Back
City of Pasadena
· City
· California
Rose Bowl Stadium Architectural Services
PROPOSALS DUE
November 05, 2026, 12:00 pm PST
6 days left
WHAT THEY WANT
(Summarized from the RFP)
The Rose Bowl Operating Company (RBOC), on behalf of the City of Pasadena, is seeking a qualified architectural firm to serve as its Venue Architect, a long-term design partner for capital improvements across the Rose Bowl Stadium campus. RBOC's current architectural services agreement expires December 31, 2026, and this procurement establishes the successor agreement so the organization can move quickly when project funding is secured. The selected firm will provide site condition assessments, conceptual planning, pre-design and concept design, schematic design, design development, construction documents, bidding support, and construction administration, with construction cost estimates at each milestone and presentation materials for the RBOC Board. Projects may be delivered by Design-Bid-Build, Construction Manager at Risk, or Design-Build.
DOCUMENT SET
11 documents
· 2.6MB
Request for Proposals — full solicitation.pdf · 1.2MB
Addendum 1 — questions and answers.pdf · 210KB
Attachment A — scope of work and deliverables.pdf · 480KB
Attachment B — cost proposal form.xlsx · 64KB
Sample agreement and insurance requirements.pdf · 560KB
Pre-proposal meeting — sign-in sheet and slides.pdf · 1.8MB
More in the folder — every document opens with a free account.
CHANGES SINCE PUBLISHED
3 changes
WHAT OTHERS ASKED
34 questions answered
▶
The Rose Bowl Lasting Legacy website lists Phase 2 costs of $45M-$50M. Please clarify the following: 1) Does this range represent the all-in cost of Phase 2, including soft costs (design, engineering, permitting, project management, contingency) as well as hard construction costs? If not, please identify what is excluded. 2) Is the $45M-$50M a current estimate or an approved budget?
Pricing · Scope/requirements
▶
Will the City revise the indemnity terms contained in the sample Master Services agreement to comply with the limitations of CA Civil Code 2782.8? We respectfully request the following revisions to align Section 9.13 with the limitations of California Civil Code 2782.8. 9.13 INDEMNITY. 9.13.1 Contractor agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend [Strike: “(even if the allegations are false, fraudulent or groundless),”] to the maximum extent permitted by law, the City, its City Council and each member thereof, its officers, employees, commission members, and representatives, from any and all liability, loss, suits, claims, damages, costs, judgments, and expenses (including [Add: “reasonable”] attorney’s fees and costs of litigation) which [Strike: “in whole or in part result from, arise out of, or are claimed to result from] [Add: “to the extent arising out of, pertaining to, or relating to:”] [Strike: “A. any activity on or use of City's premises or facilities or any performance under this Contract; or”] B. any [Add: “negligent“] acts, errors, or omissions (including, without limitation, professional negligence) of Contractor, its employees, representatives, subcontractors, or agents in connection with the performance of this Contract. [Add: “In no event shall the cost to defend charged to the Contractor exceed the Contractor’s proportionate percentage of fault.”] 9.13.2 This agreement to indemnify includes, but is not limited to, personal injury (including death at any time) and property or other damage (including, but without limitation, contract, tort, patent, copyright, trade secret, or trademark infringement) sustained by any person or persons (including, but not limited to, companies or corporations, Contractor and its employees or agents, and members of the general public). The sole [Add: “or active”] negligence or willful misconduct of City, its employees or agents other than Contractor or Contractor’s subcontractors are excluded from this indemnity agreement.
Award & contract · Compliance
▶
Is the design team expected to coordinate with RBOC's historic preservation consultant or is it required to contract with the RBOC's historic preservation consultant?
Eligibility · Scope/requirements
▶
How much creatively within or beyond the scope, are you looking for? The scope is pretty clear – but we didn’t know if the design team could think/propose beyond the scope or should it be very specific to the scope?
Administrative
▶
The Sample Master Services Contract included with the RFP appears to contain provisions oriented toward construction/public works contracting rather than professional architectural and engineering services. On other City of Pasadena professional services engagements, we have encountered agreement forms tailored specifically to professional design services. Please confirm whether the attached Master Services Contract is the intended form of agreement for the Venue Architect, or whether RBOC/City intends to utilize or issue a Professional Services Agreement appropriate to architectural and engineering services.
Award & contract
▶
For the East / West Seating Improvement Project, should proposers assume a generally uniform replacement seating product throughout the designated pink-seat areas, or should the design scope include evaluation of differentiated seating products, including potential premium or enhanced seating offerings in selected locations? If differentiated seating is to be studied, will RBOC provide market, revenue, pricing, or program criteria to inform the appropriate mix?
Scope/requirements
All 34 answers open with a free account.
ABOUT THIS RFP
RFP number
2026-RFP-0531
Budget
Not Assigned
Published
Entity type
City
State
California
Summarized from the City of Pasadena portal.
HOW TO SUBMIT
Submit proposals electronically through the City of Pasadena's OpenGov eProcurement Portal (https://procurement.opengov.com/portal/pasadena), uploading early enough to be received in the system before the deadline. The proposal is prepared in two separate parts, a Technical Proposal and a Price Proposal, both uploaded to the portal; the Technical Proposal, Additional Data, and Statement of Qualifications together may not exceed 50 pages on 8.5 x 11 pages in 12-point font, and pricing must not appear in the technical part. Required forms include the affirmative action, signature, legal status, and non-collusion forms, disqualification disclosure, conflict of interest, Taxpayer Protection Amendment disclosure, designated representatives, relevant experience form, and fee schedule. Questions go through the portal's Q&A function only; do not contact City employees. A Notice of Interest Form is returned to Nancy Silver, Chief Compliance Officer, nsilver@rosebowlstadium.com, to receive addenda.
NAICS CODES & TAGS
541310
541330
Architecture and Engineering Design
Capital Improvements Planning
ACROSS 539 RFPS
MORE THAN
RFPs changed their terms while active.
25 days is the median window from publication to due date; day 16 is the median first change for the 113 that changed. 539 RFPs published and due: July 23 - Sept. 30, 2026.
Bid on five RFPs, and the odds are better than two in three that at least one changes its terms before the deadline. Larger firms have staff tracking this. Start free and you’ll have it at your fingertips too.
Free to open
free account required
A free account opens this RFP in full, starting with the rest of the description above — and 5 RFPs a week, no card.
Changes since published
3 changes filed since it went out, each one summarized, so a date or a requirement never shifts without you knowing.
What others asked
34 questions the government entity answered in writing — the answers bind.
The documents
The set as published, in one folder or as direct links to the document.
Matched to you
The RFPs that fit the NAICS codes and tags you save; open up to 5 a week in full.
