What this RFQ is selecting
• The EDC is selecting a partner with a record of delivering walkable mixed-use projects or small Texas
downtowns. A mixed-use portfolio is strongly preferred.
• The response should present a site vision and program that fits Texas Downtown scale, generally two- to
three-story buildings, with a realistic mix of uses and a first phase that actually activates the site. The site
vision and program can be delivered via a concept plan, rendering(s), vision board, or narrative.
• The respondent must show financial capacity to close without an open EDC check, including documented
equity, liquidity, lenders, and partners.
• The team must be built for execution and named before award. That team includes a project manager,
architect, civil engineer, landscape architect, retail recruitment and leasing lead, and general contractor.
What this RFQ is not
• It is not a request for a priced bid. No land price, TIRZ dollar amount, or infrastructure contribution figure
is published in this RFQ.
• It does not require control of adjacent privately owned parcels. Respondents may discuss adjacent
parcels; they are not a control requirement.
• It does not prescribe a single site plan. Scenario 1 (Texas Downtown Scale) is the Board’s preferred
reference case after the September 23, 2026 update. Respondents may still propose a tighter, larger, or
reordered program if they explain why it is more deliverable and still fits Texas Downtown character.
Board direction — September 23, 2026
• The preferred program is Scenario 1, Texas Downtown Scale: two- to three-story buildings, a restaurant
cluster and public park or common open space in Phase 1, mixed-use buildings in later phases, and parking
provided at the surface and in the right-of-way.
• The Board identified a market for live/work units and for office tenants. Upper floors may be office,
live/work, or two- to three-story urban lofts. High-density multifamily is not the assignment.
• The assignment is to find the right partner. The City and the EDC will take the time required. A response
that rushes Phase 1 with a weak team or an incomplete capital stack will not be rewarded for speed.
Related work underway
In parallel with this RFQ, the City’s development advisor is completing two remaining activation-scope items from
the Fifth Street District engagement. Both will inform exclusive negotiation. As each is accepted by the City, it will
be issued as an addendum or as interview material.
• The Infrastructure Assessment and CIP Recommendations will work from Public Works and existing
engineering data to identify infrastructure gaps and improvements required to support vertical
development, and will produce a prioritized CIP recommendation with rough order-of-magnitude costs.
Respondents should treat that document as the map of what is already in the ground or programmed
versus what remains project-delivered.
• The Property Acquisition Strategy will evaluate the current ownership map of the district, identify
acquisition priorities and sequencing, assess acquisition scenarios, and outline tools available to the City
and EDC. This RFQ offers the publicly owned core. Adjacent private parcels are not a control requirement.
The strategy will tell shortlisted teams how the City intends to treat those edges.
SACHSE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION · RFQ 2026-08-EDC — 5th Street District Master Developer
Respondents should not assume those exhibits exist on day one of the posting. Shortlisted teams will have them
before interviews. A team that needs those answers to decide whether to respond may ask in writing; staff will
say what is known at that date.

2. The 5th Street District
Location and ownership
The 5th Street District sits near the well-traveled intersection of SH 78 and 5th Street in Old Town Sachse. More
than 49,000 vehicles pass the intersection each day. The City and the EDC own approximately seven acres within
the district. Adjacent private parcels exist; they are not part of the public land offered through this RFQ and are
not required as a control condition of a response.
Public work already in the ground includes 5th Street improvements and a traffic circle, reconstruction of
Alexander Street with a mid-block pedestrian crossing, sidewalks and on-street parking, water and sewer
upgrades, and off-street parking delivered in earlier phases. TIRZ #3 is in place. These are the “no-regrets” public
investments the adopted Economic Development Strategic Plan treats as the foundation the market cannot supply
on its own.
What the adopted plans encourage
Responses will be read against two adopted documents: Shaping Sachse (Comprehensive Plan, adopted May 19,
2025) and Better Together: Building a Complete Community in Sachse (Economic Development Strategic Plan,
2026). Relevant language from the Strategic Plan’s 5th Street corridor spotlight is restated here so respondents
work from the same text the Board has adopted.
Priority reinvestment area. “Shaping Sachse identifies Old Town and the 5th Street corridor as priority
reinvestment areas and establishes a clear expectation that significant public participation will be required to
catalyze new development and redevelopment. With limited undeveloped land remaining, the success of the 5th
Street District is central to Sachse’s ability to deliver a more complete community with local businesses, quality of
life amenities, downtown activations, and long-term economic value.”
Public land at the heart. “The heart of the 5th Street District is comprised of property owned by the City and EDC.”
Remaining constraints — street conditions, sidewalks, parking, drainage, and utilities on some parcels — “limit
private development today and cannot be resolved by the market alone. In this context, strategic public investment
is not a subsidy—it is a necessary step to reduce risk, signal readiness, and create the conditions for private
investment to follow.”
Sequenced roles. The Plan organizes implementation in three phases with different public and private roles: Enable
(no-regrets public investments), Activate (catalytic projects and early momentum), and Build (private vertical
development). In the Build phase the Plan expressly contemplates “issuance of an RFI/RFP/RFQ, or interviewing
potential qualified development candidates, to assist in the comprehensive development of the EDC- and Cityowned
parcels,” while keeping “the door open for possible sale or transfer of property to private ownership, such
as through partnership with a master developer or as part of an incentive package.”
Character of the place. Earlier EDC goals-and-objectives language, still operative as policy direction, describes the
assignment as creating “a pedestrian oriented, from scratch downtown that is attractive, safe, unique, and welcoming, and functions as a central gathering place for the community,” and states that the District “will be ‘the heart of Sachse’ and unlike other areas in suburban communities.”
Respondents must include a narrative explaining how their approach aligns with Shaping Sachse and the Economic
Development Strategic Plan. Renderings, sketches, or an image board are encouraged.

3. Program the City and EDC Are Seeking
Character
Heart of Sachse / Old Town authenticity. Texas Downtown style, which is generally two- to three-story buildings.
The district should strive to be a regional gathering place and hub of business activity.
Uses
• The program should include quality and unique restaurants and lifestyle commercial. Destination uses are
expected; commodity chains that could locate on any arterial are not.
• Ground floors must be active. Retail, restaurant, and similar pedestrian uses belong on the street.
• Upper floors on the mixed-use buildings may be office, live/work, or two- to three-story urban lofts. Office
and live/work are equally welcome outcomes.
• Missing-middle housing is welcome on the edges of the public land and on the drainage lot west and south
of Sachse Road. Townhomes, multiplexes, cottage courts, and similar low-rise types that face the
neighborhood or the drainage lot can be proposed.
• The program must include a public gathering space that can be programmed. A park, plaza, or equivalent
civic room should give the district a reason to visit before every building is full.
• The first phase must activate the site. Activity on opening day matters more than a complete master plan
that sits dark for years.
Upper-floor posture
The core of the district is not a high-density residential site. A building with restaurant or retail at grade and office
on floors two and three is a successful response. Live/work on those same floors is a successful response. Urban lofts are allowed if they stay at Texas Downtown scale — walk-up, two or three stories, a small number of units over the commercial. A stacked residential building that happens to have retail at the sidewalk is not the City of
Sachse’s preference for this site.
On September 23, 2026 the EDC Board noted a market for both live/work units and office tenants. Respondents should say how they would evaluate which upper-floor product they can lease or sell in Sachse.
Preferred reference case — Scenario 1 (Board direction)
On September 23, 2026 the EDC Board was presented three development scenarios and gave clear preference for the Scenario 1 — Texas Downtown Scale — modeled as a three-phase, approximately six-year build-out. It is the program respondents should design against. It is not a mandatory floor plan. Respondents may propose a tighter,
larger, or reordered program if they explain why it is more deliverable and still fits this character.
• Phase 1 is a restaurant and entertainment cluster with a public park or common open space. The reference case is approximately 20,000 square feet on three sites oriented to a central green.
• Phase 2 is two mixed-use buildings totaling approximately 60,000 square feet, with retail, restaurant, or office on the ground floor and office, live/work, or urban lofts above. Office or live/work above is an equally acceptable outcome.
• Phase 3 is one mixed-use building facing Boone totaling approximately 40,000 square feet, with retail or restaurant on the ground floor and office, live/work, or urban lofts above. The back half of that lot may remain in short-term surface parking.
• An interim surface parking lot of about 125 spaces may remain on a parcel that can later become a development site as the district evolves.
• Missing-middle housing on the property edges and on the drainage lot west and south of Sachse Road is optional if the respondent can show drainage, access, and a neighborhood transition. That housing is additive to the commercial core. It is not a substitute for it.
Under that reference case, staff anticipates on the order of $40 million in private investment, approximately $28 million in annual taxable sales at stabilization, and roughly $15.4 million in 20-year revenue across City property tax, TIRZ, EDC sales tax, City sales tax, Streets, and the Municipal Development District. Those figures are planning estimates from the September 23, 2026 Board materials. They are not a guaranteed public contribution, and they are not a ceiling on what a respondent may propose.
Phase versus whole-district proposals
Respondents may propose on a single phase or for the entire district. They must say which, and why. A singlephase response will be scored on the same rubric. It must still show how the phase proposed sits inside a credible district, how later phases remain possible, and how the respondent would treat remaining public land if they are
not awarded the later phases.
The City and EDC may shortlist more than one team, award Phase 1 or a single phase to one respondent and reserve later phases or negotiate a whole-district MDA with a single master developer. That decision will follow scoring, interviews, and Board / Council direction. It will not be made in this RFQ.
4. City and EDC Participation — Tools, Not Dollars
Recent DFW downtown and mixed-use deals that reached construction used a stack, not a single tool: reduced price land, TIRZ support, structured parking contributions, streetscape grants, fee waivers, and civic facilities.
Across a set of comparable projects totaling about $740 million in private investment, public incentives averaged about 20 percent of the total project cost.
Sachse already has the tools that comparable projects used. This RFQ documents the toolbox available in Sachse. It does not publish a dollar amount the City or EDC will contribute. The tools available for the project include Type B performance agreement, land conveyance, Chapter 380, TIRZ reimbursement, or a combination. Terms of any
incentive agreement(s) will be chosen in exclusive negotiation to fit the deal that actually advances.
Toolbox available for negotiation
• The toolbox includes EDC- and City-owned land, conveyed by direct sale, ground lease, a combination of the two, or a similar structure the respondent prefers. A write-down or contribution of land is on the table as one tool in the stack. No asking price, no published discount, and no assumption that land is free will be stated in this RFQ.
• TIRZ fund balance and/or increment is available consistent with the adopted project and finance plan. 
• Capital Improvement Plan support is already in the ground, and additional infrastructure may be part of the stack.
• Fee waivers or similar process relief may be considered if authorized.
• Streetscape, parking, drainage, public park/plaza space, and public-realm work that remains after the no regrets investments already delivered may be assigned between the City and the project.
• Civic or programmable public space may be constructed as part of the project.
Rules that will govern any stack
• But-for. Any Sachse negotiation still has to pass a “but-for” test. Public dollars do not fill a gap the private stack can fill.
• No open check. Financial capacity is scored at 20 percent. A response that works only if the EDC writes an unspecified check will not advance.

5. Property Conveyance
The RFQ identifies the conveyance options. It does not pick one, and it does not publish a price.
Respondents shall state their preferred conveyance strategy and why it fits their capital stack, phasing, and lender requirements. Acceptable options include:
• The City and EDC will consider a direct sale of some or all publicly owned parcels.
• The City and EDC will consider a ground lease of some or all parcels.
• The City and EDC will consider a combination of sale and ground lease by parcel or by phase.
• The City and EDC will consider a similar structure, for example a sale with repurchase rights or a lease with a purchase option, if the respondent explains how it protects the public interest and still lets the project finance.
A write-down or contribution of land is a tool the City and EDC are willing to consider. It is not a published offer.
Any discount must still pass a but-for test, must be earned against performance, and will be sized in exclusive negotiation against the rest of the incentive stack.
Final conveyance and incentive terms will be negotiated first in a Pre-Development Agreement and then in the MDA. Both will require action by the EDC Board and, as applicable, the City Council.

6. Schedule the City Expects
Respondents must document their ability to move forward in 2027 with financing and partners identified — not hoped for. A competitive response shows the project can be prioritized and advanced quickly once exclusive negotiation starts.
Exclusive negotiation
After interviews, staff will recommend a preferred team (or teams). On Board direction, the EDC will enter an approximately 90 day exclusive Pre-Development Agreement. During that window the parties will settle program
and phasing, preferred conveyance, the public stack including any land write-down, public-realm delivery and programming, a 2027 start schedule, and a term sheet sufficient to draft the MDA.
Exclusive negotiation is not an award. If talks fail, the EDC may open talks with the next-ranked team, re-solicit, orstop. The MDA is the only document that conveys property or binds public dollars.
The process from this RFQ to an MDA is:
1. Issue RFQ Staff will issue the RFQ, host an optional site briefing, and accept written questions only. Early October
2. Staff score Staff will complete a completeness review and then score against the published rubric. Early November
3. Shortlist Staff will shortlist a target of three teams. Mid-November
4. Interviews Staff will lead interviews with the shortlisted teams. Mid-November
5. Recommend Staff will recommend a preferred team. The Board will name that team if it concurs. Early December
6 Exclusive negotiation Staff will negotiate a 90- to 180-day Pre-Development
Agreement covering program, term sheet, and conveyance. Dec 2026 – mid-2027
7 MDA The authorized bodies will consider a Master Development Agreement. There is no award until that approval. 2027
Official questions deadline, submittal deadline, and interview window will appear on the published cover. Do not rely on the target language in this draft.

7. Evaluation Criteria
Staff will first confirm completeness. Complete responses will then be scored on the published rubric below.
Weights total 100 percent.

20% Comparable experience- The respondent has delivered walkable mixed-use projects or small Texas downtowns. Public-partner references will be weighted.
20% Site vision and program- The site vision / program fits Texas Downtown scale and contemplates how the district will further the stated goals of the Comprehensive Plan
and Economic Development Plan.
20% Financial capacity- The respondent can document equity, liquidity, lenders, and partners.
15% Public realm / benefit- The response includes public space and event programming that reinforce the District and the City’s goals and shows an equivalent commitment to Sachse’s no-regrets investment in the 5th Street District.
15% Team built for execution- The response names the Project Manager, Architect, Civil Engineer, Landscape Architect, Retail Recruitment and Leasing lead, and General
Contractor.
10% Deal and public cost- The response addresses land terms, approach on public incentives.

Shortlisted teams will be interviewed. Interviews may clarify scoring; they will not replace it. The Board will receive a staff recommendation. Award, if any, is not complete until an MDA is approved by the authorized bodies.

8. What a Response Must Contain
Keep the package readable. Unless the published cover sets a different limit, target 30 pages or fewer for the narrative, exclusive of financial exhibits, resumes, and required forms. One electronic PDF and the number of bound copies stated on the published cover.
Required contents
1. Cover letter. Identify the respondent entity and the primary contact. State whether the response is for a certain phase/property or for the whole district, and explain that choice.
2. Statement of alignment. Include a narrative that explains the development approach and how it aligns with the Comprehensive Plan and the Economic Development Strategic Plan. This narrative is required.
3. Site vision and program. Describe the mix of uses, phasing, parking approach, and how Phase 1 activates the site. Renderings, sketches, or an image board are encouraged. They are not mandatory.
4. Comparable experience. Describe projects actually delivered with an emphasis on walkable mixed-use or small Texas downtowns. Include public-partner references and a clear statement of the respondent’s role.
5. Team. Name the Project Manager, Architect, Civil Engineer, Landscape Architect, Retail Recruitment and Leasing lead, and General Contractor. Include a resume for each named person.
6. Financial capacity. Provide evidence of equity, liquidity, lenders, and documented partners sufficient to close in 2027. Mark confidential material as directed on the published cover.
7. Deal posture. State the preferred conveyance (sale, ground lease, combination, or similar), the nature of any TIRZ or infrastructure ask, residual public work the respondent expects the City or EDC to carry.
8. Anticipated schedule from MDA to first vertical start.
9. Public realm. Explain how any gathering space, plaza will be designed, delivered, owned or maintained, and programmed.
10. Required forms. Submit the forms listed on the published cover. That list will be locked before posting and will include conflict disclosure, Form CIQ, and related City and EDC certifications.

Before a response is complete
• Respondents should attend a site visit with staff. This should be scheduled by the respondent.
• Staff will host a pre-submittal meeting on October 22, 2026 at 11:00 AM and in-person attendance is encouraged. A virtual attendance option will also be provided.
• Questions must be submitted in writing. Questions submitted after the published deadline will not be answered. Answers will be issued by addendum and posted with the RFQ.
• The submittal package must include a narrative statement of alignment to the project goals. Conceptual renderings and site plans are not required but are encouraged to help convey developer intent.
• The package must name the full stack of team members, including subconsultants.
What a competitive response should show
• The response should present comparable projects with public-partner references.
• The respondent should show the ability to prioritize this project and to stay with it. The Board will wait for the right partner. It will not wait for a team that cannot name financing or show an ability to advance in 2027.
• The response should present a capital stack and financials that can close.
• The response should show alignment to the adopted community plans and also an understanding of how to build and operate a mixed-use district at a Texas downtown scale.
• The response should show an equivalent commitment to Sachse’s no-regrets investment in the 5th Street District.

9. Process Rules
• From issuance until award recommendation, respondents shall communicate about this RFQ only with the designated point of contacts. Contact with Board members, Councilmembers, or other City staff for the purpose of influencing selection is grounds for disqualification.
• The EDC may issue addenda. Respondents are responsible for monitoring the posting location identified on the published cover.
• Responses are subject to the Texas Public Information Act. Mark proprietary material or confidential materials clearly. The EDC will follow the Act. It cannot guarantee confidentiality. You will be responsible for asserting any third party arguments to the Texas Attorney General.
• Respondents bear all costs of preparing and submitting a response and of attending interviews.
• The EDC and the City may reject any or all responses, waive informalities, request clarifications, shortlist fewer or more than three teams, end the process, or negotiate with one or more respondents. This RFQ creates no right to an award and no obligation to convey property.
• Naming a preferred team authorizes staff to negotiate a Pre-Development Agreement for an estimated 90 day period. That step does not convey land, approve incentives, or guarantee an MDA. Either party may end exclusive talks. The EDC may then negotiate with another shortlisted team.
• Respondents shall disclose actual or potential conflicts, including work for competing sites in the 5th Street and Old Town area.
• The RFQ and any MDA will be governed by the laws of the State of Texas. Venue will lie in Dallas County.