RFP_Civic_Center_Assessment.pdf

(Date issued: May 5, 2026)

THE CITY OF TUSTIN is soliciting proposals for:

Civic Center Campus Assessment and

Feasibility Study

Questions may be submitted through OpenGov by 10 a.m. PST May 29, 2026.

• All questions must be requested in writing.

• Questions of a substantial nature will be

Due Date: June 12, 2026

Location - Via OpenGov

pg. 1

City of Tustin

Civic Center Campus Assessment and Feasibility Study

The City of Tustin (“City”) is seeking proposals from qualified consulting firms to conduct a comprehensive feasibility study evaluating the City’s current and future Civic Center facility needs.

The selected consultant(s) will assess long-term space requirements, evaluate the lifecycle costs of maintaining and upgrading the existing facility, and evaluate a range of facility strategies, which may include continued investment in the existing Civic Center, renovation or expansion options, and the potential development of a new or reconfigured Civic Center campus.

This effort will include financial modeling, property valuation, conceptual site planning, and evaluation of alternative project delivery methods, including public-private partnership (P3) opportunities, as applicable. The study will also evaluate the potential for partial or full redevelopment of the existing Civic Center site, if supported by the analysis.

The outcome of this effort will be a strategic, data-driven framework to enable City Council decision-making regarding the future of Civic Center facilities, including a comparative evaluation of alternatives and, if appropriate, a recommended path forward and implementation considerations.

BACKGROUND

The City of Tustin is located in Orange County, California, and is located roughly 37 miles southeast of Los Angeles and 90 miles northwest of San Diego. The City has an estimated population of 80,000 and covers over 11 square miles. Known for its historic Old Town district and strong sense of community, Tustin provides a full range of municipal services including public safety, public works, community development, and parks and recreation.

The City operates out of its primary administrative facility at the Civic Center campus, originally constructed in 1974 on Centennial Way. The Civic Center is comprised of approximately 6.713 acres.

Between 1990 and 1993, the facility underwent significant renovation and expansion, resulting in a complete transformation of the building as it exists today. Since then, the facility has undergone various interior modifications to improve functionality, without increasing the overall square footage (See Attachment C for Floor Plans). While the facility has served the City well, it is increasingly challenged by space constraints, aging infrastructure, and evolving service delivery needs.

In recent years, Tustin has experienced steady growth and redevelopment, including significant investment in surrounding areas. However, reinvestment in Old Town has been more limited, presenting both a challenge and an opportunity. The Civic Center site, due to its central location, represents a key strategic asset that may support broader economic development and community activation goals, depending on future facility decisions.

pg. 2

PURPOSE/GOAL

The purpose of this RFP is to engage qualified consultants(s) to evaluate and define a long-term strategy for the City’s administrative facilities that aligns with operational needs, fiscal responsibility, and community objectives.

Key goals of this effort include:

• Define Future Needs: Establish a clear understanding of current and projected staffing, operational, and space requirements over a 20 to 30-year planning horizon

• Evaluate Existing Facility: Identify the lifecycle cost, constraints, and opportunities associated with maintaining, renovating, or expanding the current Civic Center facility

• Evaluate Facility Alternatives: Analyze a range of options, which may include renovation, expansion, reconfiguration, consolidation, and/or development of a new or reconfigured Civic Center campus

• Assess Property Considerations: Evaluate the potential value and feasible reuse scenarios of the existing Civic Center site, if applicable

• Identify Financial and Delivery Strategies: Evaluate funding mechanisms and project delivery methods, including P3 opportunities, as appropriate

• Support Decision-Making: Provide clear, objective, and actionable analysis to support City Council consideration of alternatives

CITY RESPONSIBILITIES

Additional background information will be made available to the selected consultant(s) upon Notice to Proceed, including:

• Organizational charts and staffing data;

• Additional reports and internal documents as needed; and

• Available budget and operational data.

SCOPE OF WORK

The selected consultant(s) shall provide comprehensive professional services to evaluate the City’s current and future Civic Center facility needs and develop a long-term strategic framework.

The scope is intended to produce a data-driven analysis of existing conditions, future space requirements, financial implications, and a range of facility alternatives.

Alternatives may include continued investment in the existing facility, renovation or expansion options, reconfiguration or consolidation strategies, and, if warranted, the potential development of a new or a reconfigured Civic Center campus.

Work efforts shall integrate technical analysis, financial evaluation, and conceptual planning to ensure a holistic assessment of options. The consultant(s) will be expected to coordinate closely with City staff, incorporate prior planning efforts where applicable, and present clear, actionable findings to support City Council decision-making.

The following tasks outline the minimum scope of services to be provided:

Project Initiation & Project Management Provide overall project management, coordination, scheduling, and progress tracking throughout the duration of the project.

pg. 3

Existing Conditions Assessment Review relevant documents, conduct stakeholder interviews, and assess existing Civic Center conditions, including space utilization, operational inefficiencies, and site constraints. Utilize provided floor plans (Attachment C) to validate existing conditions

Staffing & Space Needs Assessment Evaluate current and projected staffing levels and operational requirements to develop a comprehensive space program, including:

• Department-level space needs

• Growth projections over a 20 to 30-year horizon

• Opportunities for space optimization and modern workplace strategies

Facilities Consolidation & Civic Use Assessment Evaluate the distribution of administrative functions, public services, and community event spaces across multiple facilities. This task shall:

• Identify inefficiencies associated with fragmented operations

• Assess current and future needs for civic and community gathering spaces

• Evaluate opportunities consolidation and integration of flexible, multi-purpose public spaces

Baseline (Status Quo) Cost Analysis Prepare a lifecycle cost analysis for continued use of the existing facility, including:

• Maintenance and capital improvement needs

• Renovation and expansion costs

• Ongoing operations and maintenance costs over 20–30 years

Property Considerations & Redevelopment Feasibility (If Applicable) Assess potential value and feasible reuse scenarios of the existing Civic Center site, if applicable, including:

• Highest and best use considerations

• Preliminary market valuation

• Feasibility considerations under multiple scenarios

Conceptual Site Planning (Alternative Facility Scenarios) Develop concept-level plans for feasible facility scenarios, which may include renovation/expansion of the existing site and/or development of a new or reconfigured Civic Center campus, including:

• Evaluation of potential sites, if applicable

• Conceptual layouts (building footprints, circulation, parking)

• Integration with public spaces and park system

• Accommodation of civic and community uses

Order-of-Magnitude Cost Estimate & Financial Analysis Prepare planning-level cost estimates and financial analysis, including:

• Capital cost estimates for each alternative

• Identification of funding and financing strategies

• Consideration of potential site value, if applicable

• Comparative analysis across all alternatives

pg. 4

Delivery Strategy Evaluation Evaluate alternative project delivery methods, as applicable to the range of facility alternatives evaluated, including:

• Design-Bid-Build (DBB)

• Design-Build (DB)

• Progressive Design-Build (PDB)

• Construction Manager at Risk (CMAR)

• Public-Private Partnerships (P3/PPP)

Findings & Recommendations Develop a decision-making framework to support City Council evaluation of alternatives. This shall include:

• Comparative evaluation of all alternatives

• Economic and non-economic considerations

• Site-specific constraints and opportunities

• Identification of a recommended strategy, if supported by the analysis

Potential Implementation Considerations If a preferred strategy is identified, outline potential next steps, including:

• Key milestones and sequencing

• Decision points for City Council

• Preliminary project schedule and next steps

Stakeholder Engagement & Presentations Support City decision-making through:

• Facilitation of a Council workshop

• Preparation of presentation materials

• Attendance at Council meeting(s)

Monthly Progress Reports Submit monthly progress reports with each invoice, including:

• Work completed by task

• Percent complete by task vs. budget

• Updated project schedule and key milestones

• Budget status (hours used vs. planned)

• Upcoming work within the next 30-60 days

• Key issues and risks

REQUIRED DELIVERABLES

The Consultant shall prepare the following deliverables, at a minimum:

1. Existing Conditions & Needs Assessment Report

• Facility assessment summary

• Space utilization analysis (by department)

• Staffing projections (20–30 year horizon)

• Key operational deficiencies

2. Space Needs Program

• Program area (SF) by department/function

• Adjacency requirements

pg. 5

• Civic/public space needs (Council chamber, community rooms, etc.)

• Flexibility assumptions (future growth, hybrid work)

3. Alternatives Analysis Report Must include a minimum of three (3) distinct and viable alternatives, which may include, but are not limited to:

• Continued use with renovation and/or expansion

• Reconfiguration, consolidation, or phased improvements

• Development of a new or reconfigured Civic Center campus

Each alternative must include:

• Conceptual site diagram

• Program fit

• Parking/circulation assumptions

• Phasing

• Pros/cons and risks

• Order-of-magnitude cost

• Lifecycle cost (20–30 years)

4. Financial & Delivery Strategy Memo

• Capital cost comparison

• Lifecycle cost comparison

• Funding strategies

• Delivery options (DBB, DB, PDB, CMAR, P3)

• Risk allocation

5. Preferred Alternative & Recommendation Report

• Decision matrix

• Recommended option, if supported by the analysis

• Justification

• Sensitivity analysis

6. Potential Implementation Considerations

• Phasing strategy

• Key decision points

• Procurement considerations

• Preliminary schedule

7. Council Workshop & Final Presentation

• Final Council presentation

• Executive-level graphics and materials

PROCEDURE FOR SUBMITTING PROPOSALS

Proposal Responses – Proposals must be received electronically through OpenGov no later than 10:00 a.m. on June 12, 2026. Consultants are responsible for ensuring proposals are complete and submitted on time. Late proposals may not be considered.

The following instructions describe the form in which proposals must be presented. Proposal documents must be prepared simply, economically, and provide a straightforward, concise response to the requirements of the RFP. Completeness and clarity of content must be

pg. 6 emphasized. The requirements stated do not preclude offerors from furnishing additional reports, functions, and costs as deemed appropriate.

A. TRANSMITTAL LETTER

The proposal transmittal letter shall contain the following:

• Name of individual, partnership, company, or corporation submitting proposal.

• Statement which indicates an understanding of the scope of work as presented in this specification and confirmation that all terms and conditions of the RFP are understood and acknowledged by the undersigned.

• Proposers shall disclose any current or potential conflicts of interest that could influence, or appear to influence, the firm’s objectivity in performing the requested services. This includes, but is not limited to: Financial or business relationships with developers, contractors, or entities that could participate in future phases of the project; Involvement in real estate acquisition, disposition, or brokerage services related to the project area; Affiliations with firms that provide design, construction, financing, or public-private partnership (P3) services; Proposers shall also indicate whether they intend to pursue or participate in any subsequent phases of this project, including but not limited to design, development, construction, or financing. Firms are not precluded from submitting proposals based on such relationships; however, the City will consider potential conflicts of interest and the ability of the firm to provide objective, unbiased analysis as part of the evaluation process.

• Signature(s) of representative(s) legally authorized to bind the offeror.

B. SECTION I: GENERAL APPROACH AND PLANS

• The City requests that proposals submitted be organized and presented in a neat and logical format and are relevant to these services. Consultant’s proposals shall be clear, accurate, and comprehensive. Excessive or irrelevant material will not be favorably received.

• The Proposal shall be limited to a maximum of 35 pages (excluding front and back covers, section dividers and attachments such as resumes and forms).

Font size shall be minimum 11-point Arial. Proposal exhibits shall be maximum 11” x 17”. The purpose of these restrictions is to minimize the costs of proposal preparation and to ensure that the response to the RFP is fully relevant to the project.

• This section of the proposal must contain all work requirements necessary to accomplish the tasks as defined in the Scope of Work section. It will outline the proposed approach, methodology, work plan, and schedules to accomplish the tasks and to produce the deliverables.

• Proposal shall state as completely as possible, the proposer’s understanding of and approach to accomplishing the City’s stated needs, such as:

pg. 7 o 1) Description of all project requirements;

o 2) Description of plans to accomplish tasks, study, project, etc.;

o 3) Required involvement of city staff.

• For each task/requirement listed in the Scope of Work, provide whether or not proposer can satisfy the requirement. Provide additional information regarding your solution that you deem appropriate.

C. SECTION II: QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE

This section must contain the following information:

• A Statement of Qualifications for the proposed project team, including identification of the Project Manager and key personnel. Include specific experience in municipal facility planning, civic or public agency facility development, real estate analysis, financial modeling, and delivery strategy evaluation (including P3/PPP, if applicable). Provide concise resumes for all key staff to be assigned. Consultant must commit that the staff identified in its proposal will be assigned to this project and not substituted without prior written approval from the City.

• Contact information for the identified Project Manager, including address, telephone number, and email address.

• A brief history of the firm, including year established, ownership structure, areas of specialization, core services, and experience working with public agencies, particularly municipalities.

• A description of the firm’s experience with projects of similar scope and complexity, including but not limited to Civic Center or civic facility feasibility studies, facility master planning, space needs assessments, redevelopment of public sites, and financial/delivery strategy analysis.

• Descriptions of at least three (3) recent and relevant projects of similar size and scope. Include for each project: client name and location, project description, scope of services provided, key outcomes or findings, the firm’s role, and identification of key staff involved. Include examples of deliverables where available.

• A minimum of three (3) client references for similar projects, including agency name, contact person, title, telephone number, and email address. Consultant must grant the City permission to contact all references provided.

• In the event the Consultant intends to partner or subcontract any portion of the work, the Consultant shall provide the information requested above for each proposed partner or subconsultants, including firm qualifications, role in the project, and resumes of key personnel. The prime consultant shall remain fully responsible for all work performed.

• A brief narrative describing the firm’s understanding of the project, including key issues, potential challenges, and approach to successfully delivering the Scope of Work.

• A statement disclosing any actual or potential conflicts of interest, including financial or business relationships that could influence the firm’s objectivity, and identification of any intent to participate in future phases of the project (e.g., design, development, construction, or financing).

pg. 8

D. SECTION III: COST AND TIMELINE

• Identification of all costs Consultant/Vendor will charge for performing the tasks necessary to accomplish the objectives of this RFP. The costs must break out all expenses expected to be billed to the City for each component of the project.

Cost proposal shall include the estimated number of project work hours and costs attributable to each phase. A list of hourly rates of proposed project team members shall also be included.

• A work plan, provide a proposed project time schedule, detailing the time necessary for each phase of the services you are proposing.

• A timeline indicating major milestones and estimated time to complete the project.

• The City anticipates the project to be completed within approximately 6 to 9 months from Notice to Proceed. Proposers shall propose a detailed schedule consistent with this expectation.

SCHEDULE OF EVENTS

The following is the schedule of events that the City plans to follow in conducting this solicitation:

Event Tentative Date Issuance of RFP May 08, 2026 Pre-Proposal Meeting & Site-Walk (Optional) May 21, 2026 (10 a.m.)

Clarification Questions Due May 29, 2026 (10 a.m.)

Due Date for Proposals June 12, 2026 (10 a.m.)

Interviews of Finalists, if applicable End of June/Early July 2026 Begin Project End of July 2026

PROPOSAL EVALUATION, INTERVIEWS, and AWARD PROCESS

Award will be based upon a review and evaluation by a committee designated by the City Manager’s Office. Proposals will be evaluated based on the following criteria:

• Quality, clarity, and completeness of the proposal, including responsiveness to the RFP requirements

• Understanding of the project and key issues, including the City’s operational, financial, and redevelopment objectives

• Strength of methodology and proposed work plan, including approach to technical analysis, financial modeling, and development of feasible, actionable recommendations

• Relevant experience and qualifications of the firm and project team, particularly with municipal facility planning, civic facility development, real estate analysis, and financial/delivery strategy evaluation

• Demonstrated experience supporting public agency decision-making, including preparation of materials and presentations for executive leadership and elected officials

pg. 9

• Past performance and quality of references, particularly with public agencies on similar projects

• Ability to meet project schedule and deliverables, including demonstrated capacity to manage similar efforts

• Objectivity and absence of conflicts of interest, including the ability to provide unbiased analysis and recommendations

• Proposed cost and overall value to the City

The following criteria will be used in evaluating the proposals using a point value system (100 points) based upon the weighting indicated below:

• Qualification and Experience of Firm (15 points)

• Approach and Work Plan (including project controls and QA/QC processes) (35 points)

• Qualifications and Experience of the project manager and other key individuals (25 points)

• Schedule of Delivery (5 points)

• Reference Checks (10 points)

• Proposed cost (10 points)

The City anticipates that finalists will be selected after an initial evaluation based on above criteria and may be invited to make formal presentations to the evaluation committee. At the conclusion of this interview process, the evaluation committee will provide a recommendation for award and the proposer being recommended will receive a notice of intent to award pending successful negotiations and contract preparation. Upon successful completion of this process, a recommendation may be made to the City Council, based on the contract, for their review and consent and unsuccessful firms will be notified.

pg. 10

STANDARD TERMS AND CONDITIONS

Attachment A

1. Application These standard terms and conditions shall apply to all City of Tustin (hereafter “City”) solicitations and procurements, unless specifically excepted in the solicitation specifications or additional documents negotiated by the parties prior to formal award.

2. Requirements By submitting a proposal, the respondent agrees to provide the City with the agreed upon services described in the solicitation in accordance with these standard terms and conditions, at the agreed upon price and in compliance with the stated specifications, any subsequent addendums issued prior to the date of the opening, and any negotiated terms subsequent to the acceptance of proposals.

3. Legal Compliance Proposer must comply with all Federal, State and Local laws, statutes, ordinances, regulations and standards in effect at the time of delivery of goods and services, and must maintain any and all required licenses and certificates required under the same laws, statutes, ordinances, regulations and standards for services and/or goods provided in response to this solicitation.

4. Modifications and Addendums The City shall have the right to modify any of the solicitation documents prior to submission deadline and will endeavor to notify potential proposers, but failure to notify shall impose no liability or obligation on the City. All modifications and addendums must be in written form prepared by the City department issuing the solicitation. Proposers are responsible for incorporating any and all modifications and addendums into their submissions.

5. Interpretation of Solicitation Documents The City is the final judge of the meaning of any word(s) sentences, paragraphs or other parts of the solicitation documents. Proposers are encouraged to seek clarification, before submitting a proposal, of any portion of the proposal documents that appears to be ambiguous, unclear, inconsistent, or otherwise in error. Clarifications will be in writing.

6. Late Proposals Proposals must be received by the City by the time specified in the solicitation. The City will not accept late submissions. The vendor must use OpenGov for proposal submittal.

OpenGov time stamp shall be the official time of receipt.

7. Minor Irregularities The City reserves the right to waive any minor irregularities that do not materially affect the scope or pricing of submitted proposals

8. Responsiveness of Proposals Proposal submissions that fail to meet significant requirements outlined in the solicitation documents will be considered “non responsive”.

pg. 11

9. Withdrawal of Proposals Proposers may withdraw any submitted proposals prior to the submission deadline.

Proposers may not withdraw after the proposal due date (June 12, 2026 at 10 a.m.) without the City’s approval. Proposers who no longer wish to negotiate with City will be allowed to withdraw proposals. However, once a proposal has been withdrawn, it can no longer be considered.

10. Disqualification of Proposer The City may disqualify proposers, and their proposals not be considered, for any of the following reasons: Collusion among proposers; Proposer’s default on an existing or previous contract with the City, including failure to deliver goods and/or services of the quality and price proposed or agreed upon; Proposer’s lack of financial stability; any factor concerning the proposer’s inability to provide the quantity, quality, and timeliness of services specified in the solicitation; proposer involved in a current or pending lawsuit with City; proposer’s attempt to influence the outcome of the solicitation through unauthorized contact with City officials outside of those listed in the solicitation documents; and proposer’s attempt to offer gifts, gratuities, or bribes to any City employee or elected official in connection with a solicitation.

11. Right to Reject All Proposals The City reserves the right to reject all proposals for any reason whether or not said proposals are responsive or non-responsive. The City reserves the right to reject any proposal that is non-responsive to this RFP. The City may, but shall not be required to, solicit additional information, orally or in writing, from one or more of the applicants relating to the content of their proposal(s). The City may, but shall not be required to, meet with one or more of the applicants prior to a preliminary selection of one or more applicants with which the City may choose to negotiate.

12. Cost of Submission

The cost of submitting proposals shall be borne by the proposers, and the City will not be liable for any costs incurred by a proposer responding to this solicitation.