Active SLED Opportunity · OHIO · CENTRAL OHIO TRANSIT AUTHORITY (COTA)
AI Summary
COTA seeks an Architecture and Engineering consultant team for site analysis, building design concepts, cost estimates, and feasibility study to support mixed-use, transit-oriented redevelopment of the Old Central Market Site in downtown Columbus, Ohio.
The Central Ohio Transit Authority (COTA) is seeking a qualified Architecture and Engineering consultant team to evaluate the redevelopment potential of the “Old Central Market Site” located at 111 E. Town Street in downtown Columbus, Ohio. The selected team will conduct a comprehensive site analysis, develop preliminary building design and massing concepts, prepare cost estimates, and perform a real estate feasibility study to support mixed-use, transit-oriented development.
The Central Ohio Transit Authority (COTA) acquired the “Old Central Market Site” in 2021 in accordance with the Uniform Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Act (URA) for Federally Assisted Programs. The 2.6-acre site, located at 111 E. Town Street in downtown Columbus, was historically used as an urban market and later as an intercity transit center.
In 2023, a market analysis identified strong redevelopment potential for the site, particularly for transit-oriented, mixed-use development that aligns with COTA’s long-term strategic goals. Given its central location and importance to future downtown transit operations, the site presents a unique opportunity to integrate transportation infrastructure with residential, commercial, and community-serving uses.
COTA is advancing this effort in accordance with Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Joint Development guidance and requirements, which govern the use of transit-owned property for development projects that generate public and economic benefits. The Authority is seeking to better understand development feasibility, site constraints, and implementation strategies to support informed decision-making.
This solicitation represents a critical step in defining a clear and achievable path forward for redevelopment of the Old Central Market Site, ensuring alignment with federal requirements, community priorities, and COTA’s mission to enhance mobility and regional growth.
COTA will evaluate the extent to which the Respondent demonstrates overall firm experience, technical competence, and organizational capability to successfully perform services of similar size, scope, and complexity. Consideration will be given to the Respondent’s demonstrated knowledge of applicable regulatory requirements, public-sector procurement and contracting standards, and industry best practices. The evaluation will also consider the firm’s financial stability, business longevity, organizational structure, and operational capacity, as well as experience providing comparable services to public transit agencies or similarly regulated public entities.
COTA will assess the quality, relevance, and success of the Respondent’s experience on comparable projects completed within the past five (5) years. Evaluation will focus on the similarity of project scope, scale, and complexity, including the Respondent’s demonstrated ability to deliver services within established schedules and budgets while meeting performance and quality standards. Consideration will also be given to the documented outcomes achieved, the effectiveness of project execution, and the Respondent’s experience performing work within similar operational, technical, and regulatory environments.
COTA will evaluate the qualifications, experience, availability, and overall suitability of the proposed key personnel assigned to this engagement. Consideration will be given to the education, certifications, professional credentials, and relevant project experience of assigned staff, as well as their proposed roles and responsibilities. The evaluation will also consider the Respondent’s overall staffing capacity, depth of technical expertise, continuity planning, and ability to provide adequate organizational support resources to ensure timely, consistent, and high-quality service delivery throughout the term of the contract.
COTA will evaluate the Respondent’s demonstrated understanding of COTA’s objectives, operational environment, and project-specific challenges, as well as the clarity, feasibility, and effectiveness of the proposed technical approach. Consideration will be given to the Respondent’s ability to identify project risks, constraints, and critical success factors, and to propose practical and effective mitigation strategies. The evaluation will also consider the extent to which the Respondent’s approach reflects innovation, efficiency, and value-added solutions that enhance service quality, cost-effectiveness, and overall project outcomes.
COTA will assess the Respondent’s past performance based on information provided in the SOQ, reference checks, and any other information reasonably available to COTA. Evaluation will focus on the Respondent’s demonstrated record of delivering high-quality work, maintaining effective communication and responsiveness, adhering to schedules and budgets, and achieving high levels of client satisfaction. Consideration may also be given to the Respondent’s history of claims, disputes, or litigation, if applicable, and the manner in which such matters were resolved
Following the evaluation and ranking of Statements of Qualifications (SOQs) and completion of the presentation and/or interview process, COTA will negotiate scope, staffing, schedule, and pricing with the highest-ranked Respondent to establish a fair and reasonable contract price. Cost proposals shall not be submitted or considered as part of the initial SOQ evaluation.
If COTA is unable to reach agreement with the highest-ranked Respondent, negotiations may be terminated and initiated with the next highest-ranked Respondent, continuing this process until a satisfactory agreement is reached or the solicitation is canceled.
COTA reserves the right to reject any or all cost proposals, discontinue negotiations, or make no award if deemed to be in the best interest of the Authority.
If Yes, identify each subcontractor and describe the scope of services to be performed, the subcontractor’s qualifications and experience, and the proposer’s approach to managing and overseeing subcontracted work.
Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
Please Upload your Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) response, including any and all required forms listed in the solicitation and the corresponding attachments.
**Do not upload cost information in here.
Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
Enter the name and title of the respondent’s authorized official that will be charged with signing the awarded contract.
Enter the number of years the Vendor’s firm has been in business.
Provide the Vendor’s gross annual receipts for the most recently completed fiscal year.
Please enter a CAGE Code if applicable.
CAGE stands for Commercial and Government Entity. A unique CAGE code is assigned to all businesses and individual's that complete the System for Award Management registration process. This "system" is a database that contains information about all active government contractors.
Enter the full name, title, and email address of the authorized company representative submitting the Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) on behalf of the Vendor.
Upload a tracked-changes (redlined) version of the Contract Terms and Conditions included in the solicitation.
Redlines must be limited to items that were submitted by your firm during the official Q&A period and subsequently acknowledged or addressed by the Agency.
Do not include new or additional requested changes that were not raised during the Q&A period.
Failure to comply with these requirements may result in the Agency deeming your response non-responsive or requiring withdrawal of unapproved redlines during contract negotiations.
By certifying, the Bidder certifies that they are duly authorized to submit this proposal on behalf of the Vendor.
What is the proposed contract term (years)?
What is the proposed contract term (months)?
Enter the total number of one-year option periods to be included beyond the initial base term.
Do not include the base term in this number.
Option years must be supported by budget planning and operational need.
Each option year must be exercisable at COTA’s sole discretion.
If federal funds are involved, ensure the total potential contract term (base + options) complies with applicable federal regulations and does not create an impermissible multi-year commitment without funding availability.
If no option years are anticipated, enter “0.”
Select the payment method that best aligns with the anticipated contract structure and scope of work. The payment method should reflect the level of scope definition, risk allocation, and funding source.
Firm Fixed Price (FFP): Use when the scope is clearly defined and deliverables are measurable.
Unit Price: Use when quantities may vary but pricing per unit is established.
Time & Materials (T&M) / Labor Hour: Use only when the scope cannot be fully defined in advance. A not-to-exceed ceiling must be established.
Cost Reimbursement (CPFF, CPIF, etc.): Requires justification and financial oversight; typically used for complex or research-based services.
Milestone / Deliverable-Based: Payments tied to completion and acceptance of defined phases or deliverables.
Progress Payments: Generally used for construction projects based on percentage of completion.
Subscription / Recurring Fee: For SaaS, licensing, or ongoing support services.
Select the evaluation and award methodology that will be used to determine the successful proposer. The selection method must align with applicable federal, state, and agency procurement requirements.
Best Value (Trade-Off): Award is based on a combination of technical merit, experience, and price, where higher technical quality may justify a higher cost.
Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA): Award is made to the lowest-priced proposal that meets all minimum technical requirements.
Qualifications-Based Selection (QBS): Used for Architectural & Engineering services. Firms are ranked based on qualifications only, and price is negotiated with the highest-ranked firm.
Competitive Range & Best and Final Offer (BAFO): A shortlist of the highest-rated proposers may be established for discussions, clarifications, and the submission of revised proposals prior to final evaluation and award.
Fixed Budget / Feasibility Selection: A maximum budget is established in advance, and proposals are evaluated based on technical merit and feasibility within the stated budget constraint.
Enter the DBE participation percentage established for this contract.
Enter the maximum page limit for the proposal submission (excluding required notarized forms and the separate price proposal).
SLED stands for State, Local, and Education. These are solicitations issued by state governments, counties, cities, school districts, utilities, and higher education institutions — as opposed to federal agencies.
SamSearch Platform
AI-powered intelligence for the right opportunities, the right leads, and the right time.