a single combined PDF or as separate PDFs. All required components must be included and clearly organized in accordance with the Proposal Requirements (Page 8–9).
Q (Survey/Boundary): Does the City desire the Consultant to provide the topographical survey and does the City need a boundary survey for the site?
A: The City has not prepared a topographic or boundary survey for this project. As described in the Scope of Work (Page 6), proposers should include any surveying services they deem necessary to complete the design.
Q (Storm Drainage): Where is the drainage lift station and can we take drainage directly to the lift station or is treatment required prior to the lift station?
A: A stormwater pump station is located adjacent to the project site; however, it is part of a private system associated with the Napa Cove development and is not available for project use. Public storm drainage facilities, including an existing drop inlet adjacent to the site within the public right-of-way, are available to receive runoff. Proposers should refer to the Introduction – Summary (Page 1) and Scope of Work (Page 6). The selected consultant will be responsible for evaluating site conditions and coordinating with the City to determine appropriate drainage design and any required treatment measures.
Q (Budget): Confirming that the $1.35m is for planning and design.
A: No. The $1.35 million represents the design and construction budget for the project. This amount is intended to inform the consultant’s design approach and cost-conscious decision-making.
Q (Grading): Does the City want to provide a level park area, which may require retaining walls or would the City be open to naturally grading the site to accommodate the existing grades?
A: The RFP does not prescribe a specific grading approach. Proposers should refer to Section 3.2 – Anticipated Park Improvements (Page 5), which identifies a retaining wall along the northern property line to address grade separation. The consultant will be responsible for evaluating site conditions and developing an appropriate grading design consistent with the project scope and budget.
Q (Construction Services): In the scope of services, the CIty states "limited support", what does that mean to the City? Would consultant complete any site visits during construction?
A: “Limited support” refers to the services described in Section 3 – Scope of Work, Limited Construction Phase Design Support (Page 8), which include review of contractor submittals, responses to Requests for Information (RFIs), and site visits for design clarification if requested by the City. The level of effort for these services may vary depending on contractor means and methods and the clarity of the construction documents. As such, a fixed quantity of site visits is not specified.
Q (Questionnaire): In the City's Proposer Questionnaire, it asks for the CSLB number. As this is a design RFP, this is not applicable, does the City want to change this to LATC number?
A: No change is required. As noted in the Proposer Questionnaire, the CSLB number is requested “if applicable.” Proposers should provide any relevant professional licenses or certifications as part of their qualifications in accordance with the Proposal Requirements – Proposer’s Mandatory Qualifications and Experience
Q (No subject): Will the City provide a topographic survey, boundary survey, and geotechnical investigation/report, including recommendations for subgrade preparation and drainage requirements associated with synthetic turf areas, or should the consultant include these services in the proposal? Also, if the geotechnical investigation/report will be provided, can you confirm whether it may occur after project initiation with coordination between the consultant team and geotechnical engineer to establish design criteria appropriate to the project scope?
A: The City has not prepared a topographic survey, boundary survey, or geotechnical investigation for this project. Proposers should include any services they deem necessary to complete the design. These services are typically required to support design development and should be considered by the consultant as part of their proposed approach. Proposers should refer to the Scope of Work (Page 6).
Q (No subject): Is off-street parking required for this project? If not, should the consultant assume any accessible parking or ADA-compliant access improvements are required within or adjacent to the site?
A: Off-street parking is not included as part of this project. The project is limited to the design of the park within the existing parcel and is intended to connect to existing adjacent infrastructure.
Q (No subject): Can the consultant assume that a new electrical service will be required, or should the proposal be based on extending or utilizing existing electrical infrastructure? Also, will the project include site lighting (e.g., pathway, security, or parking/interface lighting), and if so, what level of lighting should be assumed?
A: No new site lighting is included as part of this project. Electrical needs for the project are anticipated to be minimal and limited to items such as irrigation control. An existing electrical service is located near the adjacent tennis courts and may be utilized; however, this will require coordination with the utility provider.
Q (No subject): Are there any specific stormwater management requirements (e.g., on-site retention, treatment, or compliance with regional permits) that must be incorporated into the design?
A: The selected consultant will be responsible for evaluating site conditions and incorporating stormwater management measures as required to comply with applicable local, regional, and state regulations.
Q (No subject): Can the City provide any information on existing conditions or constraints along the northern property line, including adjacent grades, easements, or fencing requirements?
A: Available information regarding existing conditions is limited to what is described in the RFP. The site includes a grade differential along the northern property line where adjacent residential properties are at a lower elevation. Proposers should refer to Section 3.2: Anticipated Park Improvements (Page 5), which identifies a retaining wall and fencing along the northern property line to address this condition. The selected consultant will be responsible for verifying existing conditions, including grades, property limits, and any applicable easements, as part of the design process.
Q (No subject): Does the City have preferred manufacturers, performance standards, or maintenance requirements for synthetic turf systems (e.g., infill type, drainage performance, shock pad requirements)?
A: The consultant shall recommend materials and system specifications that are consistent with durability, safety, drainage performance, and long-term maintenance considerations as part of the design process.
Q (No subject): Please confirm the scope of work is limited to the APN 058-362-020-000, identified on the Melvin Park Exhibit, and does not include any improvements to the existing park across Roja Lane.
A: Confirmed
Q (No subject): Will the City consider relevant projects that are designed, but not yet constructed, as part of Proposers experience?
A: Proposers may include relevant projects that are designed but not yet constructed; however, experience with projects that have been constructed will be considered more favorably as it demonstrates the ability to deliver complete, buildable designs.
Q (No subject): Will tab pages and cover pages be included in the page limit?
A: Yes. Tab pages, cover pages, and all other submitted materials are included in the overall page limit. Proposers should refer to the General Proposal Format Requirements (Page 11).
Q (No subject): Will the City of American Canyon provide utility locating report, or should the proposer carry a line item for this?
A: The City has not prepared a utility locating report for this project. Proposers should include any utility investigation or locating services they deem necessary to complete the design. Proposers should refer to the Section 3 – Scope of Work (Page 6).
Q (MIG Question 4): What is the anticipated height and extent of the retaining wall along the northern boundary? Will the Consultant be expected to provide structural design for the wall, or will this be performed by others?
A: The selected consultant will be responsible for evaluating site conditions and developing the design, including any required structural design, as part of the project scope.
Q (MIG Question 6): Does the City have a geotechnical report for the Cove Apartments adjacent to the site?
A: Yes
Q (MIG Question 13): Are the design fees included in the construction fees?
A: The $1.35 million represents a planning-level estimate for the overall project. Design services are being procured under this RFP and will be funded as part of the total project budget. Proposers should develop their approach with consideration of the overall project budget.
Q (MIG Question 12): Will the project require Planning Commission or City Council approvals?
A: The specific approval process has not been determined and will be evaluated by the City as the project advances. Any required approvals will be handled by the City.
Q (MIG Question 8): How flexible is the program described in section 3.2 Are all the listed elements expected or is there openness to adjusting scope to align with the available budget?
A: The elements identified in Section 3.2 – Anticipated Park Improvements are intended to inform the design and are not prescriptive. The consultant will work with the City during the design process to refine the program and develop a design that aligns with the project budget and priorities.
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.