Real Property Policy
Update
Planning and Development Committee
August 4, 2015
Presentation Overview:
• Existing RTD Policies:
•
•
Resolution 10 (1984) + Resolution 35 (2002)
Resolution 17 (2010): Strategic Plan for Transit Oriented
Development
• Recommended Resolution and Approach
•
Policy for Joint Development and Disposition of Excess
Property (replaces Resolution 10 (1984) and Resolution
35 (2002)).
•
Unsolicited Proposal Policy for Joint Development and
Acquisition of Excess Property (replaces Section 3.4.2 of
Resolution 17 (2010).
Current RTD Policies Governing Real Property
Resolution 10 (1984)
•
GM presents a disposition plan or joint development plan for any property right to
the Board for approval–includes all leases, sale, and easements
•
Includes specific requirements that conflict with current FTA regulations
Resolution 35 (2002)
•
Delegated authority to the GM for:
•
Negotiating leases less than 5 years;
•
Net lease value within GM’s delegated contracting authority ($250,000 in 2002);
•
Execute utility and access easements across RTD property and utility and access
easements benefiting RTD property.
Resolution 17 (2010), Revised Strategic Plan for Transit Oriented
Development
•
Section 3.4.2 -Identifies a process for unsolicited proposals for joint development
Proposed Resolution - Overview
Repeal and replace Resolution 10 (1984) and Resolution 35 (2002)
in their entirety;
Replace Section 3.4.2, Joint Development Proposal Process of
Resolution 17 (2010), Strategic Plan for TOD
Pass a new resolution that adopts individual policies and allows
those to be updated separately:
•
•
•
•
The District’s property interests have expanded and become more integral to
its services and mission;
Much of the District’s real property has a “federal interest” in it;
Need updated policies to provide additional capability to manage a variety of
uses and dispositions efficiently and effectively;
Need flexibility to follow the federal requirements for managing those
properties as those federal requirements are updated over time.
Two new policies:
•
•
Policy for Joint Development and Disposition of Excess Property
Unsolicited Proposal Policy for Joint Development or Acquisition of Excess
Property
Proposed Policy for Joint Development
and Disposition of Excess Property
•
Require Board approval of any permanent grant of real property
interests with the following exceptions, approval of which will
be delegated to the GM:
• Access and utility easements across and benefitting RTD
property;
• Dedications of Right of Way to local jurisdictions;
• Grants of property interests with a fair market value under the
GM’s delegated contracting authority (currently $1,000,000 per
Resolution 19, Series of 2007)
•
•
•
Non-permanent grants of property interests (eg: licenses,
temporary construction easements, short - term leases)
All grants of property interests (whether delegated or not) will
follow the applicable Federal Transit Administration
requirements (currently FTA C 7050.1 and FTA C 5010.D1).
GM will establish administrative procedures for both staff review
and for securing Federal Transit Administration concurrence.
Proposed Unsolicited Proposal Policy for
Joint Development or Acquisition of
Excess Property
•
Replace Section 3.4.2, Joint Development Proposal
Process of Resolution 17 (2010), Strategic Plan for TOD
•
Goal: Encourage innovation in leveraging real property
assets consistent with RTD’s adopted policies
•
Establish a process for reviewing unsolicited proposals for joint
development or acquisition of excess property;
•
Establish criteria for accepting sole source (non-competitive)
joint development proposals;
•
Establish criteria for submission and review of joint
development proposals.
Proposed Unsolicited Proposal Review Process
Proposal for Purchase Offer or Joint Development
RTD staff evaluates
Is there a current or future
transit interest in the property?
Excess Property
Disposition Process
NO
YES
Can transit operations
be modified or
reconfigured?
YES
Joint Development
Proposal Process
Proposed Excess Property Review Process
Purchase Offer Received
• Post Notice requesting Additional Offers
• Establish Value (internal)
• Evaluate Offers
• FTA Concurrence (if required)
Board Action
Proposed Joint Development Proposal Review process
Joint Development Proposal Received
• Evaluate Technical and Financial Merit
• Evaluate Sole Source Criteria
Sole Source
Board Action: Exclusive
Negotiation Period *
• Finalize Terms
• Establish Value
• FTA Concurrence (if
required)
Board Action:
Development
Transaction
Competitive Process
• Post Notice For Additional Proposals
• Evaluate Technical and Financial Merit of
any Additional Proposals
• Determine if additional information and/or
RFP is required (for those proposals with merit)
Board Action: Exclusive Negotiation Period *
• Finalize Terms
• Establish Value
• FTA Concurrence (if required)
Board Action: Development Transaction
*Depending on the complexity of proposal, staff may recommend moving directly to a
development transaction without an exclusive negotiation period
Proposed sole source criteria justification
for Joint Development Proposals:
Sole Source Criteria for Joint Development Proposals
1) The proposer owns or can demonstrate legal control (such
as a purchase option or long term lease) of property
contiguous to RTD property;
AND
2) The proposed development concept leverages that
contiguous ownership to provide benefits to RTD that could
not be achieved by EITHER i) a standalone development of
the RTD property, OR ii) by a development proposed by
another contiguous property owner.
Proposed Submission and Evaluation Criteria,
for Joint Development Proposals:
Technical Merit:
•
Concept plans showing:
•
Proposed use of the property and adherence to the local jurisdiction’s master
planning and zoning for the area;
•
Transit operations to be impacted (includes, bus facilities, rail, parking, and
patron access between those facilities) and demonstration that transit
operations will remains whole;
•
Proposed ownership structure, including phasing, for all components of the
proposed joint development;
•
Proposed value to the District;
•
Assumptions regarding maintenance responsibilities for all publicly accessible
spaces within the proposed joint development.
Reasonable Financial Capacity:
•
Demonstrate that proposer has the necessary financial standing, capacity,
experience and resources to undertake, finance and deliver the proposal;
•
If the proposal assumes accessing public financing to deliver the proposal, the
District may elect to review the proposal with the relevant public entity before
making a determination.
Proposed Next Steps
1. Provide draft resolution and policies to the Board for
review and discussion – September
2. Adoption of new resolution and policies– September or
October
Questions?