Phoenix_Main_Line_Transit_Oriented_Development_(TOD)_(Addendum_#1_Revision).pdf

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL - GOODS AND SERVICES

PTD25-004

PHOENIX MAIN LINE TRANSIT ORIENTED

DEVELOPMENT (TOD)

CITY OF PHOENIX

PUBLIC TRANSIT

302 N. 1ST AVENUE

PHOENIX, AZ

85003

RELEASE DATE: August 1, 2025

DEADLINE FOR QUESTIONS: August 22, 2025

RESPONSE DEADLINE: September 12, 2025, 11:59 pm

City of Phoenix

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL - GOODS AND SERVICES

PTD25-004

Phoenix Main Line Transit Oriented Development (TOD)

1. INTRODUCTION

2. INSTRUCTIONS

3. SCOPE OF WORK

4. EVALUATION PROCESS

5. STANDARD TERMS AND CONDITIONS

6. SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS

7. DEFENSE AND INDEMNIFICATION

8. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS

9. SUBMITTALS

10. PRICING PROPOSAL

Attachments:

A - Acceptance of Offer Form

B - Exhibit B - Small Business Participation Plan Forms

Request For Proposal - Goods and Services #PTD25-004 Title: Phoenix Main Line Transit Oriented Development (TOD)

1. Introduction

1.1. Contact Information

Conner Exline

Public Transit

Email: conner.exline@phoenix.gov

Phone: (602) 256-3239

1.2. Schedule of Events

The City reserves the right to change dates, times, and locations, as necessary. The City does not always hold a Pre-Offer Conference or Site Visit. All times in the Schedule of Events are

Local Phoenix, AZ Time.

To request a reasonable accommodation or alternative format for any public meeting, please contact the Procurement Officer (Conner Exline) at (602) 256-3239/Voice or 711/TTY, or conner.exline@phoenix.gov, no later than two (2) weeks prior to the meeting.

Solicitation Issue Date: August 1, 2025

Pre-Offer Conference (Non-Mandatory): August 13, 2025, 10:00am

Conference to be conducted via Microsoft

Teams.

RSVP via email to conner.exline@phoenix.gov required by

August 12, 2025, 11:59 PM MST

Written Inquiries Due Date: August 22, 2025, 11:59pm

Offer Due Date: September 12, 2025, 11:59pm mailto:conner.exline@phoenix.gov

2. Instructions

2.1. Preparation of Offer

All forms provided must be completed and submitted with the Offer. The signed and completed

Conflict of Interest and Transparency form must be included or your Offer may be deemed non-responsive.

It is permissible to copy Submittal forms if necessary. Erasures, interlineations, or other modifications of the Offer must be initialed in original ink by the authorized person signing the

Offer. No offer will be altered, amended or withdrawn after the specified offer due date and time.

Key Personnel proposed in the offer may not be replaced before contract award or else the

Offeror shall be determined non-responsible. The City is not responsible for Offeror’s errors or omissions.

All time periods stated as a number of days will be calendar days.

It is the responsibility of all Offerors to examine the entire solicitation and seek clarification of any requirement that may not be clear and to check all responses for accuracy before submitting an offer. Negligence in preparing an offer confers no right of withdrawal after due date and time. Offerors are strongly encouraged to:

A. Consider applicable laws and/or economic conditions that may affect cost, progress, performance, or furnishing of the products or services.

B. Study and carefully correlate Offeror’s knowledge and observations with the RFP document and other related data.

C. Promptly notify the City of all conflicts, errors, ambiguities, or discrepancies which an

Offeror has discovered in or between the RFP document and such other related documents.

D. The City does not reimburse the cost of developing, presenting or providing any response to this solicitation. Offers submitted for consideration should be prepared simply and economically, providing adequate information in a straightforward and concise manner. The Offeror is responsible for all costs incurred in responding to this solicitation. All materials and documents submitted in response to this solicitation become the property of the City and will not be returned.

E. Offerors are reminded that the specifications stated in the solicitation are the minimum level required and that offers submitted must be for products or services that meet or exceed the minimum level of all features specifically listed in this solicitation. Offers offering less than any minimum specifications or criteria specified are not responsive and should not be submitted.

F. Offer responses submitted for products considered by the seller to be acceptable alternates to the brand names or manufacturer’s catalog references specified herein must be submitted with technical literature and/or detailed product brochures for the

City’s use to evaluate the products offered. Offers submitted without this product information may be considered as non-responsive and rejected. The City will be the sole judge as to the acceptability of alternate products offered.

G. Prices will be submitted on a per unit basis by line item, when applicable. In the event of a disparity between the unit price and extended price, the unit price will prevail unless obviously in error.

Unless the solicitation specifically allows, alterations of electronic spreadsheet price proposals will be sufficient grounds for the City to consider your offer to be non-responsive.

2.2. Fixed Offer Price Period

All offers shall be firm and fixed for a period of 180 calendar days from the solicitation opening date.

2.3. Obtaining a Copy of the Solicitation and Addenda

Interested Offerors may download the complete solicitation and addenda from the City's

Procurement Portal: https://procurement.opengov.com/portal/phoenix/projects/170315. Any interested Offerors without internet access may obtain this solicitation by calling the

Procurement Officer or picking up a copy during regular business hours at the City of Phoenix, Public Transit Department, Procurement and Contracts Section, 302 N. 1st Avenue, 9th Floor, Phoenix, AZ 85003. It is the Offeror’s responsibility to check the City's Procurement Portal, read the entire solicitation, and verify all required information is submitted with their Offer.

2.4. Exceptions

Offeror must not take any exceptions to any terms, conditions or material requirements of this solicitation. Offers submitted with exceptions may be deemed non-responsive and disqualified from further consideration in the City’s sole discretion. Offerors must conform to all the requirements specified in the solicitation. The City encourages Offerors to send inquiries to the

Procurement Officer rather than including exceptions in their Offer.

2.5. Inquiries

All questions that arise relating to this solicitation should be directed via City’s OpenGov

Procurement Portal and must be received by the due date indicated in the Schedule of Events.

The City will not consider questions received after the deadline.

No informal contact initiated by Offerors on the proposed service will be allowed with members of City’s staff from date of distribution of this solicitation until after city council awards the contract. All questions concerning or issues related to this solicitation must be presented in writing.

The Procurement Officer will answer written inquiries in an addendum and publish any addenda on the City’s OpenGov Procurement Portal.

2.6. Addenda

The City of Phoenix will not be responsible for any oral instructions made by any employees or officers of the City of Phoenix regarding this solicitation. Any changes will be in the form of an https://procurement.opengov.com/portal/phoenix/projects/170315 addendum. The Offeror must acknowledge receipt of any/all addenda through the City's

Procurement Portal.

2.7. Business in Arizona

The City will not enter contracts with Offerors (or any company(ies)) not granted authority to transact business, or not in good standing, in the state of Arizona by the Arizona Corporation

Commission, unless the Offeror asserts a statutory exception prior to entering a contract with the City.

2.8. Licenses

If required by law for the operation of the business or work related to this Offer, Offeror must possess all valid certifications and/or licenses as required by federal, state or local laws at the time of submittal.

2.9. Certifications

By signature in the Offer section of the Offer and Acceptance page(s), Offeror certifies:

• The submission of the Offer did not involve collusion or other anti-competitive practices.

• The Offeror must not discriminate against any employee, or applicant for employment in violation of Federal or State Law.

• The Offeror has not given, offered to give, nor intends to give at any time hereafter, any economic opportunity, future employment, gift, loan, gratuity, special discount, trip, favor, or service to a public servant in connection with the submitted Offer.

2.10. Submission of Offer

Offers must be in possession of the Department on or prior to the exact time and date indicated in the Schedule of Events. Late offers will not be considered. The prevailing clock will be the

City Department’s clock.

Offers should be submitted electronically via the City’s Procurement Portal by clicking on “Draft

Response” via https://procurement.opengov.com/portal/phoenix/projects/170315. Offerors that are unable to submit electronically should contact the Procurement Officer to discuss the logistics of hard copy submittals. Offerors must be registered with OpenGov by signing up via https://procurement.opengov.com/signup. Vendor training guides can be found at: https://opengov.my.site.com/support/s/article/ca6d1285-1e48-4a21-bb0d-715edb7794ed

Any original documents (such as bonds, guaranties, powers of attorney), if required by the solicitation, must be separately delivered to and received by the City on or prior to the exact time and date indicated in the Schedule of Events, with a clear indication of the Offer for which it is attributed.

It is the responsibility of the Offeror to ensure that the Offer is timely and to confirm that there are no technical reasons that any offer submitted electronically may be delayed. The date and time on the upload as received/stamped by the City’s Procurement Portal will provide proof of submission and verification whether the Offer was received on or prior to the exact time and date indicated in the Schedule of Events.

https://procurement.opengov.com/portal/phoenix/projects/170315 https://procurement.opengov.com/signup https://opengov.my.site.com/support/s/article/ca6d1285-1e48-4a21-bb0d-715edb7794ed

For assistance with submittals, vendors are welcome to use the OpenGov support chat (blue chat bubble in the bottom right corner) to connect with a member of OpenGov's support team who will be able to assist you with your submission.

Please DO NOT submit links to Google Docs, Dropbox Paper, or similar services. Your offer may be deemed non-responsive if your offer is supplied utilizing these services.

2.11. Withdrawal of Offer

At any time prior to the solicitation due date and time, an Offeror (or designated representative) may withdraw the Offer by clicking “Unsubmit Response” on the Offer submission via the City’s

Procurement Portal.

2.12. Offer Results

Offers will be opened on the offer due date, time and location indicated in the Schedule of

Events, at which time the name of each Offeror, and the prices may be read. Offers and other information received in response to the solicitation will be shown only to authorized City personnel having a legitimate interest in them or persons assisting the City in the evaluation.

Offers are not available for public inspection until after the City has posted the award recommendation on the City's Procurement Portal.

The City will post a preliminary offer tabulation on the City's Procurement

Portal: https://procurement.opengov.com/portal/phoenix/projects/170315 within five business days of the offer opening. The City will post the information on the preliminary tabulation as it was read during the offer opening. The City makes no guarantee as to the accuracy of any information on the preliminary tabulation. Once the City has evaluated the offers, the City will post an award recommendation on the City's Procurement Portal. By signing and submitting its

Offer, each Offeror agrees that this posting of the award recommendation to the City's

Procurement Portal effectively serves as the Offeror’s receipt of that notice of award recommendation. The City has no obligation to provide any further notification to unsuccessful

Offerors.

2.13. Pre-Award Qualifications

Offeror must have been in operation a minimum of five years. The Offeror’s normal business activity during the past five years will have been for providing the goods or services in this solicitation.

Upon notification of a recommended award, the Offeror will have 14 calendar days to submit a complete certificate of insurance in the minimum amounts and the coverages as required in the

Insurance Requirements of this agreement. Insurance requirements are non-negotiable.

2.14. Minimum Qualifications

The following requirements must be met at offer due date and time, or else the City may determine that the offer is non-responsive, or the Offeror is non-responsible:

A. Offeror must have been in operation a minimum of five years. The Offeror’s normal business activity during the past five years will have been for providing the goods or services in this solicitation.

https://procurement.opengov.com/portal/phoenix/projects/170315

2.15. Certificates of Insurance

Upon notification of a recommended award, the Offeror will have 14 calendar days to submit a complete certificate of insurance in the minimum amounts and the coverages as required in the

Insurance Requirements of this solicitation. Insurance requirements are non-negotiable.

2.16. Award of Contract

Unless otherwise indicated, award(s) will be made to the most responsive, responsible

Offeror(s) who are regularly established in the service, or providing the goods, contained in this solicitation and who have demonstrated the ability to perform in an acceptable manner.

A. Factors that may be considered by the City include:

1. Technical capability of the Offeror to accomplish the scope of work required in the

Solicitation. This may include performance history on past and current government or industrial contracts; and,

2. Demonstrated availability of the necessary manpower (both supervisory and operational personnel) and necessary equipment to accomplish the scope of work in the Solicitation; and,

3. Safety record; and,

4. Offeror history of complaints and termination for convenience or cause.

B. Notwithstanding any other provision of this solicitation, the City reserves the right to: (1) waive any immaterial defect or informality; or (2) reject any or all offers or portions thereof; or (3) reissue a solicitation.

C. A response to a solicitation is an offer to contract with the City based upon the terms, conditions, and specifications contained in the City’s solicitation. Offers do not become contracts until they are executed by the Chief Procurement Officer or Department

Director. A contract has its inception in the award, eliminating a formal signing of a separate contract. For that reason, all of the terms, conditions and specifications of the procurement contract are contained in the solicitation, and in any addendum or contract amendment.

2.17. Solicitation Transparency Policy

Commencing on the date and time a solicitation is published, potential or actual Offerors or respondents (including their representatives) shall only discuss matters associated with the solicitation with the Mayor, any members of City Council, the City Manager, any Deputy City

Manager, or any department director directly associated with the solicitation (including in each case their assigned staff, except for the designated Procurement Officer) at a public meeting, posted under Arizona Statutes, until the resulting contract(s) are awarded to all offers or responses are rejected and the solicitation is cancelled without any announcement by the

Procurement Officer of the City’s intent to reissue the same or similar solicitation.

As long as the solicitation is not discussed, Offerors may continue to conduct business with the

City and discuss business that is unrelated to the solicitation with the City staff. Offerors may not discuss the solicitation with any City employees or evaluation panel members.

Offerors may discuss their proposal or the solicitation with the Mayor or one or more members of the Phoenix City Council, provided such meetings are scheduled through the Procurement

Officer, and are posted as open meetings with the City Clerk at least 24 hours prior to the scheduled meetings. The City Clerk will be responsible for posting the meetings. The posted notice shall identify the participants and the subject matter, as well as invite the public to participate.

With respect to the selection of the successful Offerors, the City Manager and/or City Manager's

Office will continue the past practice of exerting no undue influence on the process. In all solicitations of bids and proposals, any direction on the selection from the City Manager and/or

City Manager's Office and Department Head (or representative) to the proposal review panel or selecting authority must be provided in writing to all prospective Offerors.

This policy is intended to create a level playing field for all Offerors, assure that contracts are awarded in public, and protect the integrity of the selection process. OFFERORS THAT

VIOLATE THIS POLICY SHALL BE DISQUALIFIED. After official Notice is received by the City for disqualification, the Offeror may follow the Protest process, unless the Solicitation is cancelled without notice of intent to re-issue.

“To discuss” means any contact by the Offeror, regardless of whether the City responds to the contact. Offerors that violate this policy will be disqualified until the resulting contract(s) are awarded, or all offers or responses are rejected and the solicitation is cancelled without any announcement by the Procurement Officer of the City’s intent to reissue the same or a similar solicitation. The City interprets the policy as continuing through a cancellation of a solicitation until Council award of the contract, as long as the City cancels with a statement that the City will rebid the solicitation.

2.18. Protest Process

Offeror may protest the contents of a solicitation no later than seven days before the solicitation deadline when the protest is based on an apparent alleged mistake, impropriety or defect in the solicitation. Protests filed regarding the solicitation may be addressed by an amendment to the solicitation or denied by the City. If denied, the opening and award will proceed unless the City determines that it is in the City’s best interests to set new deadlines, amend the solicitation, cancel or re-bid.

Therefore, unless otherwise notified by a formal amendment, the Protester must adhere to all solicitation dates and deadlines, including timely filing of an offer, regardless of filing a protest.

Offeror may protest an adverse determination issued by the City regarding responsibility and responsiveness, within seven days of the date the Offeror was notified of the adverse determination.

Offeror may protest an award recommendation if the Offeror can establish that it had a substantial chance of being awarded the contract and will be harmed by the recommended award. The City will post recommendations on the City’s Procurement Portal to award the contract(s) to an Offeror(s). Offeror must submit award protests within seven days after the posting of the award recommendation, with exceptions only for good cause shown, within the

City’s full and final discretion.

All protests will be in writing, filed with the Procurement Officer identified in the solicitation and include the following:

• Identification of the solicitation number;

• The name, address and telephone number of the protester;

• A detailed statement describing the legal and factual grounds for the protest, including copies of relevant documents;

• The form of relief requested; and

• The signature of the protester or its authorized representative.

The Procurement Officer will render a written decision within a reasonable period after the protest is filed. The City will not request City Council authorization to award the contract until the protest process is complete. All protests and appeals must be submitted in accordance with the

City’s Procurement Code, (Phoenix City Code, Ch. 43) and any protests or appeals not submitted within the time requirements will not be considered. Protests must be filed with the

Procurement Officer.

2.19. Public Record

All Offers submitted in response to this solicitation will become the property of the City and become a matter of public record available for review pursuant to Arizona State law. If an

Offeror believes that a specific section of its Offer response is confidential, the Offeror will isolate the pages marked confidential in a specific and clearly labeled section of its Offer response. An Offeror may request specific information contained within its Offer is treated by the

Procurement Officer as confidential provided the Offeror clearly labels the information

“confidential.” To the extent necessary for the evaluation process, information marked as

“confidential” will not be treated as confidential. Once the procurement file becomes available for public inspection, the Procurement Officer will not make any information identified by the

Offerors as “confidential” available to the public unless necessary to support the evaluation process or if specifically requested in accordance with applicable public records law. When a public records request for such information is received, the Procurement Officer will notify the

Offeror in writing of any request to view any portion of its Offer marked “confidential.” The

Offeror will have the time set forth in the notice to obtain a court order enjoining such disclosure.

If the Offeror does not provide the Procurement Officer with a court order enjoining release of the information during the designated time, the Procurement Officer will make the information requested available for inspection.

2.20. Right to Disqualify

The City reserves the right to disqualify any Offeror who fails to provide information or data requested or who provides materially inaccurate or misleading information or data. The City further reserves the right to disqualify any Offeror on the basis of any real or apparent conflict of interest that is disclosed by the Offer submitted or any other data or information available to the

City. This disqualification is at the sole discretion of the City. By submission of a solicitation response, the Offeror waives any right to object now or at any future time, before any agency or body including, but not limited to, the City Council of the City or any court as to the exercise by the City of such right to disqualify or as to any disqualification by reason of real or apparent conflict of interest determined by the City. The City reserves the right to replace the disqualified

Offeror.

2.21. Contract Award

The City reserves the right to award a contract by individual line items, by group, all or none, or any other combination most advantageous to the City. The City reserves the right to award multiple contracts.

2.22. Determining Responsiveness and Responsibility

Offers will be reviewed for documentation of minimum qualifications, completeness, and compliance with the Solicitation requirements. The City reserves sole discretion to determine responsiveness and responsibility.

Responsiveness: Nonresponsive Offers will not be considered in the evaluation process. The solicitation states criteria that determine responsiveness, and the solicitation includes terms and conditions that if included or excluded from Offers (as the case may be) will render an Offer nonresponsive.

Exceptions, conditions, reservations, or understandings are presumed to be unacceptable, and an Offer that includes unacceptable exceptions, conditions, reservations, or understandings may be rejected as nonresponsive. Alternatively, the City in its sole discretion may instruct in writing that any Offeror remove the conditions, exceptions, reservations or understandings. If the Offeror fails to do so in writing, the City may determine the Offer to be nonresponsive.

Responsibility: To obtain true economy, the City must conduct solicitations to minimize the possibility of a subsequent default by the Contractor, late deliveries, or other unsatisfactory performance that may result in additional administrative costs. It is important that the Offeror be a responsible Contractor. Responsibility includes the Offeror’s integrity, skill, capacity, experience, and facilities for conducting the work to be performed.

The Procurement Officer will review each Offer to determine if the Offeror is responsible. The

City’s determination as to whether an Offeror is responsible will be based on all information furnished by the Offeror, interviews (if any), and information received from Offeror’s references, including information about Offeror’s history, terminations for convenience or cause, contract breach lawsuits or notices of claim and any other sources the City deems appropriate. Award of the Contract resulting from the solicitation will not be made until any necessary investigation, which each Offeror agrees to permit by submitting its Offer, is made by the City as it deems necessary. A review of responsibility may occur up to contract award.

The Offeror’s unreasonable failure to promptly supply information about an inquiry with respect to responsibility may be grounds for a determination of non-responsibility with respect to such

Offeror.

2.23. Clarifications

The City may request written clarifications for such purposes as information gathering or eliminating minor informalities in offers. Clarifications shall not otherwise afford the Offerors the opportunity to alter or change their offers.

2.24. Equal Low Offer

Contract award will be made by putting the names of the tied vendors in a cup for a blind drawing limited to those bidders with tied offers. If time permits, the offerors involved will be given an opportunity to attend the drawing. The drawing will be witnessed by at least three persons, and the contract file will contain the names and addresses of the witnesses.

2.25. Evaluation of Competitive Sealed Offers

The City will use its discretion in applying the following processes to this solicitation. Any ties in scoring will be resolved with a best and final price request and the lowest price will prevail.

2.26. Detailed Evaluation of Offers and Determination of Competitive Range

During deliberations, the Evaluation Panel will reach a consensus score for each evaluation criterion except price. The Procurement Officer will score the price, which will be added to the overall consensus score. The overall consensus scores will determine the Offerors’ rankings and which offers are within the Competitive Range, when appropriate.

2.27. Offers Not Within the Competitive Range

The City may notify Offerors of Offers that the City determined are not in the Competitive

Range.

2.28. Discussions with Offerors in the Competitive Range

The City will notify each Offeror whose Offer is in the Competitive Range or made the ‘short list’ and provide in writing any questions or requests for clarification to the Offeror. Each Offeror so notified may be interviewed by the City and asked to discuss answers to written or oral questions or provide clarifications to any facet of its Offer. The Offerors in the competitive range may be required to provide a demonstration of their product.

Demonstrations - Offerors in the competitive range may be invited to construct a hands-on sample or presentation of their solution at the City of Phoenix. In addition, each finalist may prepare and deliver a presentation of their proposed solution based on the script developed by the evaluation panel. The City may also require a hands-on lab demonstration designed specifically for the evaluation panel. The results of the surveys will be tabulated and delivered to the evaluation team for the final review and solution selection session(s).

If an Offer in the Competitive Range contains conditions, exceptions, reservations or understandings to or about any Contract or Solicitation Scope requirement, the City may discuss or negotiate the conditions, exceptions, reservations or understandings during these meetings. But the City in its sole discretion may reject any and all conditions, exceptions, reservations and understandings, and the City may instruct any Offeror to remove the conditions, exceptions, reservations or understandings. If the Offeror fails to do so, the City may determine the Offer is nonresponsive, and the City may revoke its determination that the Offer is in the Competitive Range.

To the fullest extent permitted by law, the City will not provide any information, financial or otherwise, to any Offeror about other Offers received in response to this solicitation. During discussions with Offerors in the Competitive Range, the City will not give Offerors specific prices or specific financial requirements that Offerors must meet to qualify for further consideration.

The City may state that proposed prices are too high with respect to the marketplace or otherwise unacceptable. Offerors will not be told of their relative rankings before Contract award.

2.29. Best and Final Offers (BAFO)

A BAFO is an option available for negotiations. Each Offeror in the Competitive Range, which is determined in the City’s sole discretion, may be afforded the opportunity to amend its Offer and make one BAFO.

If an Offeror’s BAFO modifies its initial Offer, the modifications must be identified in the BAFO.

The City will evaluate BAFOs based on the same requirements and criteria applicable to initial

Offers. The City will adjust appropriately the initial scores for criteria that have been affected by offer modifications made by a BAFO. Based on the criteria defined in the solicitation as weighted, the City will then perform final scoring and prepare final rankings.

The Evaluation Panel will recommend the Offer that is the best value and most advantageous to the City based on the evaluation criteria.

The City reserves the right to make an award to an Offeror whose Offer is the highest rated, best value, and most advantageous to the City based on the evaluation criteria, without conducting written or oral discussions with any Offeror, without negotiations, and without soliciting BAFOs.

3. Scope of Work

3.1. Purpose

The City of Phoenix is seeking an urban design firm or urban planning firm (referred to herein as the “Consultant”) to perform a strategic update to several Transit Oriented Community (TOC)

Plans with an emphasis on improving the tools needed to implement those plans, such as refinements to the Walkable Urban (WU) Code and the creation of a framework that will allow property owners to voluntarily ‘opt-in’ to the WU Code. The City envisions an urban design process for key catalyst sites (such as city-owned property) to anchor the public dialogue around zoning as a tool for implementing the community vision while also preparing these catalyst sites for near-term redevelopment.

This RFP is seeking creative proposals from qualified respondents on how to best achieve the goals for this land use planning and zoning refinement project. The ideal team has significant experience in urban design, form-based codes, design charrettes (or immersive urban design workshops), and innovative and strategic community engagement. The proposal should integrate the following tasks into a seamless process.

• Task 1: Opt-In Rezoning Process o Create a process to allow property owners to voluntarily ‘opt-in’ to the WU Code to encourage the development, redevelopment, and/or adaptive reuse of properties within the Study Area by incentivizing development that is in alignment with the community vision.

• Task 2: Mixed Income Housing and Mixed Use Design Scenarios o Conceptualize scenarios for priority sites (such as city-owned properties) for development, redevelopment, and/or adaptive reuse with a special emphasis on how to deliver mixed-use concepts with mixed-income housing. These test sites may be used to anchor public engagement around the technical concepts contained in Tasks

1 and 3.

• Task 3: Walkable Urban (WU) Code Refinement and Calibration o Refine the WU Code to support better TOC outcomes, emphasizing mixed use, mixed-income housing, and thoughtful urban design for greater compatibility and design synergy with defining features throughout the Study Area.

• Task 4: Strategic Update to the TOC Policy Plans o The content produced during this project should be added to the TOC Plans as a strategic update that will add depth, context, and additional recommendations.

3.2. Study Area

The Study Area generally follows a 0.5-mile buffer distance along the Valley Metro Rail from

Dunlap Avenue and 19th Avenue at the northwest, turning east in Downtown Phoenix and extending to the Corporate Limits. The Study Area principally focuses on the following Transit

Oriented District Plans:

• Gateway:

https://www.phoenix.gov/content/dam/phoenix/pddsite/documents/pz/reinventphx%20gat eway%20tod%20policy%20plan%208.5x11.pdf

• Eastlake-

Garfield: https://www.phoenix.gov/content/dam/phoenix/pddsite/documents/pz/reinventp hx%20eastlake-garfield%20tod%20policy%20plan%208.5x11.pdf

• Midtown: https://www.phoenix.gov/content/dam/phoenix/pddsite/documents/pz/reinventp hx%20midtown%20tod%20policy%20plan%208.5x11.pdf

• Uptown: https://www.phoenix.gov/content/dam/phoenix/pddsite/documents/pz/reinventp hx%20uptown%20tod%20policy%20plan%208.5x11.pdf

• Solano https://www.phoenix.gov/content/dam/phoenix/pddsite/documents/pz/reinventphx

%20solano%20tod%20policy%20plan%208.5x11.pdf

• 19 North: https://www.phoenix.gov/administration/departments/pdd/planning-zoning/transit-oriented-communities/19north.html

• The Downtown Code Area, and https://www.phoenix.gov/content/dam/phoenix/pddsite/documents/pz/reinventphx%20gateway%20tod%20policy%20plan%208.5x11.pdf https://www.phoenix.gov/content/dam/phoenix/pddsite/documents/pz/reinventphx%20gateway%20tod%20policy%20plan%208.5x11.pdf https://www.phoenix.gov/content/dam/phoenix/pddsite/documents/pz/reinventphx%20eastlake-garfield%20tod%20policy%20plan%208.5x11.pdf https://www.phoenix.gov/content/dam/phoenix/pddsite/documents/pz/reinventphx%20eastlake-garfield%20tod%20policy%20plan%208.5x11.pdf https://www.phoenix.gov/content/dam/phoenix/pddsite/documents/pz/reinventphx%20midtown%20tod%20policy%20plan%208.5x11.pdf https://www.phoenix.gov/content/dam/phoenix/pddsite/documents/pz/reinventphx%20midtown%20tod%20policy%20plan%208.5x11.pdf https://www.phoenix.gov/content/dam/phoenix/pddsite/documents/pz/reinventphx%20uptown%20tod%20policy%20plan%208.5x11.pdf https://www.phoenix.gov/content/dam/phoenix/pddsite/documents/pz/reinventphx%20uptown%20tod%20policy%20plan%208.5x11.pdf https://www.phoenix.gov/content/dam/phoenix/pddsite/documents/pz/reinventphx%20solano%20tod%20policy%20plan%208.5x11.pdf https://www.phoenix.gov/content/dam/phoenix/pddsite/documents/pz/reinventphx%20solano%20tod%20policy%20plan%208.5x11.pdf https://www.phoenix.gov/administration/departments/pdd/planning-zoning/transit-oriented-communities/19north.html https://www.phoenix.gov/administration/departments/pdd/planning-zoning/transit-oriented-communities/19north.html https://phoenix.municipal.codes/ZO/1202

• The 50th Street Station Area (no adopted plan).

3.3. Background

While the City’s TOC plans, policies, and tools have performed well and remain largely relevant since their adoption, the following circumstances warrant a strategic update and more robust implementation policies, codes, and actions to achieve measurable progress on the goals, objectives, and vision established by the communities and adopted by the City of Phoenix.

• Rapid and Sustained Population Growth. The City of Phoenix has experienced sustained population growth over the past decades, becoming one of the fastest-growing cities in the United States. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, Phoenix’s population increased from approximately 1.4 million in 2010 to over 1.6 million in 2020. This growth trend is expected to continue with an increasing share of population growth being absorbed in areas served by high-capacity transit.

• Arizona Law and the Impact on Municipal Zoning Authority. The State of Arizona has two laws that heavily influence the authority and influence that municipalities may have on private property via zoning and other related actions: Proposition 207 and a prohibition on inclusionary zoning.

o Proposition 207. A ballot measure known as Proposition 207 was approved by the voters in a state-wide referendum. Proposition 207 specified, among other things, that a property owner is entitled to just compensation if the value of a person's property is reduced by the enactment of a land use law. This law has produced a chilling effect across Arizona municipalities on the willingness to install overlay districts and to rezone property without an owner voluntarily participating. There are now several Arizona municipalities with Opt-In zoning regimes that have successfully navigated Proposition 207.

o Inclusionary Zoning. Arizona is one of only several states that prohibits mandatory inclusionary zoning through its State Law.

A Note on the Legislative Landscape. There have been many bills circulating in the legislature focused on streamlining housing production including several that have become law including on “missing middle housing” and accessory dwelling units. This is referenced as background to demonstrate the pro-housing sentiments at the State Level that are, in part, driving the City’s desire to refine development standards and to streamline the development process via an Opt-In Zoning Regime.

• Significant Housing Shortage. In 2019, the City of Phoenix adopted the Housing

Phoenix Plan in response to an urgent need for additional housing across all parts of the income spectrum. Since its adoption, this plan has been used aggressively to produce and preserve housing units for the rapidly growing population. By the end of the Q4 of

2024, the City of Phoenix met its goal to “Create or Preserve 50,000 homes by 2030” with 53,212 units including 45.4% at an affordable or workforce rate. However, there is https://www.phoenix.gov/housing/plan https://www.phoenix.gov/housing/plan still work to be done to continue refining development standards, entitling key properties, and deploying catalyst projects to model TOC opportunities.

• Development Outcomes and Code Performance. The City of Phoenix currently has two form-based codes that apply to different portions of the Study Area: the Downtown

Code (DTC) (Chapter 12 of the Zoning Ordinance) and the Walkable Urban (WU) Code

(Chapter 12 of the Zoning Ordinance).

In 2010, the City of Phoenix adopted the DTC and rezoned that portion of the Study Area to utilize the new form-based code. Due partially to the by-right entitlements granted by the DTC, Downtown Phoenix has experienced remarkable reinvestment, redevelopment, and adaptive reuse, including approximately $5.7 Billion in new investment, 9,379 new dwelling units, and the reinvigorated Roosevelt Row Arts District. The DTC Area represents five percent of the total Study Area and underwent a significant refinement process in 2024 and, as such, the City does not anticipate changes to the DTC at this time.

In 2015, the City of Phoenix created the WU Code with the express purpose of implementing the ReinventPHX TOD Plans; however, for a variety of reasons including

Proposition 207, the City was unable to zone the WU Code onto the map for immediate use. While many properties have rezoned to the WU Code since its creation, an owner (or buyer) must undertake a full rezoning process to access its benefits which has slowed its deployment.

A recent study of the Midtown and Uptown Transit Oriented Districts revealed that between 2015 and 2023, 63 sites rezoned to the WU Code (on approximately 196 acres) for a total of nearly 6,500 new dwelling units constructed and approximately 3,800 more are entitled and planned. From this rapid and sustained development activity, a series of performance issues have arisen in how the WU Code functions, including the following.

o The one-size-fits-all transect standards may not be appropriate (or preferred) for all neighborhoods, districts, and street contexts.

o Limited influence over Public Space / Street Standards o Difficulty regulating adaptive reuse projects due to non-conforming status’ o Difficulty achieving integrated and truly mixed-use and transit-oriented projects o Limited use of the bonus criteria identified in the TOD Strategic Policy Framework

(Policy E.4.) and the Phoenix General Plan (Page 81) adopted in 2025.

o Limited affordable and/or mixed-income projects to address affordable housing goals.

3.4. Scope of Work

The Scope of Work is intended to articulate a set of minimum expectations for the Consultant and is organized as four primary tasks that the City envisions being executed in a seamless and integrated manner.

https://phoenix.municipal.codes/ZO/12 https://phoenix.municipal.codes/ZO/13 https://www.phoenix.gov/content/dam/phoenix/pddsite/documents/planning-zoning-pz/uptown-and-midtown-boards-11.30-2.0.pdf https://www.phoenix.gov/villagessite/Documents/pdd_pz_pdf_00380.pdf https://www.phoenix.gov/content/dam/phoenix/pddsite/documents/planning-zoning-general-plan/city%20council%20adopted_planphx%202025%20update%20final_11x17.pdf

Consultant’s responsibilities:

• Task 1: Opt-In Rezoning Process

• Task 2: Mixed-Income Housing and Mixed-Use Design Scenarios

• Task 3: Walkable Urban (WU) Code Refinement and Calibration

• Task 4: Strategic Update to the TOC Policy Plans

City’s responsibilities:

• To collaborate with the Consultant on shared expectations related to the planning process, the engagement process, and planning products.

• To compile and provide the Consultant with all relevant datasets, studies and plans, rezoning cases, zoning interpretation letters, and other relevant content.

• To coordinate all meetings with the City Councilmembers, the Planning Commission, the

Village Planning Committees (VPCs), and other public officials.

• To coordinate with the City of Phoenix Public Information Officers (PIOs) for the use of the City’s social media resources.

• To shepherd the planning products through the formal public hearing process.

Note to prospective respondents:

All project tasks are non-sequential and should be integrated into a seamless planning and engagement process.

• A Seamless Process: Proposals should clearly demonstrate how the tasks will be integrated into a seamless planning and community engagement process. If sub-consultants are included, the proposal should outline the approach to coordinating amongst and strategically deploying these subject matter experts to achieve a seamless process.

• A Thorough Understanding with Intentional Staffing: Proposals should demonstrate a thorough understanding of the project, highlight relevant experience, and clearly explain the roles that all firms and key personnel will play to deliver a successful project together.An Innovative, Integrated, and

• Attainable Process: Proposals shall outline their approach, how it relates to or builds upon the other project tasks and explain how it is both innovative and attainable within the constraints of the project, including budget and schedule.

3.5. Task 0: Project Management and Recordkeeping

Prior to the commencement of work or the execution of any sub-consultant agreements, the

Consultant shall facilitate a kick-off meeting with City staff to:

• refine the approach;

https://www.phoenix.gov/villages

• review the scope of work;

• review and refine the allocation of resources to each task and subtask;

• define project parameters;

• establish roles and responsibilities;

• confirm a schedule which facilitates a logical alignment of concurrent tasks; and

• discuss protocol for updates to the City of Phoenix Mayor, Districts 1, 3, 4, 5 and 6

Council Offices, or other meetings as requested by City staff.

Subtask 0.1 - Deliverables:

• Consultant’s responsibilities:

o Prepare draft and final meeting minutes for review and approval by the project team.

The meeting minutes will identify all attendees, discussion points, decisions, and action items. Draft meeting minutes will be due one week following the meeting.

o Coordinate with the TOC Project Manager, or their designee, to identify project coordination meeting agenda items for discussion. The Consultant will also be responsible for preparing draft and final meeting minutes for review and approval by the project team. Draft meeting minutes will be due one week following each meeting.

o Provide monthly, at a minimum, reports of their grant-related activities to the TOC

Grant Manager. This report shall also include collaboration activities with local initiatives and partners within the project area.

Subtask 0.2 – Project Meeting Participation:

• Consultant’s responsibilities:

o Attend, at a minimum, monthly project coordination meetings with City staff to report on scope progress; identify opportunities for collaboration between the various teams working in the project area; discuss issues or constraints; prepare for events or other public outreach activities; and provide updates on the schedule and budget. The

Consultant should be available to support City staff in preparing updates, creating presentation materials, and providing summary of all work to date.

o Create quarterly update materials for meetings with the City Management, the

Mayor, and applicable City Council Offices. These schedules will be established at the outset of the project.

o Be available to attend, at a minimum, ten quarterly meetings with City Management, the Mayor, and applicable City Council Offices. These may be held in conjunction with other project meetings and/or events to reduce unnecessary travel.

https://www.phoenix.gov/mayorcouncil/find-my-council-district https://www.phoenix.gov/mayorcouncil/find-my-council-district o Present, at a minimum of 12 public meetings that are separate and distinct from the design charrettes unless otherwise approved by the Project Manager. These meetings are envisioned as a series of two meetings before each of the following public bodies to 1) establish trust, credibility and to set expectations and, 2) to present findings and recommendations. These annual schedules are published in

January and the 12-month schedule will be provided at the outset of the project.

▪ Planning Commission, and the following Village Planning Committees

(VPCs): Camelback East, Central City, Encanto, Alhambra, and North Mountain.

3.6. Task 1: Opt-In Rezoning Process

The Consultant will develop ‘opt-in rezoning process’ to allow property owners to utilize the WU

Code by-right, tailored to the unique legal environment in the State of Arizona, and particularly focusing on the mixed income housing and mixed-use opportunities. This task aims to reduce a significant financial and procedural barrier to transit-oriented housing and mixed use development production by providing property owners with the opportunity to use either their existing zoning entitlement or the WU Code.

Subtask 1.1 - Deliverables:

• Opt-in Rezoning Strategy and Recommendations Report, which is envisioned to include the following content:

o Section 1: An Overview of Existing Entitlements o Section 2: An Overview of the Entitlement Process and Legal Constraints o Section 3: An Assessment of the Direct and Indirect Costs of Piecemeal Rezoning o Section 4: An Assessment of Peer Communities with Opt-In Zoning Regimes o Section 5: A Proposed Opt-In Rezoning Process Framework o Section 6: A DRAFT Text Amendment to implement the Opt-In Rezoning Strategy

3.7. Task 2: Mixed Income Housing and Mixed-Use Design Scenarios

This task is envisioned to anchor the public discourse, visioning, and prioritization necessary to achieve meaningful code, policy, and process reforms (Tasks 1 and 3) in a series of real-world catalyst sites, such as city-owned properties, that can then be developed in the short-term to model transit-oriented mixed income housing and mixed-use opportunities.

Subtask 2.1: Mixed Income Housing and Mixed-Use Opportunity Assessment

This subtask is focused on exploring the opportunities, barriers, and related factors impacting affordable housing construction and mixed-use urban development throughout the Study Area.

The assessment should consider factors such as: market and housing demands; code performance through an urban design critique of recent developments including stipulations of zoning approval; and the progress that has been made toward the implementation of the TOC

Plans, including actions by the City as well as the private market.

Subtask 2.1 - Deliverables:

• Mixed Income Housing and Mixed-Use Opportunities Assessment Report. This report is envisioned as a highly visual report not exceeding 50 pages that will serve as a guide for any new design concepts (Subtask 2.3), refinements to the WU Code (Task 3), for the strategic update to the TOC Plans (Task 4), and that may include the following content:

o Section 1: Current Housing Needs Assessment o Section 2: Housing and Mixed-Use Barriers o Section 3: Housing and Mixed-Use Opportunities o Section 4: Novel strategies to address common neighborhood concerns o Section 4: Recommendations, emphasizing strategies for how to realize opportunities and overcome barriers.

Subtask 2.2: Catalyst Site Analysis and Prioritization Assessment

This subtask is focused on exploring the potential land development opportunities throughout the Study Area with the greatest near-term potential for development, redevelopment, and/or adaptive reuse to: 1) achieve affordable and mixed income housing production, 2) model high-quality transit oriented development featuring a mix of land uses, and 3) anchor the public conversation around the technical and often contentious topics of code refinement and calibration (Tasks 1 and 3).

Subtask 2.2 -…