Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCarnegie Parcels Request for Proposals (RFP)1 Commission Memorandum REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission FROM: Brit Fontenot, Director of Economic Development and Community Relations Chris Kukulski, City Manager SUBJECT: Carnegie Parcels Request for Proposals (RFP) MEETING DATE: January 23, 2012 AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Action RECOMMENDATION: Delay publishing the RFP and discuss an alternative (or alternatives) to the current process and direct staff to return to the City Commission in approximately 30 days to seek approval of a revised process. BACKGROUND: During the last month staff has had discussions with various hotel industry professionals and others interested in the sale of the Carnegie parcels and development of a downtown hotel. Based on these discussions, staff recommends the Bozeman City Commission (Commission) reconsider the current RFP approach for developing a hotel on the Carnegie parcels. This memorandum summarizes the history of the process and concludes with a brief framework for your discussion on alternative approaches. On April 15, 2011 the City of Bozeman received a Letter of Intent (LOI) from CATELLUS GROUP LLC (CATELLUS) for the purchase of the Carnegie parcels in downtown Bozeman for the purpose of exploring the feasibility of constructing a hotel with ancillary services. The Carnegie parcels are located on the corner of North Black and East Mendenhall at 106 East Mendenhall. The lot contains 71 parking spaces. The Carnegie parcels are located directly east, across North Black Avenue, from Bozeman’s five-story (including the basement level), 435 space parking structure, Bridger Park Downtown. The Carnegie parcels were purchased by the City of Bozeman in 1976. On May 2, 2011 the Commission voted 5 – 0 to acknowledge the receipt of the CATELLUS LOI and authorized the City Manager to sign the document and order an appraisal “only if a future determination is made by the City that the Carnegie parking lot is no longer necessary for the conduct of city business.” Packet material from the May 2, 2011, Carnegie parcels public hearing can be found here: http://weblink.bozeman.net/WebLink8/0/doc/44680/Electronic.aspx 87 2 Approved minutes from the May 2, 2011 Carnegie parcels public hearing can be found here: http://weblink.bozeman.net/WebLink8/0/doc/45098/Page1.aspx On May 9, 2011, City staff conducted a public forum and information and listening session in the Commission meeting room with businesses and property owners surrounding the Carnegie parcels. Approximately 25 – 30 business and property owners, staff and elected officials participated in the discussion. The majority of property and business owners present at the meeting expressed concern that disposing of the subject property may negatively impact their business due to the proposed displacement of public parking on the Carnegie parcels. There was some support for the sale of the Carnegie parcels for a higher and better use than that of a surface parking lot and still other attendees expressed a great deal of interest but had no recommendation at that time. On May 11, 2011, the Bozeman Parking Commission met in its regularly scheduled monthly meeting wherein the Parking Commission found by a vote of 5 – 1 (with one recusal) that there is a higher and better economic use and a greater benefit to the downtown area for the Carnegie parcel than surface parking due to the amount of available parking in the vicinity of this lot, particularly at the Bridger Park Downtown, which currently has the capacity to replace removal of the Carnegie lot spaces. Accordingly, the Parking Commission found the Carnegie parcel is not needed to provide public parking. On June 13, 2011, the Commission conducted a public hearing to determine whether real property owned by the City located at 106 East Mendenhall Street, known as the Carnegie parcels, is necessary for the conduct of City business or the preservation of its property and provided direction to staff. By a 5 – 0 vote the Commission determined: 1) the real property known as the Carnegie parking lot (lots 17A, 18, 19, 20, 21, and 22 of Block E of the Original Town-site of Bozeman, Montana) located at 106 East Mendenhall is no longer necessary for the conduct of City business or the preservation of City property and that sale and development of the real property by a private entity, in compliance with adopted City plans, is in the public interest; 2) that any motion made by the Commission on May 2, 2011 regarding this property or the proposed sale of is superseded in its entirety by this motion; and 3) directed staff to proceed with a request for proposals process that could authorize the sale of the Carnegie parking lot to the entity whose proposal satisfies all legal requirements for the sale of City real property and whose development proposal the Commission determines best fulfills the objectives of the City’s 2020 Community Plan (https://www.bozeman.net/Smarty/files/e6/e6a049b8-fad5-4886-b7f5- 3ebfbd2f4556.pdf), its Economic Development Plan (https://www.bozeman.net/Smarty/files/f2/f2217bae-9beb-4068-8209-7b649b328453.pdf) and the Downtown Improvement Plan (http://www.downtownbozeman.org/downloads/DBIP%20Final%2012-14-09%20SM.pdf). Packet material from the June 13, 2011, Carnegie parcels public hearing can be found here: http://weblink.bozeman.net/WebLink8/0/doc/44914/Electronic.aspx Approved minutes from the June 13, 2011 Carnegie parcels public hearing can be found here: http://weblink.bozeman.net/WebLink8/0/doc/45287/Page1.aspx With Commission direction, utilizing both internal and external resources, parking, legal, 88 3 planning and economic development staff prepared the draft RFP for Commission review. Other internal reviews include those by finance and administration. Additionally, external, private sector, review of the RFP was solicited and comments received and incorporated into the draft. On September 26, 2011, the Commission provided comment and direction on the content of the draft Carnegie parcels RFP for the construction of a full-service hotel with meeting facilities in downtown Bozeman, Montana, on the Carnegie parcels. The Commission directed staff to leave the date of publication open for Commission discussion and decision at the October 24, 2011 public hearing. Staff incorporated the changes into the Draft 2 of the RFP as directed with a public release date to be determined by the Commission. The approved RFP is included as Attachment 1 in this packet material. Packet material from the September 26, 2011, Carnegie parcels public hearing can be found here: http://weblink.bozeman.net/WebLink8/0/doc/45855/Electronic.aspx Approved minutes from the September 26, 2011 Carnegie parcels public hearing can be found here: http://weblink.bozeman.net/WebLink8/0/doc/46649/Page1.aspx On October 24, 2011, in a unanimous 5 – 0 decision, the Commission directed staff to postpone the release of the Carnegie RFP until January, 2012. The Commission set a hearing date of January 23, 2012 for staff to return to the Commission to discuss the final release of the approved Carnegie parcels RFP. Packet material from the October 24, 2011, Carnegie parcels public hearing can be found here: http://weblink.bozeman.net/WebLink8/0/doc/46163/Electronic.aspx Approved minutes from the October 24, 2011 Carnegie parcels public hearing can be found here: http://weblink.bozeman.net/WebLink8/0/doc/46672/Page1.aspx On December 7, 2011 CATELLUS requested that they be removed from consideration for the purchase of the Carnegie parcels and future development of a downtown hotel project. During the week of January 2, 2012, City staff conducted discussions with hotel industry development professionals who independently expressed concerns with the release of the RFP as drafted citing the primary issue with the RFP is the expense of the initial investment necessary to create an acceptable and appropriate response to the RFP. The up-front cost seems disproportionately high when viewed against the odds of being chosen as the preferred project proposal. These professionals suggested the net result of pursuing the current strategy of the RFP release as drafted, and associated up-front investment to the Respondent, may be a total lack of responses at the conclusion of the 90-day response period. A lack of responses to the Carnegie parcels RFP may cause credibility issues with the process that may reflect poorly on City. Based on this information, we propose re-working the process to reduce up-front costs for Respondents without undermining the spirit of the original RFP. One option includes adding an RFQ stage and a process to provide more personalized attention to those who may respond in order to 89 4 communicate community desires, assess Respondent capabilities and research past projects while setting and understanding the expectations from both the City and Respondents. If an alternative approach is approved, work put into the existing RFP is neither lost or nor undermined by altering the process. The RFP as drafted and approved will constitute the majority of the information requested from respondents, albeit in a later phase of the process. Identified in both the Downtown Bozeman Improvement Plan and the Commission’s 2011 – 2012 adopted work plan, the development of a downtown hotel is one of the highest community priorities. Ensuring that the process facilitates an outcome with the highest probability of success is the rationale for suggesting alternatives to the originally proposed RFP process. Given the complexities public property sale transactions and the planning process for the construction of a downtown hotel, staff does not believe that the requested delay will have an overall negative impact on a downtown hotel project. On January 11, 2012 at the regularly scheduled Parking Commission meeting, staff discussed the information provided in this memo and excerpts from discussions with private sector industry professionals and received a consensus from Parking Commissioners present that the recommended delay and process reconsideration is a reasonable accommodation under the circumstances if the modifications increase the odds of success in the desire to construct a downtown hotel. Since the October 24, 2011 public hearing, one public comment has been received on this issue and is included as Attachment 2 in this packet material. UNRESOLVED ISSUES: The unresolved issue is the process used to achieve the desired result of constructing a hotel in downtown Bozeman. Staff has provided several process alternatives below. ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES: 1. Release the approved downtown hotel RFP on a date certain; 2. Staff creates a two-tier downtown hotel RFQ/RFP process; a. Coordinate with appropriate staff and others as necessary to draft an RFQ; b. Create two-tier RFQ/RFP evaluation process and return to the Commission in approximately 30 days for final approval. 3. Release a modified version of the RFP for development on the Carnegie parcels that is not hotel specific but market driven; 4. Staff creates a two-tier RFQ/RFP process that requests proposals for development on the Carnegie parcels; a. Coordinate with appropriate staff and others as necessary to draft an non-hotel specific RFQ; b. Create two-tier RFQ/RFP evaluation process and return to the Commission in approximately 30 days for final approval. 5. Retain a real estate professional and place the Carnegie p arcels on the open real-estate market. Through a carefully constructed purchase and sale agreement, contingencies, covenants and/or deed restrictions the City can create assurances that the sale of the Carnegie parcels goes only to a qualified buyer for the construction of a downtown hotel as outlined in the RFP; 90 5 6. Delay the release of the approved RFP for another fixed time period; or 7. Halt the process. FISCAL EFFECTS: At this time, the fiscal effects are undetermined. Attachments: 1) Draft RFP approved by the Bozeman City Commission on September 26, 2012; and 2) Public comment letter from Delaney and Co. Report compiled on: January 16, 2012 91 1 | Page    City of Bozeman, Montana Request for Proposals (RFP) for the Construction of a Full Service Hotel with Meeting Facilities In Downtown Bozeman Section 1 INTRODUCTION “In some ways it is surprising that a community of Bozeman’s stature does not already have a small 50-80 room, ‘four star’ hotel. The university, the hospital, and other corporate entities report that such a hotel is needed for many types of visitors.”1 Thank you for your interest in the development of a full-service hotel with meeting facilities in the heart of downtown Bozeman, Montana, and the northern Rocky Mountains, gateway to Yellowstone National Park. This RFP is a request for detailed plans for the financing, construction, and operations of a downtown hotel from professionals in the development community. The level of design, furnishing, and operation of the project must be commensurate with a high-quality, unique-lifestyle hotel with individualized, non-franchised architecture. Respondent must show multiple successes in developing and operating high quality hotels in similar environments. Section 2 DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY The property development opportunity is to design, build and operate a full service hotel with meeting facilities to attract more downtown patrons and high quality events and help the City of Bozeman (the City) maintain strong tourism, entertainment and cultural and professional events industries. The project must be consistent with all City plans that relate to its historic downtown core and dynamic Central Business District including but not limited to the stated goals of the Bozeman City Commission, the Downtown Bozeman Improvement Plan, Bozeman Community Plan and the Economic Development Plan. Section 3 WHY BOZEMAN? Located in the heart of the Rocky Mountains, Bozeman is truly a remarkable community. The City of 38,000 people serves a region of 90,000+ with backgrounds and cultures as diverse as the Montana landscape. From cattle ranchers to high tech engineers, the area is home to a breed of people who have come to appreciate an unmatched quality of life. While retaining a small town                                                              1 Downtown Bozeman Improvement Plan, page 37. 92 feel, Bozeman prides itself on offering community activities and programs typically available only in larger, metropolitan areas. Combine the wide array of cultural resources with an abundance of outdoor recreational opportunities and it’s easy to understand why Bozeman consistently ranks as one of the nation’s most livable cities. The Gallatin Valley is one of the fastest-growing areas in the Northern Rocky Mountains. Bozeman is the regional trade, education and medical center and consistently hosts top-tier medical, retail, cultural, and educational amenities that service southwest Montana, northwest Wyoming, and eastern Idaho. Through innovation, collaboration, and a focused effort, Bozeman is well positioned as a competitive and attractive place to conduct business, live, visit, and recreate. Bozeman is also home to Montana State University, a thriving research university. A new classification system by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching recognizes MSU as one of 96 research universities with “very high research activity.” Other such institutions are Yale University, Harvard University, Johns Hopkins University, the University of Washington and Oregon State University. MSU, through competitively awarded grants and contracts, had $109,481,694 in research expenditures between 2009 and 2010. MSU's most valuable contribution to the state's economy is an educated workforce that attracts, promotes, and retains higher paying jobs in Montana. Considered the “Gateway to Yellowstone National Park” Bozeman boasts visitor numbers of over approximately one million visitors per year. Three world class ski resorts, Bridger Bowl, 2 | Page    93 3 | Page    Big Sky, and Moonlight Basin are only minutes away. Many visitors arrive in Bozeman via Interstate 90, which bisects the beautiful Gallatin Valley from east to west. Many others transit via the recently expanded Gallatin Field Airport, one of the busiest airports in the state of Montana. Gallatin Field Airport recorded its busiest year ever with 365,210 passengers boarding airline flights in 2010. This represents a 6.6 percent increase over 2009 and nearly 14,000 passengers more than the previous record set in 2008. Presently, Gallatin Field Airport and local private business interests are exploring the feasibility of providing a customs agent for international passenger arrivals and departures. A newly constructed concourse addition will expand service to five airlines and average 20 flights per day including many non-stop connections to major hubs including Atlanta (seasonal), Chicago, Denver, Los Angeles (seasonal), Las Vegas, Minneapolis, Phoenix, Salt Lake City, San Francisco (seasonal), and Seattle. Additionally, two private jet centers provide an array of services to private jet passengers. Over the years, Bozeman has been fortunate to be included on several “Best Of” lists from a variety of sources. For example, in 2010 an economic research firm ranked Bozeman as the seventh strongest micropolitan economy in 2010 out of 576 small cities studied throughout the United States. Additional recognitions include:2 a. “Where to Live and Play Now:” This article by National Geographic Adventure recommended Bozeman as a good place to raise children for the reasons of safety, exposure to culture, and outdoor amenities. October, 2009; b. “The Union of Town and Gown:” Entrepreneur Magazine highlighted colleges that are working with their cities to foster a local entrepreneurial spirit that will develop the economy and encourage business-savvy students to stick around post-graduation. Bozeman ranked #6 on this list. October, 2009; c. “Happiest States of 2009: The List:” LiveScience ranked Montana #3 behind Hawaii and Utah where the index included questions about six areas of well-being, including overall evaluation of resident’s lives, emotional health, physical health, healthy behaviors and job satisfaction. February, 2010; d. “Best Towns 2010 – Best for Skiing (West):” Outside magazine featured the top 25 towns in America for cycling, paddling, running, surfing, skiing, and – because you might want everything – all of the above. Bozeman received these accolades for having two ski areas and 350 inches of annual snowfall. August, 2010; e. “10 Best Affordable Mountain Towns for Retirement:” According to U.S. News & World Report, Bozeman fits the bill of offering access to plenty of skiing, trails, and wildlife, while still providing affordable housing and a reasonable cost of living in addition to other retiree-friendly characteristics, such as access to healthcare and a low crime rate. July, 2010;                                                              2 This list was excerpted from Robyn Erlenbush’s article “Twelve Reasons to Live in Big Sky Country” appearing in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle’s Businesss2Business publication on January 11, 2011.  94 f. “Bozeman named #1 town to live (if you’re a skier):” According to Powder magazine, “Bozeman is the perfect mix of ski town and skitropolis; it’s more affordable than Jackson Hole, less crowded than Salt Lake City, and more of a real town than Whistler.” November, 2010; and g. “Top Retirement Town:” Bozeman was profiled in Where to Retire magazine’s November/December issue for possessing many qualities important to today’s retirees. October, 2010. The region also hosts numerous “blue ribbon” trout fishing streams including the nearby Yellowstone, Boulder, Madison, and Gallatin rivers. Bozeman is also distinguished by its thriving and vibrant downtown food, culture, arts, and entertainment scenes. Bozeman is the regional hub for retail and commerce, education, healthcare, tourism, manufacturing and innovation. Bozeman is home to notable, one-of-a-kind, worldwide organizations such as Right Now Technologies, Zoot Enterprises, Schedulicity.com, Simms Fishing Products, Mystery Ranch Backpacks, West Paw Design, LigoCyte Pharmaceuticals, Bacterin International, Scientific Materials, BioScience Laboratories, Foundant Technologies, Bridger Photonics, ILX Lightwave, and Lattice Materials. Bozeman is a dynamic, growing, and thriving community boasting an excellent university surrounded by beautiful mountains, clear streams, and fertile land. The Bozeman community strongly supports our excellent school systems which are important to our well-educated community and workforce. Additionally, Bozeman is the regional trade and medical center of southwest Montana and hosts top-tier medical, retail, and cultural amenities that service southwest Montana, northwest Wyoming, and eastern Idaho. Add the scenic beauty of our mountains, 82 miles of designated “blue ribbon” trout streams, and proximity to Yellowstone National Park (80 miles), Big Sky (48 miles), Moonlight Basin (50 miles), and Bridger Bowl (13 miles) ski areas and one can see why Bozeman is a great place to visit, call home or start or relocate a business. Section 4 PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES It is the intention of the City of Bozeman to: a. Develop a recognized high-quality downtown hotel with meeting facilities; b. Enhance the dynamic environment of downtown Bozeman with a hotel that complements the area’s existing retail, dining, entertainment, accommodation, and meeting venues; c. Serve as an added catalyst for continued economic growth and provide a direct economic benefit to Bozeman; d. Maximize the site’s potential in a creative and complementary manner; 4 | Page    95 e. Reflect and respect the architectural and spatial context of the site; f. Create long-term and sustainable jobs; and g. Further the goals and objectives of the Bozeman City Commission, Downtown Bozeman Improvement Plan, Bozeman Community Plan, and the City’s Economic Development Plan. Section 5 THE PROPERTY The development opportunity is located on a 26,600 square foot parcel known as the “Carnegie parcel” located on the corner of North Black Avenue and East Mendenhall Street at 106 East Mendenhall Street. The Carnegie parcel presently serves as a surface parcel and contains 71 parking spaces. The property was purchased by the City in 1976. Additionally, the Carnegie parcel is located directly east, across North Black Avenue, from Bozeman’s five-story (including the basement level), 435 space parking, restaurant, and retail structure, Bridger Park Downtown. Located in Bozeman’s Central Business District and immediately north of Main Street, the site is within less than five minutes walking distance of entertainment and cultural attractions, multiple historic districts, business services, public library, public parks, public parking structure, restaurants, shopping, and public transit. The site is owned by the City and currently managed by the Bozeman Parking Commission as a public surface parcel. The parcel is adjacent to Bozeman’s Main Street Historic District, recognized on the National Register of Historic Places as a historic commercial center with a period of historic significance between 1872 and 1945. Bozeman’s Main Street district remains the heart of the community, and attracts innumerable area residents and many thousands of out-of-town visitors per year. Although both existing historic hotels located within the district have been converted to private non-hotel uses, visitors often express an interest in staying in or directly adjacent to the Main Street district given its proximity to numerous locally owned restaurants, galleries, boutiques as well as music, cultural, and community events. Section 6 SELECTION Through this RFP process, the highest qualified proposals will be forwarded to the Bozeman City Commission for final selection. Formal negotiations for a sale and development agreement are expected at the end of this process. 5 | Page    96 Section 7 DEVELOPMENT SITE INFORMATION The proposed 26,600 square foot hotel site is located on real property owned by the City known as the Carnegie parcel (lots 17-A, 18, 19, 20, 21, and 22 of Block E of the Original Townsite of Bozeman, Montana) located at 106 East Mendenhall Street (see the orange square on the maps below). Details related to the size, zoning, and development capacity of the site area are summarized in the City’s Unified Development Code or UDC. Map A       6 | Page    97 Map B       Section 8 DEVELOPMENT PARAMETERS Height Limit The maximum height allowed for the development site is 70 feet as defined in the UDC. Compatibility with adjacent development may require less than the maximum for some portions of the building based on building design. The maximum height of the proposed hotel shall be measured from the sidewalk. Details related to the size, zoning, and development capacity of the site area are summarized in the City’s UDC. 7 | Page    98 Lot Coverage The entire area of the lot may be covered exclusive of the minimum yard setbacks. Parking and Easement Requirements Provide the minimum number of spaces required by the UDC (See UDC, Section 18.46.040). The City will entertain cash in lieu of parking spaces or an arrangement with the Bridger Park Downtown. Additionally, the City will consider shared parking proposals utilizing adjacent parking resources. Design Flexibility There are opportunities for flexibility in compliance with numeric standards in exchange for superior design. (See UDC, Section 18.28.070) Section 9 DUE DILIGENCE INFORMATION Property Appraisal The City has obtained a real estate appraisal on the Carnegie parcel. The appraisal is available at http://www.bozeman.net/Departments-(1)/Administration/Commission/BID---RFP---RFQ. Property Title The City has contracted for a Preliminary Commitment for Title Report to be prepared for the Carnegie parcel. The Preliminary Commitment for Title Report is available at http://www.bozeman.net/Departments-(1)/Administration/Commission/BID---RFP---RFQ. Zoning The site is zoned B-3, Central Business District, see http://www.bozeman.net/Departments- (1)/Administration/Commission/BID---RFP---RFQ for a current zone map. Environmental Clearance The City has contracted for a Phase I Environmental Assessment to be prepared for the Carnegie parcel. The Phase I Environmental Assessment is available at http://www.bozeman.net/Departments-(1)/Administration/Commission/BID---RFP---RFQ. 8 | Page    99 Section 10 DESIGN CONCEPTS AND GUIDELINES Design guidelines for the Downtown area, of which the hotel site is a part, are provided in the Downtown Bozeman Improvement Plan and the Design Guidelines for the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay. The guiding design principles for this area are summarized as follows: a. Reinforce the Downtown Bozeman Improvement Plan, Bozeman Community Plan, the City’s Economic Development Plan, and the City Commission’s 2011 - 2012 Work Plan; b. Respect history and community landmarks; c. Promote high standards of street design with active streetscapes and visually permeable street level facades; d. Create a vibrant edge to the street with strong building character and proximity to the sidewalk; e. Maintain and extend historic streetscape elements as specified in the “Downtown Business Improvement District Streetscape Plan;” f. Maintain the distinction between the street level and the upper floor in the building design; g. Provide a gracious and dignified setting; h. Achieve building design coherence; i. Maintain and extend the traditional building form and mass as seen in the surrounding commercial district, the building may express traditional form and massing with current architectural vocabulary; j. Use building materials as seen traditionally in the surrounding commercial district; k. Communicate building function; and l. Build to the highest standards. 9 | Page    100 Section 11 SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS/CONSIDERATIONS Except for the project pro-forma and information regarding the ability to financially guarantee the project, all submittal documents are considered public records once the closing date has passed. Each submittal must contain detailed responses of each of the following: 1. A cover letter or executive summary stating the responder’s interest in this project. Include reasons for developing in Bozeman, what the responder offers Bozeman, and how Bozeman fits in the corporate scheme; 2. Discuss how the proposal is consistent with and furthers City Commission Policy Initiative 1c) “[f]acilitate the development of a downtown hotel as identified in the downtown development plan,” of the Commission’s 2011 – 2012 Work Plan [HYPERLINK] the Downtown Bozeman Improvement Plan, Bozeman Community Plan, and the City’s Economic Development Plan; 3. Include a description of the proposed project (building square footage, number of floors, proposed uses, not less than 20 percent interior and 50 percent exterior schematics, including the proposed number of rooms, a discussion of retail, restaurant, meeting, and/or other proposed use of space (if applicable); 4. Provide a parking plan that includes the appropriate number of parking spaces required to serve the proposed hotel. Include a detailed description of how parking issues will be addressed; 5. Discuss the inclusion of meeting facilities in the proposal; 6. Explain any shuttle services that will be offered to the airport, Big Sky, Bridger Bowl, or any other tourist attraction in the area; 7. If selected, and upon completion of the project, discuss ongoing advertising plans that will ensure the hotel’s viability; 8. Demonstrate your knowledge of Bozeman by explaining the role tourism plays in Bozeman, the utilization of existing tourism resources, and the impact notable economic and socioeconomic trends in the community will have on a hotel; 9. Discuss the hotel’s sustainability practices, including recycling, buying local, energy efficiency, and other green concepts; 10. List responders complete experience in hotel construction, financing, and management; 10 | Page    101 11. Enumerate and describe public (local, state, and federal) incentives or funding sought. Proposals involving any contribution from the City’s General Fund will not be considered; 12. Clearly delineate the desired role of the City, if any, in terms of the financing, construction, and operations of a downtown hotel; 13. Include estimated project costs, timeline for completion, and a summary of proposed equity/financing structure; 14. State whether the intent is to purchase the property from the City and at what price or propose an alternative legal relationship; 15. Provide an economic plan/pro-forma. In a separate document or documents, substantiate the financial capacity to fund the project costs, including: 1) lot purchase, if that is proposed; and 2) estimated construction costs, including both detailed hard costs and soft costs, and financing costs, if any. In addition, provide a detailed pro-forma operating budget and substantiate the ability to fund costs in excess of income if startup losses are concluded in the budget. “Substantiation” will be considered an accountant-prepared verification of equity capital sufficient to construct and operate the project, a letter of commitment from a bank or other reputable commercial lender in an amount sufficient to construct and operate the project, or verification of a combination of equity capital and a lender letter of commitment. Except for the project pro-forma and information regarding the ability to financially guarantee the project, all submittal documents are considered public records once the closing date has passed; 16. If an alternative legal relationship is proposed, provide proposed transaction terms and conditions and a term sheet that includes the proposed lease amount and proposed lease term; 17. Acknowledge the rights of the City, per Section 18; 18. Include a narrative and photographic history of successfully completed projects of similar scope; 19. Provide public and/or private sector project references; 20. Acknowledge that the City reserves the right to require the reversion of the property back to the City if the project is not commenced or completed within a pre-determined time frame; 21. Acknowledge that the City will maintain ownership and operational rights of the Carnegie parcel until a proposal is approved, contracts are executed, and a building permit issued for the project; 22. Identify long-term, sustainable jobs created; 11 | Page    102 23. Describe the project’s contribution to the area economy through the utilization of locally sourced materials, professionals, and labor; 24. Provide a full description of the submitting development entity, including full legal name, type, ownership, and primary contact regarding submittal; 25. Identify the management company that will manage the overall, long-term hotel operations and describe the proposed legal relationship between the City and the submitting entity; 26. Provide identification and qualifications of the proposed team members (i.e. the developer, hotel operator, etc). Include a single contact person for all correspondence and notifications; 27. Provide a description of the project’s potential to serve as an economic stimulus to the area and projected economic impact, including impact on the local lodging, local Tourism Business Improvement District or facility use tax ($1/night stay), and local property tax base; 28. Identify additional project benefits to the City, such as jobs created, services provided, and needs met; 29. Provide a traffic and access plan describing the maintenance of access to Bridger Park Downtown and all other adjacent businesses throughout the site preparation and construction phases; 30. Acknowledge the City’s anti-discrimination policy for contracts, purchases, and other agreements; and 31. Acknowledge your proposal via signature(s) of key executives. Prior to executing a contract for the sale of the subject property, or permitting of the project, the City may require the successful submitting entity to furnish an approved Construction Performance Bond and a Construction (Labor and Materials) Payment Bond, each in the amount of 100 percent of the contract amount. Insurance, as required by the City, shall be provided by the successful submitting entity and a certificate(s) of that insurance shall be provided under terms approved by the Bozeman City Attorney. Teams are encouraged to provide any information that will assist the City in the evaluation of their submission. However, bulky promotional materials not directly related to the project are discouraged. Submissions must be in the actual possession of the Office of the Bozeman City Clerk, (121 North Rouse Ave, P.O. Box 1230, Bozeman, MT 59771 on or prior to Tuesday, January 3, 2012, by 5:00pm, Mountain Time. 12 | Page    103 Late submissions will not be considered. Submissions must be provided in a sealed package with the statement Downtown Bozeman Hotel Proposal and the prime contact name and address clearly labeled on the front of the package. Please submit ten complete paper copies and five complete digital copies on CD-ROM or flash drive of the proposal. PDF digital file formats are preferred. Section 12 EVALUATION PROCESS THE CITY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO REJECT ANY OR ALL SUBMITTALS AT ITS SOLE AND ABSOLUTE DISCRETION. The City will designate a Preliminary Review Panel (Panel) to evaluate all proposals received in response to this RFP. The Panel will assess the proposals based on the evaluation criteria described in Section 13, below. Panel members will score each proposal in their own preferred order. The scores assigned by each Panel member will be based on the individual member’s reasonable judgment as to the degree to which the proposal complies with the criteria and intent of the RFP process. Members of the Panel and other City staff may contact references and industry sources, investigate previous projects and current commitments, and interview some or all of the development team. The proposals passing preliminary review will be forwarded to the Bozeman City Commission for final selection based on the evaluation criteria described below. Respondents selected for Commission review may be requested to present their full proposal before the City Commission at a public meeting. Architectural design of final selected proposal will be reviewed through the City’s Planning Department, with particular attention paid to the municipal code requirements for Certificates of Appropriateness. Bozeman’s Design Guidelines for Historic Preservation and the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District should be consulted during the design process and will be used by City Planning Staff to evaluate the project. The City does not require any particular architectural style in building design. Planning staff is available to further discuss design guidelines, objectives, and intent as needed. Section 13 EVALUATION CRITERIA The following criteria will be utilized in determining those submittals deemed most advantageous to the City and most responsive to stated goals of this project. The City reserves the right during the evaluation process to determine the weight to be applied to each criteria; 13 | Page    104 however, in the Panel’s evaluation, part b below will receive the greatest weight in the scoring process, followed by part a and then part c: a. Development Entity/Capacity i. Demonstrated experience in successful financing, development, operation, and economic performance of comparable projects; ii. Ability to complete the project in a timely fashion; and iii. Preference will be given to those developers/operators that have experience in public/private projects utilizing private sector financing. b. Submittal Requirements i. Extent to which the submittal satisfies the Submittal Requirements/Considerations described in Section 11 and the Project Goals and Objectives described in Section 4; and ii. Ability to effectively design, construct, and operate the project within the Development Parameters described in Section 8. c. Transaction Terms i. Proposed development schedule and phasing required to complete the project; and ii. Quality and feasibility of proposed business offer. Section 14 PROPOSED SELECTION SCHEDULE The City intends to proceed in accordance with the schedule shown below. The City reserves the right to issue written notice of any changes in the schedule should the City determine, in its sole and absolute discretion, that such changes are necessary or desirable. The City agrees to provide adequate notice to respondents should the schedule be amended. Such notice will be provided through the City’s website at www.bozeman.net. Section 15 SCHEDULE To be determined 14 | Page    105 Section 16 INQUIRIES All questions regarding the RFP shall be in writing and directed to: Brit Fontenot Director of Economic Development and Community Relations P.O. Box 1230 City of Bozeman, Montana 406-582-2258 bfontenot@bozeman.net Written questions and responses will be published on the City’s webpage at http://www.bozeman.net/Departments-(1)/Administration/Commission/BID---RFP---RFQ. Section 17 RESPONDENT RESPONSIBILITIES All facts and opinions stated herein and in any additional information, whether written or oral, provided by the City of Bozeman and/or its representatives, are based on available information and are believed to be accurate. However, no representation or warranty is made with respect thereto. The information in this document is intended to help prospective respondents create viable responses. However, it is the sole and absolute responsibility of those responding to this request to complete their own due diligence with regard to the information contained herein, including, without limitation, any development restrictions, whether contractual, governmental, physical, or otherwise, which may restrict or affect development of the site. Development is subject to all applicable development standards and restrictions. Section 18 RESERVATION OF RIGHTS BY CITY OF BOZEMAN The issuance of this RFP and the acceptance of a submittal do not constitute an agreement by the City that any contract will actually be entered into by the City. Any costs incurred by respondents in preparation of a response to this RFP or future RFP are completely the responsibility of the respondents. Any or all disputes arising under this RFP and any contract negotiated as a result of this RFP shall be governed by the laws of the State of Montana. The City reserves the right to issue written notice of any changes in the submittal process should the City determine, in its sole and absolute discretion, that such changes are necessary or desirable. In addition and notwithstanding any other provision of the RFP, the City reserves the right to: 15 | Page    106 a. Waive any immaterial defect or informality in a submittal; b. Extend or otherwise revise the submittal date; c. Reject any or all submissions or portions thereof; d. Reissue a new or revised RFP; and e. Request additional information or one or more teams to submit a more detailed submittal. Section 19 NO PARTNERSHIP/BUSINESS ORGANIZATION Nothing in this RFP or in any subsequent development agreement, lease, or any other contract entered into as a result of this RFP shall constitute, create, give rise to or otherwise be recognized as a partnership or formal business organization of any kind between or among the City or the team unless agreed to by the City. Section 20 EMPLOYMENT RESTRICTION AND INDEMNITY No person who is an officer, employee, contractor or consultant of a team shall be an officer or employee of the City. No rights of the City’s retirement or personnel rules accrue to the submitting team, its officers, employees, contractors, or consultants. The successful team shall have the total responsibility of all salaries, wages, bonuses, retirement, withholdings, worker’s compensation and occupational disease compensation, insurance, unemployment compensation, other benefits and taxes and premiums appurtenant thereto concerning its officers, employees, contractors, and consultants. Each submitting team shall save and hold the City harmless with respect to any and all claims for payment, compensation, salary, wages, bonuses, retirement, withholdings, worker’s compensation and occupational disease compensation, insurance, unemployment compensation, other benefits and taxes and premiums in any way related to each submitting team’s officers, employees, contractors, and consultants. Section 21 PROPERTY RIGHTS/DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION All materials submitted in response to this RFP and submittals subsequent thereto, shall become the property of the City upon delivery. By tendering a response to this RFP, every submitting team waives any right of access to other submittals during the review period. 16 | Page    107 17 | Page    Any entity tendering a submittal in response to this RFP further acknowledges and understands that the City is a public entity required to abide by public record laws and shall not be liable for disclosures required by law. Section 22 SUBMITTAL REJECTION/RIGHT TO DISQUALIFY Submittal of terms, condition and/or agreements may result in rejection if such terms, conditions, or agreements are deemed unacceptable by the City in its sole discretion. The City reserves the right to disqualify any team who fails to provide information or data specifically requested herein or who provides materially inaccurate or misleading information or data or who attempts to influence the selection process outside the procedures established herein. The City reserves the right to disqualify any team on the basis of any real or apparent conflict of interest. This disqualification is at the sole discretion of the City. Section 23 CITY OF BOZEMAN’S ANTI-DISCRIMINATION POLICY Each entity submitting under this notice shall include a provision wherein the submitting entity, or entities, affirms in writing it will not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, creed, sex, age, marital status, national origin, or because of actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability, and which also recognizes the eventual contract will contain a provision prohibiting discrimination as described above, and that this prohibition on discrimination shall apply to the hiring and treatment of the submitting entity’s employees and to all subcontracts. Failure to comply with the above shall be cause for the City to deem the submittal non- responsive. #### END OF RFP 108 From:Agenda To:Chris Kukulski; Chuck Winn; Greg Sullivan; Brit Fontenot; Subject:FW: Carnegie Lot Date:Wednesday, January 04, 2012 12:50:36 PM FYI A hard copy was just delivered to the Clerk’s office as well. From: Delaney & Company [mailto:delaneynco@earthlink.net] Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2012 9:52 AM To: Jeff Krauss; Agenda; Sean Becker; Carson Taylor; Chris Mehl; Cyndy Andrus Subject: Carnegie Lot Dear Mayor Krauss and City Commissioners, The following property owners in downtown Bozeman hereby request that the City of Bozeman does not offer the Carnegie parking lot for sale. We have expressed our concerns at various public meetings in the summer and fall of 2011. We feel this parking lot is of utmost importance to the long term financial survival of our businesses and properties downtown. Strategic, well located surface parking lots such as this can never been replaced. As downtown retailers and property owners, we see the tremendous importance to our customers, tenants and businesses of having easily accessible public parking. The Carnegie lot is heavily used at all hours of the day throughout the week and it is frequently packed which clearly demonstrates its need in our community. This need will grow even further over time. The sale of the Carnegie lot would effectively eliminate 86 spaces (73 in the lot and 13 in the alley adjacent to the lot) which represents over 20% of the existing public parking lot spaces in our downtown area. Once these public parking spaces are lost, we will never be able to get them back. The sale of the Carnegie lot and the loss of these much used parking spaces will be very damaging to all of our businesses particularly at a time when many businesses are struggling in the current economy. The Sonoran Institute recently conducted a study which concluded that downtown Bozeman properties pay the highest property taxes per square 109 foot over all other commercial properties in our city. However, the only way that we can remain economically viable and support this additional tax burden along with the other added costs of operating in a downtown historic district is by having public amenities such as accessible public parking lots. Having accessible public parking is the lifeblood of a vibrant downtown mixed-use retail center. The loss of these much used and much needed spaces would be a big blow to our downtown businesses. It will also be a mistake that you can never correct. Please don't break something which isn't broken. We urge you to listen to the downtown retailers and property owners and withdraw your plans to sell off the Carnegie lot. Sincerely, Ileana Indreland Michael W. Delaney Mike Hope Steve Roderick David Loseff Rick Radovich Ashley Ogle Rick Ogle Ruth Arnold Jeanne Arnold Richard Harte Kasey Harte CC: Mike Hope, Steve Roderick, David Loseff, Rick Radovich, Ashley Ogle (Rick Ogle), Jeanne Arnold (Ruth Arnold), Kasey Harte (Richard Harte) 110