HomeMy WebLinkAboutR08-Redevelopment Agency
e
e
e
1
. DEVELOPIIDT DBPARl1'1IS1U OF t
CITY OF SAB BBRlWIDIBO
REOUIST FOR C<MfiSSION/COUNCIL ACTION
From: KENNETH J. HENDERSON
Executive Director
Subject:
CONSULTANT SBIlVIClS FOR
lIT. VIRRON CORRIDOR - REQUEST
FOR QUALIFICATIONS
Date: JANUARY 4, 1991
Synopsis of Previous Commission/Council/Committee Action:
On November 19, 1990 the Community Development Commission granted conceptual approval
of the preparation of a specific plan, authorized staff to initiate an economic
feasibility study and negotiate and recommend contracts for the provision of developer
consultation services, development of a specific plan and provision of environmental
review services for the Mt. Vernon corridor between 4th and 9th Streets.
Recommended Motion:
(COBEUIlity Development Coamission)
That the Community Development Commission authorize staff to:
1.
Assemble team of consultants for the provision of all Mt. Vernon Avenue
Corridor project services and, further, that this assemblage be carried out
without regard to team affiliations and configurations as are currently
represented in each proposal.
2.
Where legally appropriate and otherwise allowable negotiate directly with
providers of subcomponent services.
3. Negotiate and recommend contracts for the provision of financial, relocation
and engineering consulting services on the basis of the RFQ as issued on August
10, 1990 for the referenced project.
~
kUI.l'IJS".r1l J. IIB1IDB ON, Executive Director
Development Department
Contact Person: Ken Henderson/Susan Morales
Phone: 5065/5081
Project Area: Mt. Vernon
Ward(s): 1 & 3
Supporting Data Attached: Staff Reoort: Attachments
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount: $N/A
Source:
N/A
Budget Authority: N/A
Coamission/Council Notes:
SMM:kak:35l0H:
f'
Agenda Item No.
.
.
.
1-:
.
.
DEVELOPMBBT DBPAR:I:Pu5Ir.r
STAFF REPORT
Consultant Services - "t. Vernon Corridor RFO
Barlroronnll
On November 19, 1990 the Community Development Commission took action to authorize
staff to perform certain functions relative to the procurement of consultant services
for development of the Mt. Vernon Avenue Corridor between 4th and 9th Streets.
Authority vested in staff would allow for the finalization of the procurement process,
in that:
a. Staff would enter into a contract for services relating to market feasibility;
b. Staff would negotiate with providers of various services relating to project
development and make recommendations to the Commission for acquisition of such
services. During the ensuing period, staff and Val Mahabir (consultant
retained for purposes of coordinating the process and negotiating contracts)
have met and begun negotiation with each of the four consulting firms that were
determined to be finalist and the firm of Nate1son Company. Negotiations with
the aforementioned four finalist firms centered around the acquisition of
developer consultation services, services for development of a specific plan
and environmental review services. Each of the four finalists included
providers of various subcomponent services as part of each respective proposal.
Authori" to negotiate direct1v for subcomDonent services
Authority is sought for negotiation with providers of subcomponent services. This
would allow staff to mix and match those services or subcomponent services where such
action proves to be most advantageous to the City. A paradox has occurred in that in
some situations, the subcomponent provider may provide the most appropriate services
for consideration; however the City may not wish to retain the services of the
proposer. Having sought the opinion of Agency Counsel, staff has been advised that
when procuring professional services staff can in fact negotiate directly with the
prime proposer or subcomponent provider, whichever is most advantageous to the City.
(A formal legal opinion is forthcoming.)
Authoritv to Drocure financial. PnDineeriDlt and relocation services
After review of the proposals submitted by the four finalist firms and preliminary
negotiations, it was determined that specific reference must be made to the
acquisition of financial, engineering and relocation services. Consistent with the
authority sought under motion # 1, each of the referenced services (financial,
engineering and relocation) is being provided through subcomponent provider
affiliations in each proposal. Given the provisions of the previous Commission
approved motion (approval date of November 19, 1990) related to this project, it would
seem that staff has no authority for acquiring the above three referenced services.
K.JH: SMM:kak: 35l0H
COMMISSION MEETING
Meeting Date: 1-7-90
.
.
.
.
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT
Request for Qualifications for
Mt. Vernon Corridor
January 4, 1991
Page -2-
.
In order that all requisites services for the project be acquired and assessed
independently, staff first made an overall assessment of the project's viability
including factors and resources necessary to bringing this project to fruition.
Fin.ncial Serrices
It is anticipated that these services would be necessary on two fronts. First, an
overall financing plan for the project should be developed. This plan will recognize
and assess long term financial feasibility of the project area based on incremental
tax returns. Also, the plan would outline sources of financing for various
conceivable situations and where feasible create and construct financing pools.
Secondly, financing services must be provided on a project specific basis. It is
anticipated that consulting services for project specific financing will be needed in
the latter stages of the project.
Relocation Services
This service encompasses two components:
(i) Relocation planning; and
(11)
Actual relocation services.
Current relocation plans of the Department SUfficiently outlines methods of
determining levels of need, compliance measures and requirements, resources,
coordination and other pertinent items. However, the actual relocation services will
require the services of a competent, experienced firm.
~pineerinR Services
This service is necessary for assessing of all infrastructure and traffic circulation
needs of the project. Specific plans and recommendations need to be made regarding
same.
Based upon the foregoing and in concert with the actions taken by the Commission on
November 19, 1990, staff recommends adoption of the form motions.
~~~~OB' Executive
Develo~ent Departaent
Director
KJH: SMM:kak: 35l0H
COMMISSION MEETING
Meeting Date: 1-7-90
.....
.
.
.
..
C'T Y 0 P SAN B E R tf I R D ,! ('l
~,~--.;.:- ~;': :"",k. .f'">
ME)UW~':
'1"0: Dennis Barlow
seniar Assistant City Att.omey
:nul: RHGmI J. ~, ExeoJtive Director
Devel.........it Department
~: REVpr Jal umL 0l'IlmZf RBIM'IVB '10 E. VBRIDI
~ 1IBi,:I1~ Jal QrD-',Tl'ICM'ICHI (1lIQ)
DATE: I)e('-.I-<<r 13, 1990
CX>PIJ!S: city Attorney; Act:in;J Mministrator, mAl Project Manager
JiJrales; consultant; File
I am request:i.rq a legal cpin1cn be develcpd relative to the severability
of 1"-' losers umer the reoetitly cx:n::luded Request far ().lal1ficatims (RPt,l)
far the alxlIIe referenoed project. SeJ:vi.ces to be ~,ired far the dew
l~I.=lIt of the project inclme the followirJJ:
1. Devel.cper OX1sul.tatiat
2. Devel..........4. of a Specific Plan
3. o:n:luc:t:hq of an EnviraJDenta1 Review
4. Eoananic Feasibility stlny
Fc:ur (4) fiDs nspooded to the Department's request far statements of
qualificatims. Each of these falI' (4) respa1Ses in:iicated the use of a
"team awroacn". In I!Iltiiticn, each statement of lJlalificatims iD:luded
the primaxy respc;nient ani other imepement fizms far pravisicn of cer-
tain services. UpJn review of the pl.' ",""""", it be- _u_ ~ that in
order to """l,iTe the best possible services far the project, it may be
ac:lvantageaJs to utilize certain u "I>Ol1e10 of each 1"-' 'lJOE'81, exclusive of
the ~UI,-osal as a whole. 'Dle c;pJeSticn involves bio parts, as follows:
1. Can the O.'l..:tlelit services (~deiit sub.:>..lIIL..actor) be ciJtained
exclusive of tile P. 'V"""" in its entirety?, ani;
2. Can the City ~ in negotiatialS with artj "suJ:xxxrt:ractor" inde-
perxient of the primaxy 1"-' y _r?
Please note that the city, in its recpest far lJlalificaticns, did not en-
courage team buildi.n1, oor did it ad1ress the issue of severability. Also,
none of the 1"-'l-:JSers included statements in their respective 1"-"1:<"",,'"
addressiDJ the issue of severability between the primal:y 1"-' y.>eez' ani
subocntractars. No ~"""""It were refm:ellced with respect to joint ven-
tures as a part of artj of the 1"-' y......,...
, -
<.
.
.
.
~ FlCE)lJJO ..A :1..12-3401
RI"QUEf' ! Jat u:..r.t. oIP!IrcIr llEIM'IVB '10 1r1'. VBIlIar
o.'iUlIWR ~.L" Jat grm.'.TlPICM'ICIIJ (1lI!2)
DeC'-.~.er 13, 1990
Page 2
.
Please call me or Mr. Val Mahabir at extensicn 5065 shculd ycu require
actiiti.cna1 infomatiat or clarification.
..J!!.~:t.. . ____
~t
KJH:VM:lab
9012-3401
1
.
e
tit
tit
~TY
.
OF SAIC BIRICARDINO
t89JII.DllIIDrI IZI'ARDIDU'
III!XIWaIC
'10: R9lNEIH J. 1IE2'lImlSCN, I:Ic8cutive DJrectar
Devel~at. Department
FR:H: Val Mahabir
EoalCluic Devel~.t Olnsultant
SUBJECT: Hl'. 'VERlDII.VIlIJB OA<wu~ B:B9BIDRIDD' RO'JIC'1'
twm: Dec-.I.er 17, 1990
CX>PIES: File
I have reviewed all four (4) ~. ".~ that 1IIIeZe received in ~.. to
the Devel___1t DepIrtment: p..q-n: far OJalificat.1a18 (RllQ) t....~ August
10, 1990. '!be RFQ BCU;lht xespoLes ftaD plif1ed fiDB Jnterested in
~ services in the rerSevel~1t of lit. Vel.lla1 o:aidar area bet-
wen 5th am 9th SL......a. Eact1 of the four (4) xespa ni 1nc1.u:Sed various
snb:.c"t"-"_.ls that \oIIe1:e net a recpirement of the RFQ, nor a pravisicn of
the thmo"1ity Devel~d. n.-t....ion _t", taken on Ha...tI:l.... 19, 1990, as
it relates to the abaIIe reteteJ~ pmject. 'Jbe n.-i_ial action pr0-
vided, in part, that staff shall "...negotiate am 1"9<' ........ id ......4.......1:&
with thx8e (3) CCI'lSUltants to prcwide far (i) dsIIeloper CXIIBl1.tation ser-
vices: (il) a epec'ific plan, am: (ill) envircraental xeview."
As ycu are awaxe, a pmject of this magnitude does recp1re that certa1n
"'UoCo1.t activities be cx:mucted far .:<. .'1J.ishin:J the project's ultimate
objective. In paxtiClll.ar, 1Il11:<' ..,alehts xela.tiDJ to project fb1ancirg
(both averall am specific): relocat1cn of xeddential P'l"'1JOtion am
J:ud.,........es, am: erqineerizg activities are all J'IeIOf-l1ty far the
"':.. ..,.ushment of itaas I'I.IId:ler (i) am (il) abaIIe. 'Jbe fact that all four
(4) xespcude.d.8 ac\:b.a:oao:d these areas ~ the pet'f0ClBll:le of
..,):. . .JL..aCt:s allows far the ccnd.deration of eed1 of these activities in
vi.. of the total project.
It is beizg r.e......A'ded, therefore, that ead1 of the three (3) areas of
services, tobicb includes financ:dn;J, relocation am qineer!ni, be CCI'I-
sidered as essential S1W .'1 <<aM of the project. '1his lialld allow far
acquisition of said services as a part of the RFQ )'L.....-.8 referred to _
abc::Ne. In order far the afore......tioned ta.sks to be AtYYWIplished, the O:m-
JIIJIlity Action thmli....ion 1IIOJld have to pass t10lc (2) CX'IIpU1ia1 JDOticna, as
follows:
1. To instruct staff to negotiate with ~. yJSerS spec:'ificaUy far the
provision of financ:ia1, relocat1cn am ~ sexvioes.
.
.
.
.
r
Dma>>'FICE ~ 9012-l9<rJ
Irl'. VEF, af A'Vm::uE ~-::n ~ PIOJ!X:!1'
0.: J.. 18, 1990
P8ge 2
.
2. 'n) instruct IJtaff to .8- J .1. a tam of CXIllIUl.tanta far the prc:wisJ.at
of all project services, ngudl_ of ak.....d:. tea affi1iat.icm anS
ocnfiguratialS within each .....V"""'l.
It is essential. that staff be afforded the "W"" Wnity to !ntmview each
(4.- ~r en the basis of each subo "I~""4. anS have the nexibility to
ocnfigure the project team exclusive of an.h.d:. PL' v _, _.
/J rl~~
val Mahabir, CDlsultant
VM:1ab
9012-1903