1. No category

CONSULTING SERVICES
FOR THE GREATER SOUTHEAST
MANGEMENT DISTRICT, HOUSTON, TX
GREATER THIRD WARD COMMUNITY PLAN UPDATE
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
The Greater Southeast Management District (GSMD) is seeking consultant planning services to
complete an update to the Greater Third Ward Community Plan (originally created in July 1995).
The Consultant (or consultant team) will develop a process and plan that identifies and addresses
community-driven goals within the Third Ward study area.
The selected consultant will have knowledge and expertise in the following areas:
• Economic development and employment
• Social equity, asset-based community empowerment, and stakeholder-public
engagement
• Mixed-use, mixed income housing and residential development
• Multi-modal mobility planning, with a focus on connectivity and pedestrian &
ADA accessibility
• Community and/or municipal comprehensive planning
• Historical and cultural resource identification and preservation
• Public safety and emergency management planning
Since this project requires a range of research, public engagement, and planning expertise, a
team of specialized firms with one prime contractor is permitted.
One (1) original, ten (10) copies and one (1) electronic version (flashdrive) of the proposal must
be returned in a sealed envelope bearing the RFP name and the name of the address and
respondent on the outside of the envelope. Response packages will be accepted until 2:00 p.m.
(CST) on May 11, 2015 and should be addressed to:
Greater Southeast Management District
ATTN: Ms. Hina Musa
Interim Executive Director
5445 Almeda Road
Suite 503
Houston, TX 77004
1
All questions related to this RFP shall be addressed via e-mail to Hina Musa at
hmusa@greatersoutheastonline.com. The deadline for questions and inquiries is April 22, 2015
at 2:00 p.m. (CST).
All addenda and responses to questions will be posted on the GSMD website at
http://greatersoutheastonline.com/.
Reservations
GSMD reserves the right to accept or reject any or all proposals as a result of this request, to
negotiate with all qualified sources, or to cancel, in part or in its entirety, this Request for
Proposals if found in the best interest of the District. All proposals become the property of
GSMD.
GSMD reserves the right to waive any informalities and technicalities and to accept the offer
considered most advantageous in order to obtain the best value. Causes for rejection of a
proposal may include but shall not be limited to: the Offeror’s current violation of any state or
federal law, the Offeror’s current inability to satisfactorily perform the work or service, or the
Offeror’s previous failure to properly and timely perform its obligations under a contract with
GSMD.
Offeror may be disqualified and rejection of proposals may be recommended for any of (but not
limited to) the following causes: 1) Failure to follow the criteria as established within this RFP;
2) Lack of signature by an authorized representative on the Certification form; 3) Failure to
properly complete the proposal; 4) Evidence of collusion among proposers; or 5) Any alteration
of the language contained within the RFP forms.
GSMD reserves the right to waive any minor informality or irregularity.
GSMD reserves the right to retain all proposals submitted and to use any idea in a proposal
regardless of whether that proposal is selected. Submission of a proposal indicates acceptance by
the firm of the terms and conditions contained in this request for proposals, unless clearly and
specifically noted in the proposal submitted and confirmed in the contract between GSMD and
the firm selected.
GSMD will conduct reference checks as needed to evaluate proposals. The GSMD may contact
those listed, and inclusion of this listing in your proposal is agreement that GSMD may contact
the named references. GSMD reserves the right to contact other companies or individuals that
can provide information that will assist in evaluating the capability of the Service Provider.
2
Negotiations
During the evaluation process, GSMD reserves the right to request additional information or
clarifications from proposers. At the discretion of GSMD, all firm(s) reasonably susceptible of
being selected based on criteria set forth in this RFP, may be requested to make oral
presentations.
Each proposal must designate the person(s) who will be responsible for answering technical and
contractual questions. Preliminary negotiations may be conducted with responsible Offeror(s)
who submit proposals that are reasonably susceptible of being selected. At the discretion of
GSMD, all Offeror(s) reasonably susceptible of being selected based on criteria set forth in this
RFP may be given an opportunity to make a presentation and/or interview with the Selection
Committee.
Vendors will be ranked in order of preference and final contract negotiations will begin with the
top ranked firm. Should negotiations with the highest ranked firm fail to yield a contract, or if the
firm is unable to execute said contract, negotiations will be formally ended and then commence
with the second highest ranked firm, etc.
SCHEDULE OF IMPORTANT DATES
The tentative schedule for this Request for Proposals is as follows:
Release of RFP: April 6, 2015
Deadline for Questions and Inquiries: April 22, 2015
Response to Questions and Inquiries: April 24, 2015
Proposal Submission Deadline: May 11, 2015
Earliest Contract Award Date: May 27, 2015
BACKGROUND
The Greater Southeast Management District was created to promote, develop, encourage and
maintain employment, commerce, transportation, housing, recreation, arts, entertainment,
economic development, safety, and the public welfare in the Southeast Houston area. The
District was created in 2001 by the 77th Texas Legislature pursuant to House Bill 3692 (the
“Special Act”). The District is roughly bounded by Interstate 45 and U.S. 59 to the north, Main
Street to the west, and Old Spanish Trail and Griggs Road to the south. It encompasses
approximately 30.31 square miles (19,400 acres).
The Greater Third Ward Community Plan was originally a project of the Third Ward
Redevelopment Council (TWRC), a nonprofit, tax exempt organization. TWRC is a coalition of
individuals, businesses, and organizations with a stake in the future of the Greater Third Ward
3
Community. The initial Greater Third Ward Community Plan was developed in 1995 and has
not been updated since.
Many of the same conditions persist that were noted in the 1995 community plan. For instance,
blighted housing, safety issues, access to healthy food options, and a dearth of adequate
retail/services remain as concerns today. However, there is also much that has changed in the
Greater Third Ward in the intervening 20 years since the first community plan was created.
Light rail transit is now a reality in the area, with the first line having operated since 2004 and a
second line, traversing the heart of the area, soon to open. A key community amenity,
Emancipation Park, is undergoing a $35 million renovation and is poised to be a regional
destination. Master planning for MacGregor Park is soon to be underway.
Major
activity/employment centers such as the Texas Medical Center and the University of Houston
have expanded, with UH achieving “Tier One” research status in 2011. With these
advancements, as well as the increasingly sought-after locational advantages of “inside the loop”
neighborhoods, the area is also experiencing increasing development pressure, and gradual
demographic changes. The challenge facing the community today is determining how to
successfully manage the change while preserving the area’s rich culture and history, retaining
families, attracting new commercial development, and offering a full range of housing choices.
The focus of the Greater Third Ward Community Plan Update should be on developing
implementation strategies, plans, and tasks that leverage the community’s assets to bring positive
change to the area.
This is only meant to be a general overview of the area’s past and present and shouldn’t be
regarded as an all-encompassing statement of the area’s goals and concerns as it relates to the
development of the updated community plan. Engagement of stakeholders and citizens will be a
critically important component of the process. The Greater Third Ward area has no shortage of
community advocacy groups. The general public in the area is also known for its strong level of
civic engagement and willingness to let its voice be known. These groups and individual
residents/business owners will ultimately set the course for the recommendations in the Greater
Third Ward Community Plan Update.
STUDY AREA: GREATER THIRD WARD
The focus of the study is the area roughly bounded by US59 to the north, Old Spanish Trail to
the south, Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd to the east, and Main Street to the west. The area is a high
density area with a mix of land uses and a traditional street grid system. The area is also an
important connection to adjacent neighborhoods including Midtown, Downtown, and the Texas
Medical Center.
4
SCHEDULED TIME FRAME
The work is scheduled to begin on or about June 2015, and to be completed within twelve
months of the start date. GSMD reserves the right to extend, expand, or contract the scope of this
contract, subject to GSMD Board of Directors’ approval and additional funding availability.
PROJECT SCOPE OF WORK
The Greater Southeast Management District is seeking a consulting firm or consulting team to
develop an update to the Third Ward Community Plan. The following task elements have been
established to serve as a guide for plan development. Potential submitters are welcome to suggest
additions or modifications to these components to obtain a high quality planning document.
Responses to this RFP should include a scope of work with a budget for each plan
component described below (and/or as suggested by the proposer). Regardless of
modifications and suggestions, the planning process and final document must involve a robust
public outreach process in order to define the visions and goals of the community as a whole.
5
Task 1: Public Involvement, Outreach, and Empowerment
A major component of this planning effort will be an integrated, robust, and comprehensive
public outreach strategy. Provide a defined program for outreach to community residents,
businesses, and other vital stakeholders both on the front-end and throughout the planning
process. Provide a means for meaningful interaction and feedback that allows for a partnership
between project facilitators and the community. Use of strategies above and beyond a typical
public meeting format is encouraged.
Task 2: Review of Community Plans
Provide an assessment of the original Third Ward Community Plan as to successfully
implemented projects and other accomplishments, as well as challenges and reasons for nonimplemented recommendations. A focus area should be evaluating the effectiveness of GSMD
and the OST/Almeda Redevelopment Authority (TIRZ #7), both of which were created as a
direct result of the recommendations in the original Third Ward Community Plan.
In addition, this task should identify, review, and synthesize other plans and reports (recently
completed, ongoing, and upcoming) that are relevant to the community. Examples of these
plans/reports include, but are not limited to:
• MacGregor Park Master Plan (upcoming)
•
GSMD Brand Assessment (Brand Extract, ongoing)
•
Museum Park Livable Centers study (ongoing)
•
Palm Center Master Plan (upcoming)
•
TSU/UH Economic Development/Business Community Analysis Studies (recently
completed)
Task 3: Update the Community Demographic Profile
Review, analyze, and update the profile of the Third Ward, to include community history,
location, and general characteristic, demographic information. This should include 2010 Census
data (or newer American Community Survey data), as well as demographic projections for the
next 20 years.
Task 4: Community Capital and Assets
Identify community capital (human, social, cultural, political, economic, physical, and
environmental) and assets (individuals, associations, and institutions). Identify strategies for
preserving and capitalizing on these resources. Identify any particular strengths or deficiencies,
6
such as in the areas of crime, health and wellness, education, community facilities, and services
for the elderly and disabled.
Provide a detailed list of parks, open spaces, trails, and other environmental assets. Identify
potential threats to these resources as well as ways these resources can be leveraged to the
benefit of the community.
Task 5: Local Economy, Jobs, and Economic Development
Review and analyze local and regional economic factors that will influence future growth and
development. Identify local (intra-Third Ward) economic strengths and weaknesses. Provide a
framework for improving the local economic conditions for Third Ward residents and
businesses.
Task 6: Housing
Provide a succinct historical analysis of housing within the Third Ward. Provide an update on
existing housing stock to include occupancy rates, rental vs. ownership percentage, condition,
trends, affordability, and other important information. A strategy for retaining a sustainable mix
of housing-stock in perpetuity should be provided.
Task 7: Transportation
Provide a high level review of the transportation network within the Third Ward. Identify
current and future changes to the system as proposed by the City of Houston, the Texas
Department of Transportation (TxDOT), and the Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris
County (METRO). Provide a list of community supported goals and objectives for transportation
that can be facilitated by or advocated through GSMD.
Task 8: Community Appearance, Land Use, and Urban Design
Provide a plan section on desired community appearance and land use based upon feedback from
public engagement. This should encompass community attitudes and desires for land uses,
architectural styles, floor to area ratios, and general design guidelines within the Third Ward.
The entirety of the built environment should be considered, to include public space within the
right-of-way.
Task 9: Public Safety and Emergency Management
Evaluate the community’s prevention, protection, mitigation, response, and recovery capabilities
as it relates to public safety concerns, including crime, civil disorder, and terrorism. Reference
guidelines such as the National Preparedness System, Homeland Security Exercise and
Evaluation Program (HSEEP), and Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED).
Evaluate preparedness, response, recovery, and mitigation capabilities as it relates to
management of natural (e.g. weather) and man-made (e.g. accidents) emergencies.
7
Task 10: Implementation Strategies
While implementation strategies will be discussed throughout the plan, there should also be a
consolidated section of the plan in which all recommendations and implementation strategies,
plans, and tasks are concisely laid out by relevant category for easy reference.
Draft and Final Plan Deliverables
The plan shall be drafted and published in a format and language that is user-friendly, easily
understood and readily accessible to the general public. Heavy reliance on the use of technical
planning language in the plan is discouraged, whenever possible. The use of maps, graphics and
other innovative visual aids that will encourage the community’s involvement in promoting the
plan is encouraged. The plan should include an Executive Summary that is both incorporated
into the overall plan document and can also serve as a stand-alone document in a brochure or
newsletter format that can be easily reproduced for mass distribution.
The following deliverables are expected but can be negotiated:
• One (1) copy of the draft plan.
• Fifty (50) bound, colored copies of the final plan, complete with recommended policies,
associated data, supportive tables, charts and maps and summaries of major recommendations,
all of which incorporates the plan elements listed above. Maps and illustrations shall be
completed at a scale that will reproduce to fit 8.5” x 11” and 11” x 17”.
• One (1) unbound copy of the colorized version of the final plan.
• One (1) digital copy of the final plan document in a commonly accepted digital medium
Submittal Requirements:
The following instructions describe the form in which proposals must be submitted.
Proposals which do not contain responses to each of the required items will be considered
incomplete and may be rejected.
Proposal documents should provide a straightforward, concise description of the firm’s
capabilities to satisfy the requirements of this RFP. Emphasis should be on completeness, clarity
of content, and conveyance of the information as requested. The requirements stated do not
preclude Offerors herein from furnishing additional reports, functions, and costs as deemed
appropriate.
8
One (1) original, ten (10) copies and one (1) electronic version (flashdrive) of the proposal
must be returned in a sealed envelope bearing the RFP name, and the name and address of
the respondent on the outside of the envelope.
To facilitate the review of the responses, Firms shall follow the described proposal format:
1. Letter of Response (maximum three [3] pages):
• RFP title.
•
Statement by the firm of its qualifications and experience.
•
Information on the firm.
•
Description of the firm’s ability to provide the services.
2. Work Program (maximum twenty [20] pages):
•
Project overview.
•
Narrative and graphics on how the project will be completed.
•
Description of how the planning process will be organized.
•
Proposed project schedule.
3. Cost Proposal (maximum three [3] pages):
•
The cost proposal must itemize all charges for individually identifiable components of the
Scope of Work.
•
The cost proposal must state a maximum “not to exceed” contract amount for all services
rendered.
4. Project List (maximum ten [10] pages):
•
Similar projects completed in the last five (5) years including brief description of project,
name of agency for whom work was completed, address, contact person, telephone
numbers and email addresses.
5. Key Personnel (maximum ten [10] pages):
•
Names, Titles
•
Proposed role in this project
9
•
Experience
EVALUATION CRITERIA
Evaluation of each proposal will be based on the following criteria:
1. Qualifications - Degree to which the firm has completed similar projects or has background
and expertise to complete this project. (15%)
2. Price Proposal – The amount the firm proposes in comparison to other firms. (10%)
3. Understanding of Project – Degree to which the firm understands the project, whether from
experience with similar projects or from preparatory research. (20%)
4. Approach to the Project – Degree to which the firm’s proposed scope of work addresses the
project issues. (25%)
5. Quality of Work – Quality of the proposal and the evaluation of references from other projects
done by the firm. (10%)
6. Personnel – The qualifications and availability of the personnel to be assigned to the project.
(15%)
7. Intangible Factors – The degree of “chemistry” between the firm’s proposal and proposal
reviewers. (5%)
ADDENDA: Addenda to this RFP are incorporated by reference as if fully setout herein. It is the responsibility of
interested parties to insure and verify that they are in receipt of and completed all attached addenda’s prior to
submission of a proposal.
INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS: Contractor shall provide and maintain certain insurance in full force and effect
at all times during the term of this Contract and any extensions thereto. Such insurance is described as follows:
Risks and Limits of Liability: The insurance, at a minimum, must include the following coverage and limits of
liability:
10
(COVERAGE)
(LIMIT OF LIABILITY)
Workers’ Compensation
Statutory for Workers’ Compensation
Employer’s Liability
Bodily Injury by Accident
$100,000 (each accident)
Bodily Injury by Disease
$100,000 (policy limit)
Bodily Injury by Disease
$100,000 (each employee)
Commercial General Liability; Bodily
and Personal Injury; Products and
Completed Operations Coverage
Bodily Injury and Property Damage, Combined
Limits of $500,000 each Occurrence, and $1,000,000
aggregate per 12-month period (defense costs
excluded from face amount of policy)
Automobile Liability
$1,000,000 combined single limit
Professional Liability Coverage
$1,000,000 per claim/aggregate
If the required insurance is not in place at the time responses are submitted, responders must show evidence of
insurability at the above described coverage limits, which evidence can be in the form of a valid insurance quote or
such other evidence of insurability acceptable to the District. Alternatively, the responders may submit a copy of a
valid Certificate of Insurance with the above coverage and limits of liability as proof of insurance.
Insurance must be in effect at the time a Contract is executed with the successful contractor.
11