7-IFB-0657-DOT Addendum No. 1.pdf

IFB-0657-TPD: Addendum No. 1 Page 1 of 2

Addendum No. 1 for RFP-0657-TPD

DESIGN SERVICES FOR DISTRICT 4 SUBDIVISION SITES 1 AND 6

Dated September 22, 2026

Question & Answers:

1. Section I. E. (Design Timeline) and Section III (Scope of Work) both state services must be completed within 360 days of Notice to Proceed. However, Section IV. D.

(Completion Time) states services shall be completed within 180 days. Can you clarify the timeframe since it will affect our schedule and current workload narrative?

• The correct timeframe is 360 days from the issuance of a Notice to Proceed.

2. The cover page, scope of work, and project title all reference District 4 Subdivision

Sites 1 and 6. However, Section I. C. (Location) states "The project is located within District Three of the Community." This is likely leftover language from a prior RFP, but we just wanted to note the inconsistency and seek clarification that this is indeed District 4.

• Reference to District Three is leftover language from a prior RFP. The project is located in District Four.

3. The RFP does not specify a page limit for the proposal. Can you please confirm whether any such restrictions apply?

• There is no page limit.

4. The RFP does not specify a required file naming convention for documents uploaded to

Bonfire (e.g., Proposal, Exhibits A–G, Licenses/Certifications, W9, Insurance Certificates). Can you please confirm if a specific naming format is preferred to ensure proper identification during evaluation?

• There is no specific naming format.

5. Is archaeological data recovery for Site 6 being completed directly by Gila River Indian

Community Cultural Resources Management Program, or should the selected consultant include archaeological consultant services and associated costs within their scope and fee proposal?

• In November of 2018, GRIC-CRMP provided reports for both subdivision sites. No additional archaeological consultant services are needed.

IFB-0657-TPD: Addendum No. 1 Page 2 of 2

6. Please confirm whether the selected consultant's scope includes design of all offsite utility and roadway improvements necessary to serve the subdivisions, including sewer force mains, waterline extensions, roadway widening, turn lanes, and utility upgrades beyond the subdivision boundaries.

• Scope shall include design of all offsite utilities and roadway improvements, etc.

7. Will Gila River Indian Community DOT and BIA require formal Traffic Impact Studies for Sites 1 and 6, and should preparation of these studies be included in the consultant's scope and fee proposal?

• Yes

8. Has Gila River Indian Community DPW formally confirmed available water and wastewater system capacity for both subdivision sites, or should the selected consultant perform full utility capacity analyses and modeling as part of the design effort?

• Analysis and modeling will need to be a part of the design.

9. Please clarify anticipated Community, District Four Executive Committee, and stakeholder presentation requirements throughout design. Should consultant fees include attendance and presentations beyond project management meetings identified in the RFP?

• Yes

10. Will Gila River Indian Community lead coordination with the Bureau of Indian Affairs for encroachment permits, or is preparation and processing of BIA permit applications expected to be provided by the selected consultant?

• Selected firm to lead coordination with BIA