Parkland narrows Village-in-the-Park RFP shortlist to five teams; JLL to flesh out scoring and outreach

Mayor Walker convened the City Commission workshop to discuss next steps for the Village‑in‑the‑Park project and a consultant from JLL presented the recommended shortlist after the city's RFQ drew 10 responses.

Nick Fanelli of JLL told the commission, “So our top 4, in no particular order were Edens, Fuqua, Lincoln, and the Georgetown companies,” and said Turnberry Associates and Regency Centers formed a second tier. After discussion, commissioners reached consensus to advance the four top teams and add Turnberry as a fifth team for RFP presentations and later rounds.

The RFP will request fully developed qualifications and concept proposals, Fanelli said. JLL outlined requirements that will include team composition (architect, civil engineer, property management), lot coverage and height assumptions, parking strategies, tenant profiles, detailed financing and underwriting assumptions, and a community outreach plan. The consultant also offered to provide evaluation training for commissioners to support a structured scoring process.

Commissioner Kanterman proposed an internal points system to help narrow the pool during evaluation; Fanelli confirmed the formal RFP will include a scoring rubric and percentages for community outreach, design, financial viability and management experience.

Commissioners emphasized the RFP should protect long‑term city interests. Several members asked the document to require proposers to disclose management plans and hold periods and to explain checks and balances the city could use to maintain standards over time; one commissioner urged including right‑of‑first‑refusal or covenant language as options for negotiation.

Staff confirmed there will be a cone of silence once the RFP is issued, but public presentations and formal Q&A sessions are allowed. Fanelli and staff said they will incorporate commission feedback into the RFP language, invite the five shortlisted teams to present, and return to the commission for subsequent rounds and final selection.

The commission did not take a binding vote on project design, financing or any residential component at the meeting; the only formal outcome was the consensus to advance the five teams into the RFP stage.