Was the borough involved in the drafting of the RFQ or RFP?
The initial drafting of both documents was done by Pittsburgh Regional Transit (PRT), but the borough manager also reviewed both documents before they were released.
Are the full responses to the RFP and RFQ a public record?
The full responses will be public record (subject to certain redactions of potential proprietary information) once the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement is finalized.
How was the developer selected for this project?
In April 2025, and consistent with PRT’s Board-adopted Joint Development Procedures (located on PRT’s website here), Dormont and PRT jointly released a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) looking for development teams that we would be interested in working with on a potential project.
Three of four proposers were invited to submit proposals. One response was received. The other two proposers indicated that the timing of the project did not align with their resources being focused on other projects.
An evaluation committee comprised of PRT staff, Dormont staff, and the Allegheny County Economic Development Department reviewed and interviewed Pennrose and determined they were qualified development partners with a potentially viable development project proposal and made a positive recommendation to proceed into the next step of PRT’s JD Procedures – negotiations for an Exclusive Negotiation Agreement (ENA) with them.
What factors were considered when evaluating the developer’s qualifications and track record?
The categories used to evaluate the RFP response can be seen below:
Criterion 1:Project Understanding and Concept
Description of the Respondent’s plan to abide by the development approach goals and project design parameter goals described in this RFDP, and overall viability of the vision presented by the developer. Approach should address PRT’s and the Borough’s goals for this development, including but not limited to long-term control of the land, maximized land value, and transit-oriented building programming. Key Question: is the project aligned with PRT’s station area plan, TOD Guidelines, and project goals?
Criterion 2: Organization Expertise and Experience
Demonstrated organizational history of past performance with successful TOD(s) of similar scope and complexity, and collaborative work with public sector landowners to ensure successful project outcomes. Respondents are able to provide descriptions of financing approaches for comparable, recent projects. Respondents are able to provide financial information that demonstrates corporate health and that the Respondent is clear of any concerning business practices. Key Question: Does the team have the capabilities and experience to successfully execute the project?
Criterion 3: Financial Feasibility/Financial Plan
Overall thoroughness and soundness of the financial plan for the project including market and financial feasibility, approach to securing debt and equity financing, and financial capacity. Key Question: How feasible is the project, and how likely is it to be successfully implement?
Criterion 4: Financial Offer
The financial offer will be evaluated as follows: Value to PRT of All Guaranteed Ground Rent Payments including Commencement Payments, Base Ground Rent, and any Escalation.
o Participation Rent and Capital Event Participation. Proposals will be scored on the relative financial offer based on the share of gross receipts for Participation Rent and Capital Event Participation. Key Question: How financially beneficial is the total combined return of this project for PRT and the Borough?
Why was only one developer chosen?
PRT and Dormont held an open competition starting in April 2025. Four teams applied to the request for qualifications. Three developers were provided the request for proposal. Ultimately, only Pennrose, LLC submitted a final bid. The other two teams dropped out because they didn’t have enough staff at the time due to other projects in the region.
Is just one response to an RFP responsive?
It can be. An Evaluation Committee set up to review submissions determines that. In this case, they concluded that Pennrose’s proposal was responsive.
Why can’t the borough and PRT put out another RFP to get more involvement?
A significant amount of time and resources have been put into the already completed RFQ and RFP process, and the Evaluation Committee concluded Pennrose’s proposal was responsive. Accordingly, the process will continue to move forward until a final decision is made, or the project is abandoned.
Can the borough and PRT put out another RFP if the Pennrose project doesn’t come to fruition?
TODs are associated with very complex and time-consuming solicitation and agreement drafting and negotiation processes. If this project does not move forward, PRT has indicated that it will not have resources in place to go through the process again with any expectation that there would be a different result. If efforts at the Dormont site are unsuccessful, PRT anticipates refocusing its efforts to other locations in Allegheny County based upon its TOD priority areas.
The borough has made no decision as to whether it would put out another RFP for just its parcel.
What oversight or accountability measures will be in place throughout the project?
The ENA that is currently being draft will include accountability measures and holds the development team to certain timelines and milestones throughout the course of the project. The pre-development schedule is still being drafted but will be included in the final executed ENA.