The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) requested proposals to lease rights of way owned by the Department and the Central Florida Expressway Authority (“CFX”), for the purposes of constructing and operating intercity passenger rail service between Orlando and Tampa, Florida. The RFP may be obtained by submitting a written request to:

Please provide a contact name and e-mail address when submitting your request. Questions about the RFP should also be directed to the aforementioned e-mail address.
Notice: Final Selection Meeting 3:00 PM November 28, 2018 at 605 Suwannee Street, Secretary's Conference Room, Tallahassee, FL 32399

Final Selection Meeting Information

Press Release: November 7, 2018 Florida Department of Transportation Proposals Release

Additional Information:
a) Agreement and Global Settlement between the Department and Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC
b) Natural Gas Pipeline Easement Agreement between the Department and Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC
c) Florida’s Turnpike Enterprise PD&E Studies and plans for expansion of State Roads 91, 528 and 417
d) CFX Technical Memorandum and State Road 417 and State Road 528 Eight Lane Conceptual Plans (under development and will be posted when completed, if before the time for responses)
e) Department PD&E Studies and plans for expansion of Interstate 4:
   • All the PD&E info for D5 (and partial into D1) for I-4:
• Segment 1 is from CR 532 to SR 528:
• Three design contracts:
• US 27 to CR 532 -
• CR 532 to SR 522 -
• SR 522 to SR 528 -
• SR 528 to SR 435 (technically not part of the HSR reserved corridor) -
• FRA website -
• Link to Section 8 PD&E Documents: 
• Link to DTI concepts:

Addenda to Request for Proposal: None at this time.

Technical Questions and Answers:  
    Question 1: Section 1.13.2 b-2 a. Lease Requirements, states “Although not required to be furnished with a response to this RFP, proposers may elect to provide an appraisal of the proposed leased property in connection with their response.” For this appraisal, is the use of a Florida Certified General Appraiser with extensive public agency experience acceptable to both FDOT and CFX?  
    Q1 Answer: For the appraisal, the use of a Florida Certified General Appraiser with extensive public agency experience is acceptable to both FDOT and CFX. To avoid the potential for conflicts of interest with appraisers under contract with the Department or CFX who may already be performing work in the corridor, Proposers should identify a prospective Florida Certified General Appraiser to the Department and CFX for approval prior to use.  
    Question 2: Under what conditions may a proposer consider an alignment which includes access and travel through a segment of the Central Florida Rail Corridor?  
    Q2 Answer: The use of the Central Florida Rail Corridor is not being considered for this lease. The RFP does not preclude a proposer proposing an alignment that includes a segment of the Central Florida Rail Corridor, but no right to access or operate in the Central Florida Rail Corridor will be provided under a lease entered into in connection with the RFP.  
    Question 3: Will FDOT consider a one-on-one meeting with proposers to understand the state environmental process in Section 1.1, including a preliminary coordination call with the FHWA and the FRA?  
    Q3 Answer: Prospective proposers are individually responsible for identifying and assessing all legal requirements that would apply to their use of the property to be leased. Neither the Department or CFX will participate in any discussion regarding environmental or other requirements during the pendency of the request for proposals.  
    Question 4: Per the reference documents, both PD&E and design cross sections for future I-4 improvements show that there is a baseline shift from the existing condition. The future baseline includes shifting of the available rail envelope from where it is today. The timeline of implementation of the Intercity Passenger Rail project is likely ahead of the future I-4 improvements. Given that it is not in any party’s interest to build in a conflicting path with existing or future plans, how would FDOT like proposers to address this?  
    Q4 Answer: In accordance with the approach to other similar lease transactions, a proposer should anticipate that a lease will require it to utilize the leased property in a manner that minimizes the potential for conflict with the governmental agencies’ plans for the expansion, during the term of the lease, of agency owned facilities adjoining or crossing the leased property, to the extent such plans are made known to the lessee in writing prior to the effective date.  
    Question 5: We appreciate the posting of reference documents on the FDOT website for this project.
a) The materials from CFX related to SR417 and SR528 are noted as “will be posted when obtained”. When are these anticipated?
b) There are no reference documents included for I-4 within the D7 area –are there no future plans to be considered? If there are, please provide.
    Q5. Answer: Additional reference documents have been made available on this webpage. The referenced Central Florida Expressway Authority technical memorandum and State Road 417 plans are under development and will be posted when completed, if before the time for responses.  
    Question 6: Section 1.13.2.c.i states that the Proposer may be required to provide an investment grade ridership report that includes two independent opinions and an unbiased peer review process. Will the Department accept an alternate approach for this ridership report to meet investment grade status if a Proposer demonstrates the alternate approach has successfully met this standard on a recent intercity passenger rail ridership forecast in Florida?  
    Q6. Answer: As provided in the Request for Proposals, a ridership report may be required prior to execution of any lease. Under the existing terms of the Request for Proposals, a ridership report is not required to be submitted with a proposal. The Department has considered the question and has elected to not modify the terms of the Request for Proposals.  


Back to Top