Loading...
TOD SITE MEETING MINUTES / r:/~ F;' _ Qu,.\.4{. ~.t!) 1.1 .:,,:. I ~ /t/; Page 1 of 4 ... '"r ."""1"t'1 ~ " ~ I..... J i_. V .,:;J' ;~ Breese, Ed From: Eugene Gerlica [gerlicape@adelphia.net] Sent: Friday, September 08, 2006 7:26 AM To: Hawkins, Wilfred; Breese, Ed Cc: Cherof, James; 'David Norris'; 'Eugene'; 'Fior Bresolin' Subject: TODMinutesMeetings2006SeptRvO Wilfred, Please forward to Mike and Quintus. Will we see you at 1 0:00am TODAY? David Norris will note be attending. any questions, please call 772-971-9491. MEETING MINUTES Meeting Date; August 25, 2006 Attendees; Wilfred Hawkins, Assistant City Manager and appointed liaison for the Project Quintus Greene, City Development Director Mike Rumpf, Planning and Zoning Director Ed Breese, Principal Planner Jim Cherof, City Attorney Doug MacDonald, QLP President Eugene Gerlica, P.E., QLP Consultant Summary of Discussions: 1) The meeting was requested by QLP to advise the City ofthe intentions of QLP regarding the TriRail TOD and how the 800 additional residential units were intended to be developed. 2) It was reported that discussions with County Commissioners, prior to the City's approval of NO PC 16, suggested that the political process to approve such a TOD must be carefully orchestrated, and they, the County, should be consulted prior to initiating the process because they could be of great assistance. 3) Prior to making that initial contact with the County, QLP desired to meet with the City Staff to generate a common set of goals regarding the future developments. 4) QLP requested the City staff define the type, intensity, scope and detail of development they would desire at the TriRail site, within Quantum Park and/or upon other adjacent developable areas including City owned land. Two weeks were allotted for the City to make those determinations or raise questions and issues to be addressed prior to moving forward through the process. 5) The City staff requested that QLP and the City work together as the TOD moves forward through the process and that each party shall not take unfair advantage of the other party at any time during the process (or something like that, maybe Cheroff can clarify what was intended by his comment). 6) QLP advised that the QPV South development has been placed on hold pending the developments relative to the Tri Rail TOD and QLP's work force affordable housing plans. 9/812006 MEETING MINUTES Page 3 of 4 MEETING MINUTES Meeting Date; August 31,2006 Attendees: Kim Delaney, TCRPC Dan Carey, TCRPC Eugene Gerlica, P.E., QLP Consultant Summary of Discussion: I) I advised the City voted 4-1 to approve NOPC 16, the vote of confidence and 800 additional residential units Quantum Limited Partners, "QLP" requested. 2) I advised QLP and City of Boynton Beach are working together and moving forward with a TOD at. Boynton Beach TriRail Station. 3) TCRPC is the planning organization for the SFRTA. 4) Other TOD's currently in the planning process are listed below. i) West Palm Beach, the largest (35 Acres) and the farthest along in the process. ii) Lake Worth iii) Delray Beach iv) Boca Raton, no residential v) Ft Lauderdale vi) Hollywood, 20-25 Acres. 5) SFRTA Board recently voted to deny a proposed TOD, at Boca Raton I believe. TCRPC agreed it w bad plan, no residential. 6) SFRTA has a five year plan for development. It is available from their web site. 7) TCRPC functions as a facilitator, what they may be able to do are as follows. i) Work with planners and developers to develop a Master Plan. Work means they may hire an for planners and other professionals throughout the development process. ii) Propose local code changes to allow TOD's. iii) Prepare recommendations and make a presentation to the SFRTA Board in support ofa TOe iv) Perform financial calculations to demonstrate economic viability. v) Provide funding and consultants for development planning, financial planning and funding. vi) Support and Leadership in executing the development plan from conception through constru< 8) Palm Beach County provides SFRTA with $2.0 mil each year; therefore, Palm Beach County exerts influence on which TOD' s get consideration. 9) $800 to $1200 per month rental rates is work force affordable per PBC. 10) SFRTA prefers retail to be included within any TOD. 11) SFRTA desires ample parking for its ridership, and is protective of what they have. 12) Palm Tran routinely enhances connection routes to train stations when warranted. 9/8/2006 MEETING MINUTES Page 4 of 4 13) Kim suggests the next step would be to meet with Comm. Koons, then Comm. Newell to plot the COt SFR T A approval. 14) I advised her QLP would meet one more time with the City Staff, and then meet with her jointly witb City to plot our course through the County. Meeting adjourned. 9/812006 MEETING MINUTES ,. ("nF , "'" . '"" p" JIJ A#~ .....;!J 1.1 ,'.,., "1,1 Page 1 of 4 T .,. 'Y) t:".. l;. c_J v .:~." ,t'" Breese, Ed From: Eugene Gerlica [gerlicape@adelphia.net] Sent: Friday, September 08, 2006 7:26 AM To: Hawkins, Wilfred; Breese, Ed Cc: Cherof, James; 'David Norris'; 'Eugene'; 'Fior Bresolin' Subject: TODMinutesMeetings2006SeptRvO Wilfred, Please forward to Mike and Quintus. Will we see you at 1 0:00am TODAY? David Norris will note be attending. any questions, please call 772-971-9491. MEETING MINUTES Meeting Date; August 25, 2006 Attendees; Wilfred Hawkins, Assistant City Manager and appointed liaison for the Project Quintus Greene, City Development Director Mike Rumpf, Planning and Zoning Director Ed Breese, Principal Planner Jim Cherof, City Attorney Doug MacDonald, QLP President Eugene Gerlica, P.E., QLP Consultant Summary of Discussions: 1) The meeting was requested by QLP to advise the City of the intentions ofQLP regarding the TriRail TOD and how the 800 additional residential units were intended to be developed. 2) It was reported that discussions with County Commissioners, prior to the City's approval of NO PC 16, suggested that the political process to approve such a TOD must be carefully orchestrated, and they, the County, should be consulted prior to initiating the process because they could be of great assistance. 3) Prior to making that initial contact with the County, QLP desired to meet with the City Staff to generate a common set of goals regarding the future developments. 4) QLP requested the City staff define the type, intensity, scope and detail of development they would desire at the TriRail site, within Quantum Park and/or upon other adjacent developable areas including City owned land. Two weeks were allotted for the City to make those determinations or raise questions and issues to be addressed prior to moving forward through the process. 5) The City staff requested that QLP and the City work together as the TOD moves forward through the process and that each party shall not take unfair advantage of the other party at any time during the process (or something like that, maybe Cheroff can clarify what was intended by his comment). 6) QLP advised that the QPV South development has been placed on hold pending the developments relative to the Tri Rail TOD and QLP's work force affordable housing plans. 9/812006 MEETING MINUTES Page 2 of 4 7) It is the current goal of QLP to develop all 800 units as work force affordable on MU designated lands, with or without a TriRail TOD. 8) Concessions will be sought from Palm Beach County, SFRTA and the City in order to produce work force affordable housing at Quantum Park and the TriRail site. Concessions include; i) A County roadway impact fee exemption. ii) An exemption from City building permit fees. iii) An exemption from City water and wastewater reservation fees. iv) An exemption from City water and wastewater connection fees. v) An exemption from City inspection fees. vi) Contribution of Roadway Impact Fees, or other revenues, for the improvements to High Ridge Road and the entrance to the TriRail site. vii) Favorable land lease terms from SFRTA. viii) Contributions from the County, City and SFRTA to provide the structured parking for the TriRail ridership. 9) Site plan issues to over come include the following. i) Preserved "Micro Sites" on the TriRail site may need to be abandoned. ii) The dry retention area on the TriRail site may need to be abandoned. iii) Any tree preservation requirements must be confirmed to not apply to the TriRail site as it was determined for the rest of Quantum Park. iv) The ratio of parking spaces per residential unit. Suggested to be less than 1: 1 by PBC. v) Access issues to the site from High Ridge Road. 10) An additional NOPC application and approval will be necessary for the TriRail site to be designated as MU, Mixed Use. Following which, the site may be proposed, approved and developed pursuant to the PID zoning code provisions for a development within the MU POD. 11) Grant funds may be available and the City staff will investigate. 12) The trolley is currently in operation and it is conceivable that it would be expanded to compliment the TOD and workforce affordable housing. 13) The city will further define and characterize what work force affordable housing is in Boynton Beach and particularly within the Quantum Park MU POD. 14) Next meeting was schedule for 9/812006 at 10:00am at QLP office. Meeting Adjourned. 9/812006 / The City of Boynton Beach OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY 100 E. Boynton Beach Boulevard P.O. Box 310 Boynton Beach, Florida 33425-0310 : (561) 742-6050 FAX: (561) 742-6054 October 30, 2006 Via facsimile to: 561 - 842-4104 David Norris, Esquire Cohen, Norris, Scherer, et al 712 U.S. Highway One, Suite 400 North Palm Beach, FL 33408 Re: Quantum Tri-Rail Site meeting Dear David: Last week you contacted me regarding a potential meeting with the Regional Transportation Authority to discuss the Quantum Tri-Rail site. In anticipation ofthat meeting and to make certain I have the proper representatives and data with me. I would appreciate if you could elaborate on the following: 1. What is the agenda for the meeting? 2. What are the goals ofthe meeting from your client's perspective? 3. What Quantum related entities will be in attendance and in what capacity? 4. What are your client's expectations about what the City can bring to the meeting and the proposed development of the site? The actual meeting date can be coordinated through my Legal Assistant, Maribel Depasquale at 954-771-4500. Very truly yours, ( ~. JAMES A. CHERO~.ItS City Attorney [0). ~ re ~ 0 WI ~ ~ WI OCT j 0 aD l!) \ I JAC/lms cc: jWilfred Hawkins, Assistant City Manager Quintus Greene, Director of Development DEPARTMENT OF DEVElOPMENl America's Gateway to the Gulfstream "' Exhibit 1 SFRT A Policy for Unsolicited Proposals TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Definition...... ............ ..... ........ ............ ... ..................... ................... .......1 II. Policy................. ................... ................ ............ ......... .......................... 1 III. Content of Unsolicited Proposals .....................................................1 IV. Supporting Information ...................... ................ ........ ....... .... ... ..........2 V. SFRT A Procedures .......................................................... .... ...... .........3 l. Definition An unsolicited proposal is a wriUen proposal for a new or innovative Idea that IS submiUed to SFRT A on the initiative of the offeror for the purpose of obtaining a contract or other agreement with SFRT A, and that is not in response to a request for proposal, invitation to bid or any other SFRTA-initiated solicitation or program. All unsolicited proposals are subject to approval by the SFRTA Board. II. Policy It is the policy of the SFRT A to accept the submission of new and innovative ideas. Unsolicited proposals allow unique and innovative ideas or approaches that have been developed to be made available for use in accomplishment of the SFRTA mission. Unsolicited proposals are offered with the intent that SFRT A may enter into a contract with the offeror for research and development. new services, land development or other efforts supporting the SFRTA mission, and often represent a substantial investment of time and effort by the offeror. A valid unsolicited proposal must: 1. Be innovative and unique; 2. Be independently originated and developed by the offeror; 3. Be prepared without SFRTA supervision. endorsement, direction. or direct SFRT A involvement: 4. Include sufficient detail to permit a determination that SFRT A support could be worthwhile and the proposed work could benefit the agency's mission responsibilities. 5. Not be an advance proposal for a known SFRT A requirement that can be ::JCQllir0; hy (,"f'lmpetmve methods. All unsolicited proposals will be treated as public records, in accordance with Florida Statutes, and will be made available to the public upon request. III. Content of Unsolicited Proposals Unsolicited proposals should contain the following information to permit consideration in an objective and timely manner: 1. Basic infonnation: (a) Offeror's name and address and type of organization; ~, profit, non- profit, educational, small business; (L) N HnC~"; tr-Irphnnr: numhNr:, of lor:hni, 11 ,H1d bu .,inA<;s personnel to bn contacted for evaluation or negotiation purposes; 1 (c) Identification of proprietary data to be used only for evaluation purposes; (d) Names of other Federal. State, or local agencies or parties receiving the proposal or funding the proposed effort; (e) Date of submission; and (f) Signature of a person authorized to represent and contractually obligate the offeror. 2. Information Required (a) Concise title and abstract (approximately 200 words) of the proposed effort; (b) A reasonably complete discussion stating the objectives of the effort or activity, the method of approach and extent of effort to be employed, the nature and extent of the anticipated results, and the manner in which the work will help to support accomplishment of SFRT A's mission; (c) Names and biographical information on the offeror's key personnel who would be involved, including allernat~s; and (d) Type of support needed, if any, from the SFRTA; ~. facilities, equipment, materials, financial or personnel resources. 3. Fee (a) An initial fee of $50,000 payable to the South Florida Regional Transportation Authority must accompany an unsolicited proposal ("Initial Payment"). Proposals received without the initial fee shall not be accepted. (b) Payment shall be made by cash, cashier's check, or any other non- (";"mf.p\:1blo instrum,::nl. Person.)] chl..:d.,-, Aill not bi;: aC(..<jjJtvd. (c) If the initial fee is not sufficient to pay SFRTA's costs of evaluating the unsolicited proposal, SFRT A shall request in writing additional amounts required. The public-private partnership or private entity submitting ihe proposal shall pay the requested additional fee within 30 days. Failure to pay the additional fee shall rf'''iult in the proposal being rejected. (d) SFRTA shall refund any fees in excess of the costs of evaluating the proposal after the evaluation is complete. (e) The fee requirement can be waived if conflicts with federal requirements or can be reduced by the SFRT A Board in the event the SFRT A Board determines that the estimated cost of evaluation will be less than the Initial P-l'imenl. 2 IV. Supporting Information 1. Financial plan that includes in sufficient detail for meaningful evaluation: (a) proposed price or total estimated cost for the effort; and (b) identifies all required funding sources and timing of funding: 2. Period of time for which the proposal is valid (a 6-month minimum is suggested); 3. Type of contract preferred; 4. Proposed duration of effort; 5. Brief description of the organization, previous experience, relevant past performance. and facilities to be used; 6. Other statements, if applicable, about organizational conflicts of interest, security clearances, and environmental impacts; and 7. The names and telephone numbers of SFRTA technical or other SFRTA points of contact already contacted regarding the unsolicited proposal. V. SFRT A Procedures 1. Acceptance and negotiation of an unsolicited proposal: (a) Within 60 days of receipt of an unsolicited proposal and before initiating a comprehensive evaluation, SFRTA staff and Property Committee (if involving property) shall determine if the proposal - (1) Is a valid unsolicited proposal, meeting the requirements of this Policy (2) I" rr'lah1to SFRT!\'s mission; (3) Contains sufficient technical and cost information for evaluation; and (4) Has been approved by a responsible official or other representative authorized to obligate the offeror contractually; (b) If the proposal meets these requirements, SFRT A shall promptly acknowledge receipt and advertise for 30 days, in a newspaper of general circulation in one or more counties in SFRTA's service territory, its receipt of the proposal and solicitation for any additional proposals. Following the end of the advertisement period, SFRTA shall begin to process any related unsolicited proposals. (c) A favul....ble (,vmpfejit:m~jve evaluation 01 an unsolicited proposal does not, in itself, justify awarding a contract without providing for full and open competition. 3 2. Comprehensive Evaluation: (a) When performing a comprehensive evaluation of an unsolicited proposal. evaluators (to be selected by SFRTA staff and the SFRTA Property Committee, if involving property) shall consider the following factors, in addition to any others appropriate for the particular proposal: (1) Unique, innovative and meritorious methods, approaches, or concepts demonstrated by the proposal; (2) Overall scientific. technical, or socioeconomic merits of the proposal; (3) Potential contribution of the effort to SFRT A's specific mission; (4) The offeror's capabilities, related experience, facilities, techniques, or unique combinations of these that are integral factors for achieving the proposal objectives; (5) The qualifications, capabilities, and experience of the proposed principal investigator, team leader, or key personnel critical to achieving the proposal objectives; and (6) The realism of the proposed cost. (b) The evaluators shall notify the SFRT A Property Committee (if involving property) and the SFRTA Board of their recommendations when the evaluation is completed. (c) A favorable comprehensive evaluation of an unsolicited proposal does not, in itself, justify awarding a contract without providing for full and open competition. (d) SFRT.I\ <-hff shall hi i\1d nt I,,","" 90 day:, frulll the clu~,c ut th'_l advertisement period to complete its comprehensive evaluation and provide its recommendation to the SFRT A Property Committee (if applicable) and the SFRT A Board. When deemed necessary due to the complexity of the issues or other special circumstances, this timeframe may be extended by the SFRT A Executive Director. 3. Contract negotiations: (a) SFRTA may commence negotiations on a sole source basis when an unsolicited proposal has received a favorable comprehensive evaluation by SFRT A Staff and has been endorsed and approved by the SFRT A Property Committee (if involving property) and Board, respectively, and the requirements for a sole-source procurement in accordance with SFRT A's Pmrwem<>nt Rille, pnlif'ipc ~nf1 pm(';ef1\1rec; have hN'O m0\. 4 4 Contract award' (a) The award and execution of any contract or agreement relating to an unsolicited proposal is subject to endorsement by the SFRT.A Property Committee (if involving property) and approval by the SFRTA Board. (b) If an unsolicited proposal involves the use of any federal funds or land procured using federal funds, in whole or in part, the award and execution of any contract or agreement relating to the unsolicited proposal is contingent upon the applicable federal agency's approval. 5 Rejection of Unsolicited Proposal (a) SFRTA shall return an unsolicited proposal to the offeror, citing reasons, when its substance: (1 ) Is available to SFRT A without restriction from another source; (2) Closely resembles a proposed or pending competitive acquisition requirement: (3) Does not relate to SFRTA's ~ission; or ( 4) Does not demonstrate an innovative and unique method, approach, or concept, or is otherwise not deemed a meritorious proposal. WPB-FS 1\MOOREn420514v05\57375 010000 5 .L "c ~F .. .. ::::~ = ;.. ;;0 = ::: s '5= ~\I.~.'. .1 m,~..~.-j:~a~..\,..\ II -H+- ~~=c3, . l\ L\,L~tf;.I."~,. \ ,I ~ .f- _ '_Ll\. .1 1 'e .L~' Ii! \ ! I ~ ' " _, '--ii ;a: " . I ............~~ ,.. , .....,~ -:..-"--~.::::~.-=~ \\ ' \' \ \'. ',\ "- ,\ \,'" '\ \ ,,,- ,,'. \ f - --- f ~ ~ -.L. .- - / --- -- -- ~~~~ =~~~ ;: - f / --- ;i .r / ;: - -- / - -- //,..= ~ ~ ~ ~ ,- ~~=~ - - / -- ::::;;:::::: ...;... -" :t -:-- -- J :: ==~2 ~ r ~-, ! \ ~ H~ \ I I ~ ',,-.-,- I '4 ) - --_.~ ._- -- ------.-' ------ ----~,-,------ L " , !=- : \ ' \j / '1'. iJ' '/j \j 't Ii "'-.