20160309 SM1MIAMI BEACH
City Commission Meeting
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL 1
City Hall, Commission Chambers, 3rd Floor, 1700 Convention Center Drive
March 9, 2016
Mayor Philip Levine
Commissioner John Elizabeth Alem6n
Commissioner RickY Arriola
Com m issioner Kristen Rosen Gonzalez
Commissioner Michael Grieco
Commissioner Joy Malakoff
Commissioner MickY Steinberg
City Manager JimmY L. Morales
City Attorney RaulJ. Aguila
City Clerk Rafael E. Granado
Vlslf us at www.miamibeachfl.gov for agendas and video "streaming" of City Commission Meetings'
ATTENTION ALL LOBBYISTS
Chapter 2, Article Vll, Division 3 of the City Code of Miami Beach entitled "Lobbyists" requires the
registration of all lobtyists with the City Cierk prior to engaging in any lobbying activity with the City
Commission, any City Board or Committee, or any personnel as defined in the subject Code
sections. Copies of thl city code sections on lobbyists laws are available in the City Clerk's office'
euestions regarding the provisions of the ordinance should be directed to the office of the City
Attorney.
SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA
C4 - Gommission Committee Assiqnments
C4l ReferralTo The Neighborhood/CommunityAffairs Committee -Traffic ManagementAlternatives
Discussed At The february 24,2016 Commission Workshop On Traffic Management.
(Transportation)
(Memorandum)
R7 - Resolutions
R7L A Resolution Approving Addendum 5 To The Solicitation Of Alternative Proposals For A Public-
private partnership, ln Accordance With Florida Statute 287.05712, ForAn off-Wire Or"Wireless"
Light Rail/Modern Streetcar System.
(Transportation/Office of the City Attorney)
(Memorandum, Resolution & Exhibits)
1
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
2
MIAMIBEACH
City of Miomi Beqch, ,1700 Convention Cenler Drive, Miomi Beoch, Florido 33,l39, www.miomibeochfl.gov
COMMISSIO MEMORANDUM
Mayor Philip Levine and Members ol,the City
Jimmy L. Morales, City Manager
March 9, 2016
SUBJECT: REFERRAL TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD/COMMUNIW AFFAIRS COMMITTEE -
TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES DISCUSSED AT THE FEBRUARY 24,
2016 COMMISSION WORKSHOP ON TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT
BACKGROUND
On February 24, 2016, the City Commission held a Workshop on Traffic Management. At the
Workshop, staff highlighted regional and local traffic volume data and growth in recent years.
It was mentioned that while County-wide traffic volumes on regional highways have grown an
average of 1% in the last 5 years, highways serving Miami Beach have grown significantly
more. ln the last 5 years, northbound l-95 traffic volumes have grown by approximately 20%.
From 2013 to 2015, eastbound and westbound volumes on the MacArthur Causeway have
grown by 3o/o and 7o/o, respectively. From 2010 to 2015, eastbound and westbound volumes on
the Julia Tuttle Causeway grew by 15% and 12o/o, raspactively.
Additionally, staff discussed population trends in the City as documented in the 2015
Environmental Scan and the impact of population growth on traffic. Over the past 5 years, the
City of Miami Beach resident population has grown by 4o/o, while the national average growth for
mid-sized cities has been only 1o/o ovar the same S-year period. Average daily population,
consisting of daily resident population, labor force in Miami Beach, hotel guests, and other
visitors, has grown by 37o/o over a 1O-year period.
At the Workshop, staff presented an overview of current conditions; ongoing traffic management
initiatives; as well as potential policy considerations to mitigate traffic. Traffic management and
mitigation concepts and alternatives were discussed by the City Commission and the public in
attendance.
The following information regarding development impacts was requested by the Commission at
the Workshop:
Mayor Philip Levine asked for information on how many new construction projects have
been approved in the City during the last two and a half (2 %) years, and how the
population has increased during that time. Vice-Mayor John Elizabeth Alem6n asked to
provide information on how the density has changed in the last two and a half years.
Commissioner Michael Grieco asked to include how many buildings have been built in
the five (5) years prior to 2013.
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Agenda nem CA I
Date 1-f- /b3
Commission Memorandum - Referral to the Neighborhood/Community Affairs Committee -
Traffic Management Alternatives Discussed at the February 24, 2016 Commission Workshop
on Traffic Management
March 9,2016
Page2 of 4
Below is the information provided by the Building Department for building permits issued for the
last 2 and 5 years. These figures represent all building permits issued including both new
developments and renovation projects:
9to1t13-03/01/16 09t01t08-9t01t13
. Number of Commercial Permitso Number of Multi-Family Residence Permitso Number of Single Family Residence Permits
668
3,392
773
1,286
4,155
1,008
While there is no specific information available regarding changes in density throughout the
City, the number of vehicular trips reflected in concurrency log data as well as concurrency
revenues collected are surrogate indicators. Table A below, provided by the Planning
Department, reflects estimated net vehicular trips generated by approved development orders
from March 2014 to date. lt is important to note that some of the projects are in the building
permit phase and may not move fonruard to construction.
Table A
Vehicular Trips (March 2014 to Date)
Concurrency Paid/Permanently Reserved and Concurrency
Unoaid/ Tem oora rilv Reserved
South Beach Trips Mid Beach Trips North Beach Trips Total
3807.37 742.48 't43.81 4693.66
Table B below, provided by the Planning Department, reflects estimated net vehicular trips
based on concurrency revenues collected (i.e. concurrency paid/permanently reserved) for each
of the last ten (10) years.
Table B
FiscalYear
2fl)6
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Totol
South Beach
Trip lncreases
Mid Beach
72
209
116
90
130
96
137
64
220
2ts
7,i,5,0
North Beach
208
26
Total
760
9s9
813
496
432
422
471
608
83s
1,159
6,955
481
723
6s6
389
251
319
330
s23
610
933
5,277
40
L7
51
6
4
20
5
10
i87
4
Commission Memorandum - Referral to the Neighborhood/Community Affairs Committee -
Traffic Management Alternatives Discussed at the February 24, 2016 Commission Workshop
on Traffic Management
March 9,2016
Page 3 of 4
Below is the information regarding changes in demographics in our City based on the 2015 City
of Miami Beach Environmental Scan:
on
Calendar Year 2m5 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 n11 2012 2013 2014
Daily Population 1 57,593 161,780 163,062 161,669 1 74,808 182,07i 1 83,588 201,64(203,76r 206,Ui
Activities Underwav
It is important to note that the following alternatives raised at the Workshop are already being
pursued by the Administration:
o No left turn at lndian Creek Drivel42nd Street. 41't Street lntercept Garage/lntermodal facilityo Pedestrian safety concern - Publix at Collins Avenue/69th Street due to confusing
pedestrian signalo !-95 Express Lane access from/to l-195/Julia Tuttle Causeway. Failing intersection at Biscayne Boulevard/l-195 causing back-upso Bike lane on Julia Tuttle Causeway separated from the roadwayo Dickens Avenue/71tt Street intersection improvements. lmprove reliability of Miami-Dade Transit bus serviceo WAZE messaging discouraging use of residential streetso New baseline signal timing plans for corridorso Permanent trolley/bus operating on the shoulder of the Julia Tuttle Causeway
ln addition, the following suggestions from the Workshop are already being evaluated or are in
progress of being implemented:
o Text when traffic problem is resolved. No right turn on Chase Avenue from northbound Alton Roado Reinstate Miami-Dade Transit A-Bus route from Omni to Collins Park and Convention
Centero Additional interceptgarages/intermodalfacilities. Additional southbound right turn lane at Collins Avenue/41't Street
Commission Directive
Some of the other recommendations require policy direction from the Commission, either
because of the resources required or because of impacts to the Community. lt is recommended
that the following recommendations be referred to NCAC for further direction:
o Revisit pilot on Prairie Avenue to allow right turns to travel eastboundo lncreased police staffing for traffic enforcement in the FY 2016117 budgeto Further restrictions on construction work on rights-of-wayo Further restrictions on hours for special events permits blocking rights-of-way
Dail
Resident
lalendar Year 2005 2006 2N7 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
)ermarent Residents'84,086 84,880 85,03t 84,63i 86,91(87,771 88,34!89,54(90,58t 91,54(
5
Commission Memorandum - Referral to the Neighborhood/Community Affairs Committee -
Traffic Management Alternatives Discussed at the February 24, 2016 Commission Workshop
on Traffic Management
March 9, 2016
Page 4 of 4
o Limitations on parking during special events complemented with shuttle and water taxi
serviceso More aggressive requirements for employee transportation planso Expanding construction parking plan requirements to construction transportation plan
requirementso Additional dedicated lanes for transit throughout the Cityo Transport of public school children within 2-mile limito Removal of bump outs to facilitate additional turn laneso lntercept tolls/congestion pricing on causeways and arterials entering the City. Neighborhood greenway for Bayshore Neighborhood. Slow-down in development permits. Second level/reversible lanes on causeways/tunnelo Reversible lanes on lndian CreeUAbbott Avenueo No side street parking by Publix in North Beach. Signal at72nd Streeto End afternoon Publix deliveries in North Beach (allow only in the morning)
CONCLUSION
At the Neighborhood/Community Affairs Committee meeting, staff will provide additional
inforpation on all the alternatives discussed at the Workshop.
W xt-
JLM/KGB/JRG
T:\AcENDA\2016u\4arch\Transportation\Referal to NCAC - Traffic Managem€nt Alternatives Discussd At the February 24, 2016 Commission Workshop on Traffic
Management.docx
6
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
APPROVAL OF ADDENDUM 5 TO THE SOLICITATION OF ALTERNATIVE PROPOSALS FOR A
PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP FOR AN OFF-WIRE OR "WIRELESS" LIGHT RAIL/MODERN
STREETCAR SYSTEM.
!ntended Outcome
Source of Funds:Amount Account
I Total
Financial lmpact Summary:
-Offs:
Department Director Assistant City Manager Gity lt anager
JRG KCB fuF JLMT l^
\
,D
-
AGEHDA ITEI'I RT L
alr;z 3-1-lb
Ensure Comorehensive All Modes Throuohout The
Su Data (Survevs, EnvironmentalScan. etc: N/A
On December 16,2015, the Mayorand Commission adopted Resolution No.2015-29247, accepting receiptof an
unsolicited proposal from Greater Miami Tramlink Partners for a Light Rail/Modern Streetcar Project in Miami Beach,
and authorizing the Administration to solicit alternative proposals for a public/private partnership ("P3") for an off-wire or
"wireless" light rail/modern streetcar system from 5th Street, via Washington Avenue to the Miami Beach Convention
Center (the "Project").
On January 11,2016, the Administration issued LTC #009-2016, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit "l" to the
Commission Memorandum accompanying this Resolution, informing the Mayor and City Commission of the issuance of
the public notice and Proposal Requirements Document ('PRD) outlining the City's submission and other
requirements for the Project.
On February 10, 2016, the Mayor and City Commission approved Resolution 2016-29304, authorizing the
Administration to conduct voluntary one-on-one meetings with prospective proposers for faclfinding purposes, to
permit consideration of the best available information from the industry, in an effort to ensure the successful
implementation for the Project.
On February 19,2016, the City conducted a mandatory pre-proposal conference for the Project, and on February 19,
2016 and February 26,2016, representatives of Kimley-Horn, Parsons Brinkerhoff, HDR, Clary Consulting and LTK
Engineering (collectively, "City's Consultants") and representatives of the City conducted one-on-one meetings with
prospectlve proposers and industry participants.
As a result of the one-on-one meetings, and in an effort to maximize competition for the benefit of the City, the City's
Consultants recommend certain modifications to the solicitation of the Project that require policy direction from the City
Commission, including modifications to the antlcipated timeline for completion of the procurement process and
modifications to the minimum requirements set forth in the PRD.
The Administration and City's Consultants recommend the proposed Addendum 5, attached as Exhibit "3" to the
Commission Memorandum accompanying this Resolution.
Advisorv Board Recommendation:
Financial lnformation :
MIAMIBEACH 7
MIAMIBEACH
Cify of Miomi Beoch, I 700 Convention Center Drive, Miomi Beoch, Florido 33,l39, www.miomibeochfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE: March 9,2016
SUBIECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE MA AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
NG ADDENDUM 5 TO THE SOLICITATION OFMIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA,
ALTERNATIVE PROPOSALS FOR A PUBLIC.PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP, IN
ACCORDANCE WITH FLORIDA STATUTE 287.05712, FOR AN OFF-WIRE OR,.WIRELESS'' LIGHT RA!L/MODERN STREETCAR SYSTEM.
BACKGROUND
On December 16, 2015, the Mayor and Commission adopted Resolution No. 2015-29247,
accepting receipt of an unsolicited proposal from Greater Miami Tramlink Partners for a Light
Rail/Modern Streetcar Project in Miami Beach, and authorizing the Administration to solicit
alternative proposals for a public/private partnership ("P3"), in accordance with Florida Statute
287.05712, for an off-wire or "wireless" light rail/modern streetcar system from 5th Street, via
Washington Avenue to the Miami Beach Convention Center (the "Project").
On January 11,2016, the Administration issued LTC #009-2016, informing the Mayor and City
Commission of the issuance of the public notice and Proposal Requirements Document ("PRD")
outlining the City's submission and other requirements for the Project. A copy of LTC #009-
2016 is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
On February 10, 2016, the Mayor and City Commission approved Resolution 2016-29304,
authorizing the Administration to conduct voluntary one-on-one meetings with prospective
proposers for fact-finding purposes, to permit consideration of the best available information
from the industry, in an effort to ensure the successful implementation for the Project.
On February 19, 2016, the City conducted a mandatory pre-proposal conference for the Project,
which was extremely well-attended with approximately 140 representatives from various firms,
including infrastructure development teams from the United States, Canada Europe, and
Australia.
On February 19, 2016, and February 26, 2016, the Kimley Horn Team (representatives of
Kimley-Horn, Parsons Brinkerhoff, HDR, Clary Consulting and LTK Engineering - collectively,
"City's Consultants") and representatives of the City conducted 10 one-on-one meetings with
prospective proposers and industry participants.
Mayor Philip Levine and Members
Jimmy L. Morales, City Manager
e City
8
Addendum - Streetcar Project
City Commission Meeting
March 9,2016
Page 2 of 7
The City's Procurement Department has released four prior addendums to the PRD, attached
hereto as Exhibit "2," primarily addressing the details regarding the mandatory pre-proposal
conference, one-on-one meetings and questions and answers related to the procurement
document and proposal response format.
As a result of the one-on-one meetings, the Administration has identified certain policy matters
that require direction from the City Commission. Accordingly, a proposed addendum is attached
hereto as Exhibit "3" ("Addendum") for the City Commission's consideration.
ANALYSIS
The Onooino Environmental Reviews
The critical path for the Pro1ect continues to revolve around the various environmental reviews
that are being conducted in parallel to this procurement, and that are required in order to obtain
environmental clearances to permit the Project to move fonivard and that City's Consultants
advise are required to secure approvals for the portion of the alignment along State roadways,
two of which are being considered (5th Street and Alton Road) and that also relates to State
funding for capital cost of the project. Currently, the City anticipates the draft environmental
analysis and report will be completed August, 2016, with follow on public hearings and comment
period as required by law.
The City's Consultants have aggressively pursued the advancement of the procurement and the
environmental review process since they were first engaged a few months ago. Tasks
completed or undenruay include the following:
. Corridor Assessment - Preliminary Project Definition: lnitiation of environmental analysis
and assessment of the proposed corridor, including analysis of the full loop alternative.
Activities performed to date include:. Review of all existing studies, as-built plans, and franchise agreements with private
utilities;. Analysis of potential maintenance and storage facility locations;. ldentification of potential manufacturers of off-wire vehicles;. Preparation of GIS mapping of project corridor/features and base map;. Outlines of Project development, engineering, and environmental compliance
documentation required for project;. Research and analysis for advancing the Project without harming the opportunity for
federal funds for the Beach Corridor Transit Connection project, along with support to
Miami-Dade County for parallel development of the re-defined Beach Corridor Transit
Connection Project.o Preliminary Finance and P3 Procurement Activities: Supporting the City in several early-on
P3 Procurement and Finance activities. Activities performed to date include:. lndustry Outreach - Members of the City's Consultants reached out to the P3,
construction, engineering and LRT/Modern Streetcar industry prior to issuance of the
procurement documents to encourage participation in the procurement process. This
occurred at national meetings such as the Transportation Research Board annual
meeting and other outreach with a wide range industry members that is reflected in the
strong participation at the Pre-Proposal Meeting and in One-on-One sessions.. Research regarding the applicability of Federal Transit Administration's Program of
lnterrelated Projects as a strategy for City of Miami Beach transit project; serving as a
local match to Beach Corridor Transit Connection project.
9
Addendum - Streetcar Project
City Commission Meeting
March 9, 2016
Page 3 of 7
, Support for development of the procurement documents, Pre-Proposal Meeting and
One-on-One meetings.. Development of a Project funding plan and financial plan. This includes identification of
very preliminary Project cost and the screening of funding options for the Project that
will be covered in upcoming briefings for the Mayor and Commissioners.. Start-UpCoordination. Analysis of potential locations for intermodal hub along Alton Road and 5th Street;. Preparation of presentation and support for the MPO Policy Executive Committee
meeting for the Beach Transit Connection project, resulting in the Policy Executive
Committee endorsement of the two parallel projects (Miami Beach transit project and
Beach Transit Connection project);. ldentification of requirements for topographic survey and subsurface utility exploration
(SUE) along the Project corridors;. Development of the preliminary Project scheduleo Research of comparable transit projects to determine range of costs for Project
development and environmental studies as a share of construction costs.
Resolution No. 2015-29247 directed the Administration to proceed with the environmenta!
analysis during the 120 day solicitation period for this procurement, in order to preserve
state funding and permit proposers to incorporate the environmental analysis within
their proposals.
The City's Consultants recommended the above approach because the environmental analysis
is critical for establishing the City's technology and infrastructure requirements. Specifically,
because the Project's technical requirements will be developed through the environmental
process, the environmental reviews will establish the baseline by which the City may evaluate
which technology and proposer team is best positioned to deliver the Project as expeditiously
and economically as possible for the City.
For example, the environmental reviews may inform matters as fundamental as whether a light
rail system or a streetcar system is suitable for the Project, as well as matters relating to the
alignment for the Project, stop locations, underground utility conflicts, and resiliency program
requirements that will outline the major capital build requirements for the Project. ln addition,
the environmental reviews will address key items related to Project operations such as
operating hours, headways (how frequent the trains run during the day such as every 5 minutes,
10 minutes or 15 minutes), and major performance requirements such as ontime percentage,
all of which could affect the selection of the best value proposals for delivery of the Project.
The environmental review process contemplates that the City Commission will be briefed on
these key major items, to ensure the solicitation is aligned with the City's needs (as determined
by the City Commission), permit proposers to best respond with proposals that meet the
Commission's requirements, and encourage price competition and "best value" proposals for
delivery of the Project. ln addition, the City's Consultants are concerned that the selection of a
proposer team before the pertinent portions of the environmental reviews are completed may
compromise the City's ability to obtain funding from partners on the Project such as the State
and County.l
1 Were the City to pursue federal funding or financing for the Project, the execution of the agreement with
the proposer before approvals of the environmental documents would definitively foreclose federal
funding for the Project.
10
Addendum - Streetcar Project
City Commission Meeting
March 9, 2016
Page 4 of 7
The Evaluation Process in the PRD and the Proposed Addendum
Based on the timeline for the environmental reviews, the PRD identified a two phase evaluation
process, with proposers being ranked and short-listed in Phase 1 based on qualifications and
experience, followed by Phase 2 whereby the short-listed proposers provide cost and technical
proposals that respond to the Project definition and technical requirements developed through
the environmental reviews.
The Administration contemplated that all details of the Phase 2 process would be released by
Addendum following review and approval by the City Commission, including any key policy
details involving Project definition, the performance specifications required for the Project, the
submittal of price proposals or best and final offers, and the criteria for evaluating the Phase 2
cost and technical proposals.
At the time of issuance of the PRD, the City anticipated that the environmental reviews
and the submittal of the critica! cost and technical proposals would largely overlap, and
that the two-phase evaluation approach would best advance the Project as quickly as
possible, consistent with the directives in Resolution No. 2015-29247. However, based
on additional information received in the past few weeks, including information received
during the recent one-on-one meetings, the Administration believes that further
Commission direction is now required to address certain policy issues relating to the
procurement of the Project, including direction with respect to the proposed Phase 2
evaluation process.
ADDENDUM 5
The proposed Addendum addresses the following:
1. Clarification of the Proiect solicitation timetable
Based on the industry input received during the one-on-one meetings, the City anticipates that
proposers will need approximately five (5) months following Commission approval of the key
policy issues/Project documents (as referenced above on Page 3 of this Memorandum), to
submit detailed technical and price proposals during the Phase 2 evaluation process. The
foregoing timeframes would contemplate selection of the preferred proposer team by
December, 2016. To meet this aggressive schedule, the Administration will be coordinating
closely with the City Commission on key policy items including the Project funding plan; major
Project definition (Project alignment, stops, operating hours, headways and related items); and
Phase 2 evaluation criteria.
The above approach for a parallel environmental review and development of firm technical and
price proposals extends the City's contemplated timeline by several months, the City's
Consultants strongly recommend the above approach and timeline to facilitate:
o Obtaining Commission direction on the major policy decisions regarding the Project
funding plan, Prolect definition (as these are developed during the Environmental
Review process) and input regarding evaluation criteria;. Providing the most expeditious competitive process (number of teams, and technical
and price competition) to advance the Project;. Encouraging maximum innovation in Project design and delivery (enhances the project
11
Addendum - Streetcar Project
City Commission Meeting
March 9, 2016
Page 5 of 7
and generally reduces cost) that meets the City's policy requirements for the Project;. Providing transparency and a competitive process for technical and price proposals to
support requests for State or other partner funding;. Ensuring that the selection of a technology through the procurement does not proceed
ahead of, and jeopardize the selection of a technology required by the environmental
review process and completion of the draft environmental documentation; ando Proceeding to a financial close as quickly as possible with the team that has the best
ability to deliver the Project based on the City's policy direction on technical and other
requirements, to ultimately permit the Project to open to the public on the shortest
schedule.
Accordingly, the Addendum includes the following timetable for the Commission's
consideration:
Proposal submittals:
Evaluation Committee
City Commission short-list:
Phase 2 docs released to short-listed proposers:
Submittal of Phase 2 cosUtechnical proposals:
Evaluation of Phase 2 cosVtechnical proposals:
Commission selection of proposer:
Commercial Close of Project Agreement:
Financial Close:
May 10, 2016
June, 2016
June/July, 2016
June/Ju|y,2016
November, 2016
December,2016
December,2016
January,2017
February, 2017*
"The anticipated financial close date assumes the environmental approvals have been achieved
at or before this time.
2. Clarification of Minimum Requirements Reoardino "Catenaryless" Technoloqv.
ln the PRD, the City specified certain minimum requirements with respect to the alternative
proposals for the Project, including the requirement that "the Proposer's Vehicle/Systems
Technology shall have demonstrated capacity of fully catenaryless for revenue operations in
Miami Beach, following an alignment on a dedicated right of way."
The proposed Addendum:
(a) clarifies that the requirement of fully catenaryless (i.e., "wireless") technology, means
that the technology solution must be wireless while in operation between stops along the Project
route. Specifically, for purposes of satisfying the minimum requirements, the Vehicle/System
Technology does not have to be catenaryless at or within the maintenance facility depot, and
City will allow for charging of the vehicles in the air or via ground at passenger stops along the
route, provided the application of the power supply is unobtrusive and is incorporated within the
architectural features of the canopy design for the passenger stops This clarification will open
up competition with Vehicle/System Suppliers.
(b) clarifies that the requirement of a "demonstrated capacity" for fully catenaryless
technology may be satisfied if the proposed Vehicle/Systems Technology is in revenue
operation as part of any portion or segment of track within any project anywhere in the world;
(c) adds a requirement that the Vehicle/Systems Technology include low floor, low step
12
Addendum - Streetcar Project
City Commission Meeting
March 9, 2016
Page 6 of 7
design throughout each vehicle to maximize and facilitate accessibility and more timely
passenger loading and unloading.
3. Modification to Permit Proposers to ldentifv More than One Potential Vehicle/Svstem
Supplier as Part of Phase 1 Evaluation Process.
The City's Consultants advise that it may be premature to require proposers to be exclusively
"tied" to one Vehicle/Systems Technology before the City, through the pending environmental
reviews, provides proposers with information concerning its infrastructure requirements,
schedule/delivery requirements, maintenance depot facility requirements, and operational
requirements and the like. To require proposers to be "tied" exclusively to one Vehicle Supplier
during Phase 1, before City's requirements are established, may have the unintended effect of
reducing competition among Vehicle/System Suppliers and P3 teams, not only in terms of the
pricing offered (either for vehicles or long-term operations or maintenance work), but in terms of
schedule and delivery requirements.
ln an effort to increase competition and ensure Vehicle/System Suppliers have the incentives to
deliver streetcars to the City as expeditiously as possible, the Addendum permits proposer
teams to identify more than one proposed (1)Vehicle/System Supplier as part of their Phase 1
proposals, provided that each Vehicle/System Supplier must meet the minimum requirements
and also deliver to the proposer team a commitment letter confirming that it will provide final
pricing and other terms to the proposer team. As part of the Phase 2 cost and technical
proposals, proposer teams may then finalize terms with the Vehicle/Systems Supplier that best
meets the major policy technical requirements and that offers the P3 team and ultimately the
City the best and most competitive package.
4. Clarification Reqardinq Federal Requirements
Although City officials and the City Commission have made public statements indicating it is
unlikely that the City will apply for federal New Starts funding for the Project, the City has p!
made the final decision that it will not seek anv federal funding or federal financing for the
Project. City's Consultants will provide a cost benefit assessment as part of the draft Project
Funding Plan in June,2016 that compares pursuing Federal eligibility benefits (such as a
Federal TIFIA Loan versus more traditional financing) to the additional cost, limits on
competition and schedule impacts of meeting Federal requirements for items like "Buy America"
requirements and the longer Federal environmental review process.
Accordingly, the PRD instructs proposers to "assume that the Project will be federally and/or
State funded and that the Project shall incorporate all applicable federal and State
requirements." However, this instruction effectively means that, for purposes of the Minimum
Requirements, proposers must satisfy federal requirements, including "Buy America"
requirements.
With respect to the Vehicle Systems component of the Project, the application of Buy America
requirements will significantly impact pricing for the Project and significantly limit the competitive
field of potential Vehicle/Systems Suppliers, as there are very few Vehicle/Systems Suppliers
that can currently satisfy the Buy America requirements that also meet the minimum
requirements under the procurement documents for the fully catenaryless technology.
Given the impact Buy America requirements will have on competition and on the pricing for the
13
Addendum - Streetcar Project
City Commission Meeting
March 9,2016
PageT of 7
vehicles, the Administration recommends that Buy America requirements should only be
imposed if necessary for the Project, and that Proposers need not assume, for purposes of the
Minimum Requirements, that federal requirements will apply for the Phase 1 proposal.
5. Clarification of Application Fee
Resolution No.2015-29247 requires an application fee of $100,000 with each proposal,
provided, however, that if the application fees collected ultimately exceed the costs for fully
evaluating proposals, the City will refund to proposers any excess amounts on a pro rata basis.
lf the Commission continues to proceed with the two-phase evaluation process, the
Administration recommends clarifying in the Addendum that at the conclusion of the Phase 1
evaluation process, the City will evaluate its average review cost per proposal for Phase 1. Any
proposers who are not short-listed and do not proceed to Phase 2 shall receive a refund
consisting of the difference between the $100,000 application fee and the per proposal review
cost for Phase 1. The Administration recommends the above approach to equitably take into
account the lower costs associated with review of Phase 1 proposals, and in an effort to ensure
that the application fee does not discourage teams from participation in this solicitation.
6. Stipends.
During the one-on-one meetings, several proposers inquired as to whether the City is willing to
provide stipends to short-listed proposers, to mitigate the significant preparation costs
associated with cost and technical proposals (costs which could easily exceed $500,000 for this
Prolect). Many large public infrastructure projects typically include stipends to stimulate
competition, as some firms may otheruvise be discouraged from taking on procurement risk due
to the costs involved. Many public agencies also structure stipends to provide for the agency's
purchase or license of the work product of all the proposers, including work product of
proposers that are not ultimately selected, for purposes of permitting the agency to potentially
incorporate any innovative design elements from any proposal.
To date, the City as a matter of policy has not approved stipends to any proposed vendor or
developer for any portion of their bid preparation costs. lf a proposed vendor or developer
wants to do business with the City, the City has routinely required proposers to assume all
procurement-related risk and expenses, including for City projects that are subject to voter
referendum approval and where there is no guarantee of success.
Although the issue of stipends is at the discretion of the City Commission, the Administration
does not recommend stipends to short-listed proposers at this time. As mentioned more fully
above, the City intends to release significant technical reference materials during Phase 2 that
will be useful to proposers in developing their submittals, and the Administration believes that
the development of these materials will likely mitigate some of the costs involved.
CONCLUS!ON
The Administration recommends that the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami
Beach, Florida, hereby approve Addendum 5 to the Solicitation Of Alternative Proposals For A
Public-Private Partnership, ln Accordance With Florida Statute 287.05712, For An Off-Wire Or
"Wireless" Light Rail/Modern Streetcar System.
14
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING ADDENDUM 5 TO THE SOLICITATION
OF ALTERNATIVE PROPOSALS FOR A PUBLIC.PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP, IN
ACCORDANCE WITH FLORIDA STATUTE 287.0571?, FOR AN OFF-WIRE OR..WIRELESS" L}GHT RAIL/MODERN STREETCAR SYSTEM.
WHEREAS, on De@mber 16, n15, the Mayor and Commission adopted Resolution No.
2015-29247, accepting receipt of an unsolicited proposalfrom Greater Miami Tramlink Partners for
a Light Rail/Modern Streetcar Project in Miami Beach, and authorizing the Administration to solicit
alternative proposals for a public/private partnership ("P3"), in accordance with Florida Statute
287.05712, for an off-wire or "wireless" light rail/rnodern streetcar system from 5th Street, via
Washington Avenue to the Miami Beach Convention Center (the "Project"); and
WHEREAS, on January 11,2016, the Administration issued LTC #009-2016, a copy of
which is attached as Exhibit "l" to the Commission Memorandum accompanying this Resolution,
informing the Mayor and City Commission of the issuance of the public notice and Proposal
Requirements Document ("PRD") outlining the City's submission and other requirements for the
Project; and
WHEREAS, on'February 10, 2016, the Mayor and City Commission approved Resolution
2016-29304, authorizing the Administration to coMuct voluntary one-on-one rneetings with
prospective proposers for fact-finding purposes, to permit consideration of the best available
information from the industry, in an effort to ensure the successful implementation for the Project;
and
WHEREAS, on February 19, 2016, the City conducted a mandatory pre-proposal
conference for the Project, and on February 19,2016 and February 26,2016, Parsons Brinkerhoff
and Kimley Horn {collectively, the "City's Consultants") and representatives of the City condrcted
one-on-one meetings with prospective proposers and industry participants; and
WHEREAS, the City's Procurement Department has released four prior addendums to the
PRD, primarily addressing the details regarding the mandatory pre-proposal conference and one-
on-one meetings, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit "2" to the Commission Memorandum
accompanying this Resolutlon; and
WHEREAS, the City's Consultants recommend certain modifications to the solicitation of
the Project that require policy direction from the City Commission, including modifications to the
anticipated timeline for completion of the procurement process and modifications to the minimum
requirements set forth in the PRD; and
WHEREAS, the recomrnendations of the City's Consultants are set forth in the proposed
Addendum 5, attached as Exhibit "3" to the Commission Memorandum accompanying this
Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that the Mayor and City Commission
of the City of Miami Beach, Florida, hereby approve Addendum 5 to the Solicitation Of Alternative
Proposals For A Publicfrivate Partnership, ln Accordance With Florida Statute 287.05712, For An
Off-Wire Or "Wireless" Light Rail/Modern Streetcar System.
15
PASSED AND ADOPTED this
ATTEST:
Rafael Granado, City Clerk
_ day of March, 2016.
Philip Levine, Mayor
APPRO/ED AS TO
FORM & I.ANGUAGE
& FOR FXECUTION
8&O*,( -=-1bCttyAttonsy 8J\f Dails
16
EXHIBIT 1
17
OFFICE OF THE Cffi MANAGER
No. LTC# 009-2016
TO:Mayor Philip Levine and Members
FRoM: Jimmy L. Morales, City Manager
DATE: January 11,2016
SUBJECT: SOLICITATION FOR PROPOSALS IOR A LIGHT RAIUMODERN
STREETCAR PROJECT IN MIAII'II BEACH IN ACCORDANCE WITH
FLORIDA STATUTE 287.057 12
At the December 16, 2015, Commission meeting the City Administration presented
various options to the Commission with regard to proceeding with the solicitation of an
off-wire or "wireless" light rail transiUmodern streetcar system in Miami Beach, consistent '
with the Miami Beach portion of the Beach Corridor Transit Connection project (the City
Project). The Beach Corridor Transit Connection project was recommended by a
Miami-Dade Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) study completed in June, 2015.
Phase 1 of the recommended route alignment for the Beach Corridor Transit Connection
is from downtown via MacArthur Causeway, 5th Street, and Washington Avenue, directly
to the Miami Beach Convention Center (the "Direct Connect Project"), and a second
phase of the Beach Corridor Transit Connection Project includes an alignment along
Alton Road and 17th Street.
At that meeting, and in consideration of an unsolicited proposal from Greater Miami
Tramlink Partners which the City received for a Light Rail/Modern Streetcar Project in
Miami Beach in accordance with Florida Statute 287.05712, the Mayor and City
Commission accepted receipt of the unsolicited proposal and authorized the
Administration to solicit alternative proposals for the City Project in accordance with
Florida Statute 287.05712, and established certain parameters with respect to the
solicitation of proposals for the City Project, as outlined in Resolution 2015-29247
(Attachment A).
Pursuant to this direction, a Public Notice of Receipt of Unsolicited Proposal for a Light
Rail/Modern Streetcar project in Miami Beach (Attachment B) has been submitted for
publication in the Florida Administrative Register on January 12 and January 19, 2016;
as well as in the Miami Herald of January 14 and January 21,2016. The Proposal
Requirements Document (PRD) referenced in the notice (Attachment C) will be available
through the City's bid notification system on January 12,2016.
TO COMMISSION
18
SOLICITATION FOR PROPOSALS A LIGHT RAIL/MODERN STREETCAR PROJECT
IN MIAMI BEACH
Page 3
The City has engaged Kimley-Horn for preparation of an environmental analysis for the
South Beach Component of the Direct Connect Project, to be completed in parallel with
this solicitation. Kimley-Horn estimates that the environmental review (including up to 30
percent design plans) for the South Beach Component can be accomplished in 10 to 15
months depending on the approach and term of the environmental review. As of the
date of issuance of the PRD, the City's planning efforts for the Project are intended to
preserve eligibility for federal funding, should the City Commission subsequently decide
to pursue federal funding for the Project, if available. Based on this schedule, this
solicitation will overlap the environmental review and analysis for the Project, so that
both efforts are accomplished within the same timeframe.
Please contact me with any comments of questions.
Attachments
JLM\K&
19
ATTACI,IITEI.IT A
RESOLUTION NO. 20LS-29247
A REsoLUTToN oF THE MAyoR ANo cr-iV-commrssroN oF THE crry oF
MIAMI BEACH, FI.ORIDA, ACCEPTING RECEIPT OF AN UNSOLIGITED
PROPOSAL FROM GREATER MIAMI TRAMLINK PARTNERS FOR A LIGHT
RAIUMODERN STREETCAR PROJECT IN MIAMI BEACH, AUTHORENG THE
AOMINISTRATION TO SOLICIT ALTERNATIVE PROFOSALS FOR THE CITY
PROJECT IN ACCORDANCE WITH FI.ORIOA STATUTE 287.05712, ANO
ESTABLISHING CERTAIN PARAMETERS WITH RESPECT TO THE
SOLTCITA-TION OF PROPOSALS FOR THE CITY PROJECT.
WHEREAS, over 10 years ago, the Miami-Dade Metropolitan Planning Organization
(tvtPO) prepared the Draft Environmental lmpact Statement (DEIS) that recommended a light rail
transiUmodem streetcar system powered by overhead catenary wires to connect the cities of
Miami Beach and Miami via dedicated right-of-way along the MacArthur Causeway, a prolect
formerly refened to as the Baylink Project and now refened to as the Beach Conidor Transit
Connection Project; and
WHEREAS, in Octote r 2013, pursuant to requests from the cities of Miami Beach and
Miami, the MPO commenced a planning-level study entitled, The Beach Conidor Transit
Connection Study (the "Study"), that refreshed and updated the decade-old Baylink study, in
partnership with Miami-Dade Transit(MDT), Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), the City
of Miami Beach and theCity of Miami; and
WHEREAS, the Study was completed in June 2015 and reaffirmed the MacArthur
Causeway as the preferred alignment to connect the City of Miami Beach and City of Miami,
recommended an off-wire or "wireless" light rail transiUmodern streetcar system for the portion
within each urban area as the preferred vehicle technology, and further recomrnended the use of
exclusive lanes for the transit vehicles in order to provide reliable service; and
WHEREAS, Phase 1 of the recommended route alignrnent is from downtown via
MacArthur Causeway, 5th Street, and Washington Avenue, directly to the Miami Beach Convention
Center (the 'Direct Connect Project"), and
WHEREAS, the portion of the Direct Connect Project located within the City of Miami
Beach, from 56 Street, via Washington Avenue to the Miami Beach Convention Center, is referred
to as the South Beach Component (the "City Project"); and
WHEREAS a second phase of the Beach Corridor Transit Connection Project includes an
alignment along Alton Road and 17h Street; and
WHEREAS, the Study recommended a Public Private Partnership (P3) to design, build,
operate, maintain and finance the system; and
WHEREAS, FDOT was directed to develop an approach that would expedite the portions
of the Direct Connect Project located in the City of Miami Beach and City of Miami, while not
jeopardizing federalfunding to the maximum extent possible; and
WHEREAS, the County, FDOT, Ci$ of Miami Beach, and City of Miarni developed a
proposed Memorandum of Understanding, included as Attachment J to the Decem,ber 16, 2015
Commission Memorandum accompanying this Resolution, to provide for FDOT to take primary
responsibility for the overall Direct Connect Project while at the same time permitting the City of
Miami Beach the flexibility to initiate its own procurement for the City Project; and
20
WHEREAS, on or about December 15,2015, the City Administration learned that FDOT
and the City of Miami were proposing additional revisions to the Memorandum of Understanding,
including revisions that were inconsistent with the parties' prior discussions and not in final form,
and accordingly, the City Administration advised the Commission that it was not in a position to
recommend the proposed Memorandum of Understanding; and
WHEREAS, on or about June, 2015, the City received an unsolicited proposal for the City
Project, in accordance with Florida Statute 287.O5712; and
WHEREAS, on December 16, 2015, the City Administration presented various options to
the Commission with regard to proceeding with the solicitation of the City Project, as set forth more
fully in the December 16, 2015 Commission Memorandum accompanying this Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA" that Mayor and City Commission of
the City of Miami Beach, Florida, accepting receipt of an unsolicited proposal from Greater Miami
Tramlink Partners for a Light Rail/Modern Streetcar Project in Miami Beach, authorizing the
Administration to solicit alternative proposals for the City Project in accordance with Florida Statute
287 -05712, and establishing certain parameters with respect to the solicitation of proposals for the
City Project, as follows:
(i) An application fee of $100,000 shall apply to each proposal submitted for the City Project,
provided, however, that if the application fees coltected ultimately exceed the costs for fully
evaluating proposals, the City wili refund to proposers any excess amounts on a pro rata basis;
and
(ii) the proposal submission deadline shall be 120 days after initial publication of a public notice,
as required by Florida Statute 287.05712: and
(iii) during the 12O day notice/proposal submission period, the City will advance the environmental
analysis required for the City Project, shall proceed with such environmental analysis as
required to preserve the opportunity for state funding for the City Project and the Direct
Connect Pi'oject, and shall provide proposers with the opportunity to incorporate the City's
environmental analysis within their proposals for the City Project; and
(iv) as a result of the passage of time since the submission of the initial June 2015 unsolicited
proposal from Greater Miami Tramlink Partners, the initial proposer shall have the opportunity
to re-submit its proposal in the same manner as all other proposers; and
(v) the City Manager shall issue the public notice for the City Project, with a copy sent to the
Commission via LTC, which notice shall require prospective proposers to register with the
'City's Procurement Department to receive project-related information to assist in the
development of their proposals; and
(vi)the Cone of Silence, as set forth in Section 2-486 of the City Code, shall apply to this
procurement process; and
(vii) the City shall continue to work with the Florida Department of Transportation, Miami-Dade
County and the City of Miami to continue to pursue funding for the Ci$ Project, and to
aggressively pursue the remainder of the Direct Connect Project.
21
PASSED AND ADOPTED this /b aay of Dacember, 2015.
APPROVED AS TO
FORM & I.ANGUAGE
& FOR EXECUTION
I - L-rl
Datc
22
ATTACI|i'ENT B
Notice of Bid/Request for Proposal
OTHER AGENCIES AND ORGANIZATIONS
Citv of Miami Beach Procurement Deoartment
Xoti"i oi ie-ceipt of Unsolicited Proposal and Request for Alternative Proposals for Light RaiUModern
Streetcar,Project in Miami Beach
PUBLIC NOTICE
Proposal Requirements Document (PRD) 2016-071-KB
Notice of Receipt of Unsolicited Proposal for Light Rail/Modern Streetcar Project in Miami Beach
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN rhat the City of Miami Beach, Florida, a municipal corporation of the State of
Florida, has received an unsolicited proposal for a qualiffing public-private partnership project in accordance with
Florida Statute 287 .05712 for an off-wire or "wireless" light raiUmodern sffeetcar system (the "Project"). The City
requests, and in accordance with Florida Statute 287.05712, will accept alternative proposals for the Project until
3:00 p.m. on May 10, 2016.
Persons or entities wishing to submit alternative proposals for the Project ("Proposers") may do so by delivering
sealed proposalsto: City of Miami Beach, Procurement Department, Attn: Alex Denis, 1755 Meridian Avenue,3'd
Floor, Miami Beach, Florida 33139. Each sealed proposal submitted should be clearly marked on the outside:
"sealed Proposal - Light Rail/Modem Streetcar System and Related Services."
All proposals must be timely submitted no later than 3':00 p:m. on May 10, 2016, and must contain the information
and materials required under Fla. Stat. 287.05712(5). the additional proposal submission requirements required by
the City as provided below, and a $100,000 application fee payable to the City of Miami Beach, Florida, Any
proposal received after 3:00 p.m. on May 10, 2016 wilt be returned unopened, and will not be considered.
Responsibility for submitting timely proposals rests solely with Proposers; Citlr will not be responsible for any
delays caused by mail, courier service or other occulrence.
Proposals will be ranked in order of preference by the City. In ranking the proposals, the City will consider factors
in accordanc.q with Florida Statute 287.05712 that inblude, birt are not limited to, professional qualifications, general
business term-s, innovative design techniques or cost-rqiluciion terms, andfinance plans. A more complete listing of
factors'that the City will consider in ranking proposals, associated Project and proposal submission requirements
("Proposal Requirements") can be obtained through the City's proposal notification system, PublicPurchase
(www.PublicPurchase.com). Interested parties must register with PublicPurchase for access to the Proposal
Requirerhents, Registration will allow Proposers to receive any additional information that,may be issued with
respect to this procurement.
The City reserves the right to reject any or all proposals, or as provided under Section 287.05712, Florida Statutes,
to award. and negotiate an interim agreement and/or comprehensive agreement with the firm whose proposal best
serves the interests of the City. Nothing contained hdrein shall be interpreted as an obligation or binding agreement
by the City qegarding the Project.
The City's Cone of Silence shall be in effect during the procurement process/in accordance with Section 2-486 of
the City Code. A link to certain applicable City of Miami Beach procurenient-related provisions is available at
www.miamibeachfl.gov/procurement. All communications regarding the Project and/or Proposal Requirements shall
be directed in writing to: City of Miami Beach Procurement Department, Attn: Kristy Bada, email:
kris[vbada@miamibeachfl.gov, with a copy to the City Cldrk, Rafael Granado, at rafaelgranado@miamibeachfl.gov.
The City will provide notice of a decision or proposed decision regarding contract award. Any person who is, or
claims to be, adversely affected by the City's decision or proposed decision shall file a written protest in accordance
with Section 2-371 of the City Code.
All proposals received in response to this Notice will become the property of the City'of Miami Beach and will not
be returned. Such proposals and related information shall be subject to applicable provisions of the Florida Public
Records Law.
23
ATTACI|ITE||IT C
MIAMIBEACH
PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS
DOCUMENT (PRD)
PRD 201 6-07 r -KB
Notice of Receipt
of Unsolicited Proposol ond R"quest for
Alternotive Proposols
for
Light Roi l/Modern Streetcor Proiect
in
Miomi Beoch
PRD lssuance Date: January 12,2016
Mandatory Pre-Proposal Conference: Date and location to be determined and noticed via Addendum
Proposals Due: May 10, 2016 @ 3:00 p.m.
lssued By:
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
Procurement Department
Attention: Kristy Bada, Contracting Officer
1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach; FL 33139
305.673.7490 | KristyBada@MiamiBeachFL.gov I www.miamibeachfl .gov
24
MIAMIBEACH Procurement Deportment
1755 Meridion Avenue, 3'd Floor, Miomi
Beoch, Florido 33139
PUBLIC NOTICE
Proposal Requirements Document (PRD) 2016.071.K8
Notice of Receipt of Unsolicited Proposal for Light Rail/Modern Streetcar Project in Miami Beach
NOTICE lS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of Miami Beach, Florida, a municipal corporation of the State of Florida, has received
an unsolicited proposal for a qualiffing public-private partnership project in accordance with Florida Statute 287.05712for an
off-wire or "wireless" light rail/modem streetcar system (the "Project"). The City requests, and in accordance with Florida
Statute 287.05712, will accept altemative proposals for the Project until 3:00 p.m. on May 10, 2016.
Persons or entities wishing to submit altemative proposals for the Project ('Proposers") may do so by delivering sealed
proposals to: City of Miami Beach, Procurement Department, Attn: Alex Denis, 1755 Meridian Avenue, 3d Floor, Miami Beach,
Florida 33139. Each sealed proposalsubmitted should be clearly marked on the outside: "Sealed Proposal - Light Rail/Modern
Streetcar System and Related Services."
All proposals must be timely submifted no later than 3:00 p,m, on May 10, 2016, and must contain the information and
materials required under Fla. Stat. 287.05712(5), the additional proposal submission requirements required by the City as
provided below, and a $100,000 application fee payable to the City of Miami Beach, Florida, Any proposal received after 3:00
p.m. on May 10, 2016 will be returned unopened, and will not be considered. Responsibility for submitting timely proposals
rests solely with Proposen; City will not be responsible for any delays caused by mail, courier service or other occurTence.
Proposals will be ranked in order of preference by the City. ln ranking the propsals, the City will consider factors in
accordance with Florida Statute 287.05712 that include, but are not limited to, professional qualifications, general business
terms, innovative design techniques or cost-reduction terms, and finance plans. A more complete listing of factors that the City
will consider in ranking proposals, associated Project and proposal submission requirements ("Proposal Requirements") can be
obtained through the City's poposal notification system, PublicPurchase (rwvw.PublicPurchase,com), lnterested parties must
register with PublicPurchase for access to the Proposal Requirements. Registration will allow Proposers to receive any
additional information that may be issued with respect to this procurement.
The City reserves the right to reject any or all proposals, or as provided under Section 287.05712, Florida Statutes, to award
and negotiate an interim agreement and/or comprehensive agreement with the firm whose proposal best serves the interests of
the City. Nothing contained herein shall be interpreted as an obligation or binding agreement by the Cig regarding the Project.
The City's Cone of Silence shall be in effect during the procurement process in accordance with Section 2-486 of the City
Code. A link to certain applicable City of Miami Beach procurement-related provisions is available at
www.miamibeachfl.oov/procurement. Allcommunications rEarding the Project and/or Proposal Requirements shall be directed
in writing to: City of Miami Beach Procurement Department, Attn: Kristy Bada, email: kristybada@miamibeachfl.qov, with a
copy to he City Clerk, Rafael Granado, at rafaelqranado@miamibeachfl.qov, The Cig will provide notice of a decision or
proposed decision regarding contract award. Any person who is, or claims to be, adversely affected by the City's decision or
proposed decision shall file a written protest in accordance with Section 2-371 of the City Code.
All proposals received in response to this Notice will become the property of the City of Miami Beach and will not be
retumed. Such proposals and related information shall be subject to applicable provisions of the Florida Public Records Law.
PRD 201 6-0ZI-KB
25
b MIAMIBEACH
SECTION (l2()(, INSTRUCTIONS TO RESPONDENTS & GENEML CONDITIONS
1. GENERAL. This Proposal Requirements Document (PRD) is issued by the City of Miami Beach, Florida (the
"City"), pursuant to Section 287.05712(4), Florida Statutes, notifying interested parties that it has received an
unsolicited proposal for the development of an off-wire or "wireless" light rail/modern streetcar system in Miami
Beach as a public-private partnership (the "Project'), The City of Miami Beach will accept other Proposals from
qualified firms to deliver the Prolect and design, build, finance, operate and maintain the Project in accordance with
the specifications set forth in this PRD ("Proposals").
The City utilizes PublicPurchase (www.oublicourchase.com) for automatic notification of competitive solicitation
opportunities and document fulfillment, including the issuance of any addendum to this PRD. Any prospective
Proposer who has received this PRD by any means other than through PublicPurchase must register immediately
wilh PublicPurchase to assure it receives any addendum issued to this PRD. Failure to receive an addendum
and to comply with the requirements of this PRD, including, without limitation, payment of the requisite
$100,000 application fee, shall result in disqualification of a Proposal.
2. BACKGROUND. As early as 1969, a rail connection between the City of Miami and the City of Miami Beach was
identified as a priority in Miami-Dade County's Long Range Transportation Plan. Over 10 years ago, the Miami-
Dade Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) prepared the Draft Environmental lmpact Statement (DEIS) for a
light rail transiUmodem streetcar system to connect the cities of Miami Beach and Miami via dedicated right-of-way
along the MacArthur Causeway (the Baylink Project). More recently, the MPO conducted a planning-level study that
refreshed and updated the decadeold Baylink study in June 2015 and reaffirmed the MacArthur Causeway as the
preferred alignment to connect Miami Beach and Miami and recommended an off-wire or "wireless' light rail
transiUmodern streetcar system for the portion within each urban area as the prefened vehicle technology as well as
the use of exclusive lanes for the transit vehicles. Phase 1 of the recommended route alignment is from downtown
via MacArthur Causeway, Sttt Street, and Washington Avenue directly to the Miami Beach Convention Center
referred to as the Direct Connect Project, The portion of the Direct Connect Project located within Miami Beach
and consisting of a 2-way connection on Sth Street and Washington Avenue, is refened to as the "South Beach
Component." This PRD, and the request for other Proposals for the Project, relates solely to the South Beach
Component of the Direct Connect Project. For additional background on the local and regional efforts with respect to
the Direct Connect Project, see City Commission Resolution No.2015-29247.
The City has engaged Kimley-Horn for preparation of an environmental analysis for the South Beach Component of
the Direct Connect Project, to be completed in parallel with this solicitation, Kimley-Horn estimates that the
environmental review (including up to 30 percent design plans) for the South Beach Component can be
accomplished in 10 to 15 months depending on the approach and term of the environmental review. As of the date
of issuance of this PRD, the City's planning efforts for the Prolect are intended to preserve eligibility for federal
funding, should the City Commission subsequently decide to pursue federal funding for the Project, if available.
Based on this schedule, this solicitation will overlap the environmental review and analysis for the Project, so that
both efforts are accomplished within the same timeframe.
PRD 20I6OZI KB
26
b
-
MIAMIBEACH
3. SCOPE. The scope of the Project contemplates a full "turn-key" delivery approach thal consists of and includes
the design, construction, financing, operation, and maintenance of the Project, including vehicles and associated
power, communications, signalization, and other systems required for the functionality of the Project
("Vehicle/Systems Technology"); operation and maintenance facilities, related civil infrastructure, including "curb-to-
curb" road reconstruction, and related services pertaining to the Proyect. The City will make a site available for a
maintenance facility, with such site location to be identified by the City during the Phase 2 Proposal period
referenced in Section 0300(1) below, and managed/operated by the successful Proposer as part of the Project.
Furlher, the City, as part of its resiliency program for sea level rise, intends to raise the levelof many streets, install
pumps, etc. To the extent the Project alignment is affected by the resiliency program, the scope of work impacted by
the alignment may form part of the scope of work for the Project, and funded separately by the City,
The City anticipates a performance-based availability payment structure over the operating period. The City will
consider negotiating with the successful Proposer an option for milestone payments during the construction phase of
the Project, if funds are available and appropriated for such purposes.
The lead team participants include the following firms: (i) the firm that will be responsible for the construction of the
Project and is licensed as a general contractor in Florida ("Lead Contracto/'), (ii) the firm responsible for operation of the
proposed vehicle/streetcar system ("Lead Operato/'), (iii) the firm primarily responsible for coordinating the development
and completion of all Prolect-related engineering ("Lead Engineei'), (iv) the firm responsible for maintenance of the
Projecl, including the proposed streetcar system ("Lead Maintenance Entity"), (v) the entity primarily responsible for
providing equity for the Project ("Lead lnvesto/'), and (vi) the streetcar vehicle or systems technology suppliers
("Vehicle/Systems Suppliers") (entities (i) through (vi) above collectively referred to as "Lead Team Participants").
The Vehicle/Systems Suppliers may participate on more than one Proposer team, Except as to the Vehicle/System
Suppliers, all other Lead Team Participants shall not participate on more than one Proposer team.
The City Commission has not made a final decision on the environmentalclearance approach and finalfunding plan,
and such plans may potentially include federal or state funding, Proposers need to be knowledgeable of state and
federal requirements, in addition to City requirements, and have the ability to meet and comply with those
requirements. For purposes of the Proposals, Proposers must assume that the Project will be federally and/or state
funded and that the Prolect shall incorporate all applicable federal and state requirements.
Any comprehensive agreement entered into with a successful Proposer shall be subject to and contingent
upon environmental clearance/approval of Project components by applicable governmental entities.
PRD 20 I 6.0,/ I.KB
27
a
-MIAMIBEACH
4. MINIMUM ELIGIBILIW REQUIREMENTS. The minimum requirements for the Project and this PRD ("Minimum
Requirements') are listed below. Proposer shall submit documentation of compliance with each Minimum
Requirement. Any Proposer that fails to include the required submittals with its Proposal, or fails to comply with the
Minimum Requirements, shall be deemed non-responsive and shall not have its Proposal considered.
A. Project and Proooser Minimum Requirements.
1. The Propose/s Vehicle/Systems Technology shall have demonstrated capacity of fully catenaryless for
revenue operations in Miami Beach, following an alignment on a dedicated right of way.
2. The Propose/s Vehicle/Systems Technology shall have demonstrated full performance capabilities,
including maintaining air conditioning in all vehicles in a climate similar to the climate in the City of Miami
Beach.
3. The Propose/s Vehicle/Systems Technology shall be able to operate in a typical centenary system in
the United States (750V DC).
4. The Propose/s Vehicle/SystemsTechnology shall have demonstrated capacity to address minimum
ridership of 20,075 people on a daily basis, should it be extended across the MacArthur Causeway as
part of the Direct Connect Project.
5, The Proposer's Lead Conhactor shall demonstrate a bonding capacity of not less than $200 million by
submitting a letter stating its bonding capacity from an A-rated, Financial Class V, Surety Company.
The statement of bonding capacity shall be directly from the Surety firm on its official letterhead and
signed by an authorized agent of the firm.
6. The Proposer's Lead Contractor must have successfully delivered, as a general contractor under a
design/build or other form of construction contract, at least (1) public or public/private infrastructure
project with minimum hard construction costs of $150 million in the last (5) five years.
B. Apolication Fee. Proposals must be accompanied by a Proposal application fee in the amount of $100,000,
payable to the City of Miami Beach, payable by wire transfer, prior to the due date for proposals, pursuant to
the wire instructions below, as follows:
Bank: SunTrust
ABA:061000104
SWIFT #: SNTRUS3A (foreign wires)
Account #: 0360002236568
Account Name: City of Miami Beach General Depository Account
The wire transfer receipt number must be included in the Proposal submitted. Failure to submit the
application fee in accordance with this provision shall render a Proposal non-responsive and City
shall disqualify Proposer from any further consideration.
lf the application fees collected ultimately exceed the City's costs for fully evaluating proposals, including the
City's consultant and legal fees, the City will refund to Proposers any excess application fee amounts, if any,
on a pro rata basis.
PRD 20 I 6.0/ I.KB
28
b MIAMIBEACH
5. MANDATORY PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE flNDUSTRY FORUM): A Mandatory Pre-Proposal Conference
will be held as follows:
DATE, TIME AND LOCATION TO BE DETERMINED AND RELEASED VIA ADDENDUM
Attendance is mandatory and each interested party shall have at least one representative at the Mandatory Pre-
Proposal Conference. The City will not consider Proposals from parties not represented at the Pre-Proposal
Conference by at least one Lead Team Participant.
6. PROPOSAL DUE DATE. Proposals are to be received on or before 3:00 p.m. on May 10, 2016. Any
Proposal received after the deadline established for receipt of Proposals will be considered late and not be
accepted or will be returned to Proposer unopened. The City does not accept responsibility for any delays
caused by mail, courier service or other occurrence,
7. PROCUREMENT CONTACT. Any questions or clarifications concerning this solicitation shall be submitted to the
Procurement Contact noted below:
Procur€ment Contact
Kristy Bada
Telephone:
305.673.7490
Email:
KristyBada@Miami BeachFL.gov
Additionally, the City Clerk is to be copied on all communications via e-mail at: RafaelGranado@miamibeachfl,oov;
or via facsimile: 786-3944188.
The PRD title/number shall be referenced on all conespondence, All questions or requests for clarification must be
received no later than thirty (30) calendar days prior to the date Proposals are due. All responses to
questions/clarifications will be sent to all prospective Ploposers in the form of an addendum.
8. DETERMINATION OF AWARD. Proposals will be ranked in order of preference by the City. ln ranking the
proposals, the City will consider factors in accordance with Florida Statute 287 ,05712 that include, but are not limited
to, professional qualifications, general business terms, innovative design techniques or cost-reduction terms, finance
plans, and any other considerations identified in this PRD. The final ranking results of Step 1 & 2 outlined in Section
0400, Evaluation of Proposals, will be considered by the City Manager who may recommend to the City Commission
the Propose(s) s/he deems to be in the best interest of the City, or may recommend rejection of all Proposals. The
City Manager's recommendation need not be consistent with the ranking identified herein and takes into
consideration Miami Beach City Code Section 2-369, including the following considerations:
(1) The ability, capacity and skill of the Proposer to perform the contract,
(2) Whether the Proposer can perform the contract within the time specified, without delay or
interference.
(3) The character, integrity, reputation, judgment, experience and efficiency of the Proposer.
(4) The quality of performance of previous contracts.
(5) The previous and existing compliance by the Proposer with laws and ordinances relating to the
contract.
6PRD 2O I 6-0Z I.KB
29
b MIAMIBEACH
The City Commission shall consider the City Manage/s recommendation and may approve such
recommendation, The City Commission may also, at its option, reject the City Manage/s rec-ommendation and
select another Proposal or Proposals which it deems to be in the best interest of the City, or it may also reject all
Proposals. Upon approval of selection by the City Commission, negotiations between t'fre City anO tne setecteO
Propose(s) will take place to anive at a mutually acceptable interim agreement and/or comprehensive agreement
for delivery of the Project or any portion thereof, in accordance with Florida Statute 287.05712. tf the Gity and
selected Proposer cannot agree on contractual terms, the City will terminate negotiations and may begin
negotiations with the next ranked Proposer, continuing this process with each Proposer in rank order until agreeable
terms can be met or the RFP process is terminated, unless otherwise specified by the City Commission. Contract
negotiations and execution will take place as quickly as possible after selection.
9. NEGOTIATIONS. The City reserves the right to enter into further negotiations with the selected Proposer for an
interim agreement or comprehensive agreement for delivery of the Project or any portion thereof, and which
agreement shall, at a minimum, comply with Florida Statute 287.05712 and the Minimum Requirements set forth
herein. Notwithstanding the preceding, the City is in no way obligated to enter into an interim agreement or
comprehensive agreement with the selected Proposer in the event the parties are unable to negotiate a mutually
acceptable agreement, lt is also understood and acknowledged by Proposers that no property, contract or binding
rights of any kind shall be created at any time until and unless a final interim agreement or comprehensive
agreement has been fully negotiated, approved by the City Commission, and executed by the parties. Any
comprehensive agreement entered into with a successful Proposer shall be subject to and contingent upon
environmental clearance/approval of Project components by applicable governmental entities.
,l0. PRE-PROPOSAL INTERPRETATIONS. Oral information or responses to questions received by prospective
Proposers are not binding on the City and will be without legal effect, including any information received at pre-
submittal meeting or site visit(s). The City by means of Addenda will issue interpretations or written addenda
clarifications considered necessary by the City in response to questions. Only questions answered by written
addenda will be binding and may supersede terms noted in this solicitation. Addendum will be released through
PublicPurchase. Any prospective Proposer who has 'received this PRD by any means other than through
PublicPurchace must register immediately with PublicPurchase to assure it receives any addendum issued to this
PRD. Failure to receive an addendum may result in disqualification of Proposal. Written .questions should be
received no later than April 9, 2016.
11. CONE OF SILENCE. ln Resolution No. 2015-29247,|he Cig Commission elected, at its discretion, to apply the
City's Cone of Silence to this solicitation, Except as may be otherwise specified by the City Commission, this PRD is
subject to the Cone of Silence requirements as set forth in Section 2-486 of the City Code. All Proposers are
expected to be or become familiar with the above requirements. Proposers shall be solely responsible for ensuring
that all applicable provisions of the City's Cone of Silence are complied with, and shall be subject to any and all
sanctions, as prescribed therein, including rendering their Proposal response voidable, in the event of such non-
compliance. Communications regarding this PRD solicitation are to be submitted in writing to the Procurement
Contact named herein with a copy to the City Clerk at rafaelgranado@miamibeachfl.gov
PRD 2016OZI KB
30
b:MIAMIBEACH
12. PUBLIC ENTITY CRIME. A person or affiliate who has been placed on the convicted vendor list following a
conviction for public entity crimes may not submit a Proposal on a contract to provide any goods or services to a
public entity, may not submit a Proposal on a contract with a public entity for the construction or repair of a public
building or public work, may not submit Proposals on leases of real property to public entity, may not be awarded or
perform work as a contractor, supplier, sub-contractor, or consultant under a contract with a public entity, and may
not transact business with any public entity in excess of the threshold amount provided in Sec. 287.017, for
CATEGORY TWO for a period of 36 months from the date of being placed on the convicted vendor list.
13. COMPLIANCE WTH THE CITY'S LOBBYIST LAWS. This PRD is subject to, and all Proposers are expected to
be or become familiar with, all City lobbyist laws. Proposers shall be solely responsible for ensuring that all City
lobbyist laws are complied with, and shall be subject to any and all sanctions, as prescribed therein, including,
without limitation, disqualification of their responses, in the event of such non-compliance.
14. DEBARMENT ORDINANCE: This PRD is subject to, and all Proposers are expected to be or become familiar
with, the City's Debarment Ordinance as codified in Sections 2-397 through 2-406 of the City Code.
15. CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM LAWS. This PRD is subject to, and all Proposers are expected to be or
become familiar with, the City's Campaign Finance Reform laws, as codified in Sections 2487 through 2-490 of the
City Code. Proposers shall be solely responsible for ensuring that all applicable provisions of the City's Campaign
Finance Reform laws are complied with, and shall be subject to any and all sanctions, as prescribed therein,
including disqualification of their responses, in the event of such non-compliance.
16. CODE OF BUSINESS ETHICS, Pursuant to City Resolution N0,2000-23879, the Proposer shall adopt a Code of
Business Ethics ("Code') and submit that Code to the Procurement Division with its response or within five (5) days
upon receipt of request. The Code shall, at a minimum, require the Proposer, to comply with all applicable
govemmental rules and regulations including, among others, the conflict of interest, lobbying and ethics provision of
the City of Miami Beach and Miami Dade County.
17. POSTPONEMENT 0F DUE DATE FOR RECEIPT 0F PROPOSALS. The City reserves the right to postpone
the deadline for submittal of Proposals and will make a reasonable effort to give at least three (3) calendar days
written notice of any such postponement to all prospective Proposers through PublicPurchase.
18. PROTESTS. Proposers that are not selected may protest any recommendation for selection of award in
accordance with the proceedings established pursuant to the City's bid protest procedures, as codified in Sections 2-
370 and 2-371 oI the City Code (the City's Bid Protest Ordinance). A protest not timely made pursuant to the
requirements of the City's Bid Protest Ordinance shall be barred.
19. POSTPONEMENT/CANCELLATION/ACCEPTANCE/REJECTION. The Cig may, at its sole and absolute
discretion, reject any and all, or parts of any and all, Proposals, re-advertise this PRD; postpone or cancel, at any
time, this PRD process; or waive any irregularities in this PRD, or in any Proposal responses received as a result of
this PRD, in accordance with Florida law. Reasonable efforts will be made to either award the successful Proposer
the contract or relect all Proposals within one-hundred twenty (120) calendar days after the Phase 2 Proposal
opening date, A Proposer may withdraw its Proposal after expiration of one hundred twenty (120) calendar days
from the date of the Phase 2 Proposal opening by delivering written notice of withdrawal to the Department of
Procurement Management prior to award of the contract by the City Commission.
PRD 20 tO-0/ t-Kts
31
6E MIAMIBEACH
20. PROPOSER'S RESPONSIBILITY. Before submitting a response, each Proposer shall be solely responsible for
making any and all investigations, evaluations, and examinations, as it deems necessary, to ascertain all conditions
and requirements affecting the full performance of the conhact. lgnorance of such conditions and requirements,
and/or failure to make such evaluations, investigations, and examinations, will not relieve the Proposer from any
obligation to comply with every detail and with all provisions and requirements of the contract, and will not be
accepted as a basis for any subsequent claim whatsoever for any monetary consideration on the part of the
Proposer.
21. COSTS INCURRED BY PROPOSERS. Allexpenses involved with the preparation and submission of Proposals,
or any work performed in connection therewith, shall be the sole responsibility (and shall be at the sole cost and
expense) of the Proposer, and shall not be reimbursed by the City.
22. RELATIONSHIP TO THE CITY, lt is the intent of the City, and Proposers hereby acknowledge and agree, that
the successful Proposer is considered to be an independent contractor, and that neither the Proposer, nor the
Proposer's employees, agents, and/or contractors, shall, under any circumstances, be considered employees or
agents of the City.
23. MISTAKES. Proposers are expected to examine the terms, conditions, specifications, delivery schedules,
proposed pricing, and all instructions pertaining to the goods and services relative to this PRD. Failure to do so will
be at the Propose/s risk and may result in the Proposal being non-responsive,
24. DEFAULT: Failure or refusal of the selected Proposer to execute a contract following approval of such contract
by the City Commission, or untimely withdrawal of a response before such award is made and approved, may result
in a claim for damages by the City and may be grounds for removing the Proposer from the City's vendor list.
25. MANNER OF PERFORMANCE. Proposer agrees to perform its duties and obligations in a professional manner
and in accordance with all applicable Local, State, County, and Federal laws, rules, regulations and codes. Lack of
knowledge or ignorance by the Proposer with/of applicable laws will in no way be a cause for relief from
responsibility. Proposer agrees that the services provided shall be provided by employees that are educated, trained,
experienced, certified, and licensed in all areas encompassed within their designated duties. Proposer agrees to
furnish to the City any and all documentation, certification, authorization, license, permit, or registration currently
required by applicable laws, rules, and regulations. Proposer further certifies that it and its employees will keep all
licenses, permits, registrations, authorizations, or certifications required by applicable laws or regulations in full force
and effect during the term of this contract. Failure of Proposer to comply with this paragraph shall constitute a
material breach of this contract.
26. SPECIAL COND|TIONS. Any and all Special Conditions that may vary from these General Terms and
Conditions shall have precedence.
27. NON-DISCRIMINAT!0N. The Proposer certifies that it is in compliance with the non-discrimination clause
contained in Section 202, Executive 0rder 11246, as amended by Executive Order 11375, relative to equal
employment opportunity for all persons without regard to race, color, religion, sex or national origin. ln accordance
with the City's Human Rights Ordinance, codified in Chapter 62 of the City Code, Proposer shall prohibit (and cause
hotel operator to prohibit) discrimination by reason of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, intersexuality, gender
identity, sexual orientation, marital and familial status, and age or disability in the sale, lease, use or occupancy of
the Hotel Project or any portion thereof.
PRD 20 I 6.0Z I.KB
32
bE MIAMIBEACH
28. DEMONSTRATION OF COMPETENCY. The City may consider any evidence available regarding the financial,
technical, and other qualifications and abilities of a Proposer, including past performance (experience) in making an
award that is in the best interest of the City, including:
A. Pre-award inspection of the Propose/s facility may be made prior to the award of contract,
B. Proposals will only be considered from firms which are regularly engaged in the business of providing the
goods and/or services as described in this solicitation.
C. Proposers must be able to demonstrate a good record of performance for a reasonable period of time, and
have sufficient financial capacity, equipment, and organization to ensure that they can satisfactorily perform the
services if awarded a contract under the terms and conditions of this solicitation.
D. The terms "equipment and organization", as used herein shall, be conshued to mean a fully equipped and
well established company in line with the best business practices in the industry, and as determined by the City
of Miami Beach,
E. The City may consider any evidence available regarding the financial, technical, and other qualificalions and
abilities of a Proposer, including past performance (experience), in making an award that is in the best interest of
the City,
F. The City may require Proposers to show proof that they have been designated as authorized representatives
of a manufacturer or supplier, which is the actual source of supply. ln these instances, the City may also require
material information from the source of supply regarding the quality, packaging, and characteristics of the
products to be supply to the City.
29. ASSIGNMENT. The successful Proposer shall not assign, transfer, convey, sublet or otherwise dispose of the
contract, including any or all of its right, title or interest therein, or his/her or its power to execute such contract, to
any person, company or corporation, without the prior written consent of the City.
30. LAWS. PERMITS AND REGULATIONS. The Proposer shall obtain and pay for all licenses, permits, and
inspection fees required to complete the work and shall comply with all applicable laws.
31. FLORIDA PUBLIC RECORDS LAW. Proposers are hereby notified that all Proposal including, without limitation,
any and all information and documentation submitted therewith, are exempt from public records requirements under
Section 119.07(1), Florida Statutes, and s.24(a), Art, 1 of the State Constitution untilsuch time as the City provides
notice of an intended decision or until thirty (30) days after opening of the Proposals, whichever is earlier.
Additionally, the successful Proposer agrees to be in full compliance with Florida Statute 1 19,0701 including, but not
limited to, agreement to (a) keep and maintain public records that ordinarily and necessarily would be required by
the public agency in order to perform the services; (b) provide the public with access to public records on the same
terms and conditions that the public agency would provide the records and at a cost that does not exceed the cost
provided in this chapter or as otherwise provided by law; (c) ensure that public records that are exempt or
confidential and exempt from public records disclosure requirements are not disclosed except as authorized by law;
(d) meet all requirements for retaining public records and transfer, at no cost, to the City all public records in its
possession upon termination of the interim agreement or comprehensive agreement and destroy any duplicate
public records that are exempt or confidential and exempt from public records disclosure requirements. All records
stored electronically must be provided to the City in a format that is compatible with the information technology
systems of the City.
PRD 20I6.0ZI.KB r0
33
E MIAMIBEACH
32. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. All Proposers must disclose, in their Proposal, the name(s) of any officer, director,
agent, or immediate family member (spouse, parent, sibling, and child) who is also an employee of the City of Miami
Beach. Further, all Proposers must disclose the name of any City employee who owns, either directly or indirectly,
an interest of ten (10%) percent or more in the Proposer entity or any of its affiliates.
33. MODIFICATION/WITHDRAWALS 0F PROPOSALS. A Proposer may submit a modified Proposal to replace all
or any portion of a previously submitted Proposal up until the Proposal due date and time. Modifications received
after the Proposal due date and time will not be considered. Proposals shall be inevocable until contract award
unless withdrawn in writing prior to the Proposal due date, or after expiration of 120 calendar days from the opening
of Phase 2 Proposals without a contract award. Letters of withdrawal received after the Proposal due date and
before said expiration date, and letters of withdrawal received after contract award will not be considered,
34. EXCEPTIONS TO PRD. Proposers must clearly indicate any exceptions they wish to take to any of the terms in
this PRD, and outline what, if any, alternative is being offered. All exceptions and alternatives shall be included and
clearly delineated, in writing, in the Proposal. The City, at its sole and absolute discretion, may accept or reject any
or all exceptions and alternatives. ln cases in which exceptions and alternatives are rejected, the City shall require
the Proposer to comply with the particular term and/or condition of the PRD to which Proposer took exception to (as
said term and/or condition was originally set forth on the PRD),
35. ACCEPTANCE OF GIFTS. FAVORS. SERVICES. Proposers shall not offer any gratuities, favors, or anything of
monetary value to any official, employee, or agent of the City, for the purpose of influencing consideration of this
Proposal. Pursuant to Sec. 2-449 of the City Code, no officer or employee of the City shall accept any gift, favor or
service that might reasonably tend improperly to influence him in the discharge of his official duties,
36. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION. City reserves the right to request supplemental information from Proposers
at any time during the PRD solicitation process, unless otherwise noted herein.
37. NO WARRANTIES OR REPRESENTATIONS BY ClW. Any information provided by City under this PRD is
solely to provide background information for the convenience of the Proposers, City makes no representations
or warranties, express or implied, of any kind whatsoever with respect to any of the matters identified in this
PRD.
Balance of Pase lntentionallv Left Blank
PRD 20 r 6-0l r-KB il
34
g MIAMIBEACH
sEcTloN 0300 PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL INSTRUCTIONS AND FORMAT
1. TWO PHASE PROPOSAL EVALUATION. Proposals will be considered in two phases. Phase I will consist of the
evaluation of qualifications of the Proposer and the Lead Team Participants. Phase 2 will consist of the evaluation of
technical and cost Proposals. The information to be submitted in each phase, as well as the evaluation criteria to be
utilized for each phase, is stated below, and may be modified by Addendum to this PRD. Each phase will be
considered by an Evaluation Committee appointed by the City Manager. The City reserves the right to engage the
advice of its consultant or other technical experts in assisting the Evaluation Committee in the review of Proposals
received. Following Phase I review of Proposals, the City may shortJist one or more parties to be considered in
Phase 2 . Phase 2 Proposals will only be considered from short-listed Proposers.
2. SEALED RESPONSES. Each phase will require one (1) original Proposal (preferably in 3-ring binder) must be
submitted in an opaque, sealed envelope or container on or before the due date established for the receipt of
Proposals, ten (10) bound copies and one (1) electronic format (CD or USB format) to be submitted, The following
information should be clearly marked on the face of the envelope or container in which the Proposal is submitted:
solicitation number, solicitation title, Proposer name, Proposer return address. Proposals received elechonically,
either through email or facsimile, are not acceptable and will be rejected.
3. PROPOSAL FORMAT, ln order to maintain comparability, facilitate the review process and assist the Evaluation
Committee in review of Proposals, it is strongly recommended that Proposals be organized and tabbed in
accordance with the sections and manner specified below. Hard copy submittal should be tabbed as enumerated
below and contain a table of contents with page references. Electronic copies should also be tabbed and contain a
table of contents with page references, Proposals that do not include the required information will be deemed non-
responsive and will not be considered,
4. PHASE I PROPOSAL FORMAT REQUIREMENTS. ln order to maintain comparability, facilitate the review
process, and assist the Evaluation Committee in review of responses, it is recommended that responses be
organized and tabbed in accordance with the sections and manner specified below. Hard copy submittals should be
bound and tabbed as enumerated below and contain a table of contents with page references. Electronic copies
should also be tabbed and contain a table of contents with page references. Proposers should prepare their
submittal on 8.5 x 11 paper. Please feel free to include other materials, such as covers, appendices, brochures, etc.
at your discretion. The recommended number of pages the City desires for each submittal item is indicated below.
These are recommendations only and actual pages may exceed the recommendation, The City reserves the right to
require additional information to determine financial capability. Proposer shall have ten (10) calendar days respond
to such a request.
Executive Summary, Forms & Compliance with Minimum Requirements
4
1. Cover Page, Letter, and Table of Contents. The cover letter must indicate Prime Proposer and be signed by
same.
2, Required Forms. Provide Certification, Questionnaire & Requirements Affidavit (Appendix A). Attach Appendix
A fully completed and executed. The Certification, Questionnaire & Requirements Affidavit (Appendix A) must
be signed by the Prime Respondent.
3, Minimum Requirements. Submit verifiable information documenting compliance with each of the Minimum
irements in Section 0200, Paqes 34.
PRD 20I6-0Z]-KB 12
35
E MIAMIBEACH
Experience and Qualifications of Proposing Team
10 paqe limit, not countinq resumes limited to two
1. Qualifications of Proposer and Lead Team Participants. Submit detailed information regarding the Proposer's
and each Lead Team Participant's experience in the design, construction, financing, operation and maintenance
which documents expertise, competence, capability, and capacity in, and record of producing quality work on
projects similar to the Project. lnclude, at a minimum, the following information:
a. Company lnformation. Provide background information, including company history/organizational
structure, years in business for Proposer and each Lead Team Participant, number of employees, and any
other information communicating capabilities and experience.
b. Experience and Qualifications on Other lnfrastructure Projects. Provide a list of the Proposer's and
each Lead Team Participant's experience with comparable design-build, design-buildoperate-maintain, or
other public or public-private infrastructure projects of size and scope similar to or larger than the Project.
lnclude additional information, as well as a table that includes the prolect name, type of project, scope of
project, years the Prolect was constructed, hard construction costs for the project or operating/maintenance
budget for the project (as applicable), and delivery approach or method, For Lead lnvestor and Contractor,
provide record of projects completed within the contract time and contract price.
c. Experience and Qualifications on Rail or Transit Projects in Urban Settings. Summarize the
Proposer's and each Lead Team Participant's experience with similar rail or transit projects in urban or
sensitive environmental areas and community areas of comparable size and scope. lnclude the project
name, type of project, scope of project, years conshucted, hard costs, and delivery approach or method, and
names of key personnel. Highlight any key personnel who will also work on this Project. ldentify experience
in managing the maintenance of traffic, roadway (or bridge) design and construction, environmental and
other permitting, and implementing mmmunity relations and outreach programs on projects of similar size
and complexity to this Project. For Lead Engineer, provide information demonstrating completion of at least
one or more transit facility comparable to the Project.
d. Capacity to Manage and Implement the Project. Provide additional information sufficient to identify
Proposer's and each Lead Team Participant's demonstrated capacity to manage and implement the Project.
e. Prior YVorking Relationships Between and Among Team Members. Provide informalion identifying
prior working relationships between or among Proposer or Lead Team Participants, lnclude the project
name, type of project, scope of project, years constructed, hard costs, and delivery approach or method, and
names of key personnel. Highlight any key personnel who will also work on this Project.
PRD 20 I 6-0Z I .KB t3
36
g MTAMTBEACH
f. Key Personnel and Level of Commitment. ldentify and provide job descriptions, resumes and
references for the qualified personnel for key positions on the Project, including number of years of
experience and areas of expertise for each individual, and list of prior projects comparable in size and scope
(or greater) of this Project. Key Personnel (at a minimum) shall include:o Project Managero Construction Managero Construction Superintendento Design Managero Lead Design Engineero lndependent Quality Managero Design Quality Manager
Affirm that all key personnel will be required to be on-site 100% of the time during activities that involve their
areas of responsibility. Substitution of Key Personnel will be subject to review and acceptance by the City.
g. Prime Constructor Safety Record . For Prime Constructor, provide its Experience Modification Rate
(EMR) and OSHA forms 300 and 300A for the past three (3) years.
4 paqe limit, not
Financial Capacity
financial statements and related information
Submit detailed information sufficient to demonstrate the capacity of Proposer and Lead Team Participants
and financialguarantors. lnclude Proposer's, Lead lnvestor's, financial guarantors, Lead Contractor, Lead Operator
and Lead Maintenance most recent annual reviewed/audited financial statement with the auditors' notes. Such
statements should include, at a minimum, balance sheets (statements of financial position), and statements of
profits and loss statement of net income). City reserves the right to request additional information from any
Proposer to determine financial capacity. Proposer shall have no more than ten (10) days to respond to such
request.
PRu 20 to-0l t-KB 14
37
E MIAMIBEACH
Approach and Methodology
20
1. Management and Organization: Proposer shall describe the approach and methodology in accomplishing the
following goals of this Project i) an understanding of and approach to the management, technical aspects, and
maintenance of kaffic issues and risks associated with the Project ii) an understanding of and approach to how the
public-private partnership, or "P3", process and the Proposer's organization will contribute to the success of the
Prolect and meet the City of Miami Beach's Project goals; and iii) an understanding of the risk sharing and the
teaming relationship between the Proposer and the City of Miami Beach,
a. Methodology for integrating the Proposer and Lead Team Participants and their respective areas of
expertise: The narrative should describe the methodology for integrating the Proposer and the different areas
of expertise of Lead Team Participants into an efficient and effective organization.
b. Management Approach: The management approach must reflect an understanding of the use of the P3
prolect delivery methodology for transportation projects.
c. Organization Chart: Provide an organizational chart(s) showing the "chain of command," with lines
identifying participants who are responsible for major functions to be performed, and their reporting
relationships, in managing, designing, and building the Project. The chart(s) must show the functional structure
of the organization down to the design discipline leader or construction superintendent level and must identify
Key Personnel by name. Key Personnel will be committed to the Project. ldentify all Lead Team Participants in
the chart(s). ldentify the critical support elements and relationships of Project management, Project
administration, construction management, quality control, safety, environmental compliance, and subcontractor
administration.
d. Organizational Chart Functional Relationships: For each organizational chart, provide a brief, written
description of significant functional relationships among participants and how the proposed organization will
function as an integrated team.
2. Approach to P3/Design-Build-Operate-Maintain-Finance. Provide information on a sample approach to
finance the Project assuming an availability payment approach that is supported by annual payments during the
operation period subject to annual appropriation.
3. Approach to Design and Construction. Provide information demonstrating an understanding of and sound
approach to the development, design and construction of the Project.
a. Provide information identifying how Proposer will incorporate innovative design and other techniques in
the Project through the lifecycle of the Project.
b. Describe approach to plan, organize, and execute the design and construction of, and assure the quality
and safety of the Project.
c. Describe approach to effectively manage all aspects of the Contract in a quality, timely, and effective
manner and integrate the different parts of its organization with the City of Miami Beach in a cohesive and
seamless manner.
PRD 20 | 6-0,/ t-Kts r5
38
g MTAMTBEACH
4. Approach to lmplementation in Complex Urban Environments.
a. Describe Proposer's general approach to integrating the City and identified stakeholders in the various
phases of the Project.
b. Describe Propose/s general approach to traffic managemenf, ufility identification and relocation, access
during construction, pedestrian and parking accommodation, and community outreach.
c. Describe, in general terms, Proposer's anticipated operating approach for the Project.
5. Approach to Vehicle Systems Technology.
a. Provide a detailed description of Proposer's Vehicle/Systems Technology, including but not limited to
detailed descriptions and depictions of the proposed vehicles.
b. Provide description of operations and maintenance for the Propose/s Vehicle/Systems Technology,
including site requirements;
c. Provide service history for the Vehicle/Systems Technology,, including vehicles; and
d, Describe capability to meet Buy America Requirement (now or in the future) and other applicable federal
requirements should the City decide to pursue federal funding for the Project.
e. Explain how the Proposer's streetcar system/technology will be interoperable with the Direct Connect
Prolect,
5. PHASE 2 RESPONSE FORMAT. Following City Commission selection of the short-listed Proposers, the short-listed
Proposers will be required to prepare detailed Phase 2 Proposals for the Project, which will include technical and cosUfinancial
Proposals. The instructions for Phase 2 submittals are planned to be issued to the Phase 1 short -listed proposens in Summer
2016, and will include comprchensive Project definition, environmental information, funding plan, preliminary engineering,
performance specifications, and any additional conditions or requirements that may be applicable (e.9., prevailing wage rates,
bonding, insurance), as well as the draft Project agreement. Proposals are anticipated to be due within 60 days of the final
instructions, including submittal of a Best and Final Offer.
Balance of Pase lntentionallv Left Blank
PRIJ 20 I O.O/ I.Kts t6
39
E MIAMIBEACH
sEcTtoN 0400 PHASE 1 PROPOSAL EVALUATION
1. Evaluation Committee. An Evaluation Committee, appointed by the City Manager, shall meet to evaluate and rank each
Proposal during Phase 1 and Phase 2 in accordance with the requirements set forth in this PRD. lf the City desires further
information, Proposers may be requested to make additional written submissrons of a clarifying nature or oral presentations to
the Evaluation Committee. The evaluation of Proposals will proceed in a two-step process as specified in Section 0300(1). The
Evaluation Committee is advisory only. The results of Phase 1 and Phase 2 evaluations will be forwarded to the City Manager
who will utilize the results to make a recommendation to the City Commission. The City Manager will make the final
recommendation concerning the ranking of Proposers, both during Phase 1 and Phase 2, and such final recommendation may
or may not be consistent with the Evaluation Committee's ranking, and will consider the following:
(1) The ability, capacity and skill of the Proposer to perform the contract.
(2) Whether the Proposer can perform the contr:act within the time specified, without delay or interference.
(3) The character, intErity, reputation, judgment, experience and efficiency of the Proposer.
(4) The quality of performance of previous contnacts.
(5) The previous and existing compliance by the Proposer with laws and ordinances relating to the contract.
1. Phase 1 Evatuation Process. The Evaluation Committee shall meet to evaluate each response and rank Proposers in
order of preference, as provided in Florida Statute 287.05712, and based on considenation of the professional qualifications of
the Proposers (including Lead Team Participants), and the following factors:, in no particular order:
o Compliance with the Minimum Requirements;
.. Experience and Qualifications of Proposer and each of the Lead Team Participants, including consideration of the
information requested in Tab 2 of Section 0300 of the PRD;o Financial capability of the Proposer; and l. Propose/s Approach and Mehodology, including consideration of the information requested in Tab 4 of Section 0300.
2. Phase 2 Evaluation Process. Additional information conceming the Phase 2 evaluation process shall be released by
Addendum to this PRD at a laterdate
PRD 20 ] 6.0Z 1-KB 17
40
APPENDIX A
b
:MIAMIBEACH
Proposo I Certificotion,
auestionnoire &
Req uireme nts Affid ovit
PRD 20r 6-O7t-KB
Notice of Receipt
of Unsolicited Proposol ond Request for Alternotive Proposols
for
Light Roil/Modern Streetcor Proiect
tn
Miomi Beoch
PROCUREMENT DEPARTMENT
1755 Meridion Avenue, 3rd Floor
Miomi Beoch, Florido 33139
PRD 2U IO.O/ I Kts i8
41
uoilctutuon No:
PRD 2016-071-KB Notice of Receipt of Unsolicited Proposal and Request for
Alternative Proposals for Light Rail/Modern Streetcar Prolect in
MiamiBeach
Procurcment Conhct
Kristv Bada
Tel:
305-673-7490
Email:
KristyBada@MiamiBeachFL.qov
PROPOSAL CERTIFICATION, QUESTIONNAIRE & REQUIREMENTS AFFIDAVIT
Purpose: The purpose of this Proposal Certification, Questionnaire and Requirements Affidavit
Form is to inform prospective Proposers of certain solicitation and contractual requirements, and to
collect necessary information from Proposers in order that certain portions of responsiveness,
responsibility and other determining factors and compliance with requirements may be evaluated.
This Proposal Certification, Questionnaire and Requirements Affidavit Form is a REQUIRED
FORM that must be submitted fully completed and executed.
1. General Proposer lnformation.
The City reserves the right to seek additional information from Proposer or other source(s), including but not limited to:
any firm or principal information, applicable licensure, resumes of relevant individuals, client information, financial
information, or any information the City deems necessary to evaluate the capacig of the Proposer to perform in
accordance with contract requirements.
FIRM NAME:
No of Years in Business:No of Years in Business Locally:
OTHER MME(S) PROPOSER HAS OPEMTED UNDER IN THE LAST ,I() YEARS:
FIRM PRIMARY ADDRESS (HEADOUARTERS):
UIIY:
SIAIE:ZIP CODE:
TELEPHONE NO.:
TOLL FREE NO,:
FAX NU.:
FIRM LOCAL AOORESS:
;ltY:
STATE:ZIP UUUE:
PRIMARY ACCOUNT REPRESENTATIVE FOR THIS ENGAGEMENT:
ACCOUNT REP TELEPHONE NO.:
ACCOUNT REP TOLL FREE NO.:
AUUWNI t{EP tsMAIL:
FEUEI{AL IAA IUEN I IFIUAI IUN NU.:
PRD 20 I6.0Z ].KB t9
42
1.Veteran Owned Business. ls Proposer claiminq a veteran owned business status?l-_l vLs fl ,,o
SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENT: Proposers claiming veteran owned business status shall submit a
documentation proving that firm is certified as a veteran-owned business or a service-disabled
veteran owned business by the State of Florida or United States federal government, as required
pursuant to ordinance 2011-3748.
Conflict Of lnterest. All Proposers must disclose, in their Proposal, the name(s) of any officer,
director, agent, or immediate family member (spouse, parent, sibling, and child) who is also an
employee of the City of Miami Beach, Further, all Proposers must disclose the name of any City
employee who owns, either directly or indirectly, an interest of ten (10%) percent or more in the
Proposer entity or any of its affiliates,
SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENT: Proposers must disclose the name(s) of any officer, director, agent,
or immediate family member (spouse, parent, sibling, and child) who is also an employee of the
City of Miami Beach. Proposers must also disclose the name of any City employee who owns,
either directly or indirectly, an interest of ten (10%) percent or more in the Proposer entity or any of
its affiliates
Suspension, Debarment or Gontract Cancellation. The Proposer and each Lead Team
Participant must not have been indicted, disqualified, debaned, or suspended from the
performance of any work for any federal, state or local govemment in the United States in the last
seven (7) years, or removed via contract cancellation due to non-performance of work for any
federal, state or local govemment in the United States in the last seven (7) yeans. Has Proposer or
Lead Team Participant ever been indicted, disqualified, removed, debarred or suspended, or had a
contract cancelled due to non-oerformance bv anv oublic sector aoencv?
l--'l vEs l--l'r'ro
SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENT: lf answer to above is 'YES,' Proposer shall submit a statement
detailing the reasons hat led to action(s).
Vendor Campaign Contributions. Proposers are expected to be or become familiar with, the
City's Campaign Finance Reform laws, as codified in Sections 2-487 through 2490 of the City
Code. Proposers shall be solely responsible for ensuring that all applicable provisions of the City's
Campaign Finance Reform laws are complied with, and shall be subject to any and all sanctions,
as prescribed therein, including disqualification of their Proposals, in the event of such non-
compliance.
SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENT: Submit the names of all individuals or entities (including your sub-
consultanb) with a controlling financial interest as defined in solicitation. For each individual or
entity with a controlling financial interest indicate whether or not each individual or entity has
contributed to the campaign either directly or indirectly, of a candidate who has been elected to the
office of Mayor or City Commissioner for the City of Miami Beach.
2.
3.
4.
PRD20I60,/IKts 20
43
5.Code of Business Ethics, Pursuant to City Resolution N0.2000-23879, each person or entity that
seeks to do business with the City shall adopt a Code of Business Ethics ("Code") and submit that
Code to the Department of Procurement Management with its Proposal/response or within five (5)
days upon receipt of request. The Code shall, at a minimum, require the Proposer, to comply with
all applicable govemmental rules and regulations including, among others, the conflict of interest,
lobbying and ethics provision of the City of Miami Beach and Miami Dade County.
SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENT: Proposer shall submit firm's Code of Business Ethics. ln lieu of
submitting Code of Business Ethics, Proposer may submit a statement indicating that it will adopt,
as required in the ordinance, the City of Miami Beach Code of Ethics, available at
www. miamibeachfl ,gov/procuremenU.
Public Entity Crimes. Section 287.133(2)(a), Florida Statutes, as cunently enacted or as
amended from time to time, states that a person or affiliate who has been placed on the convicted
vendor list following a conviction for a public entity crime may not submit a Proposal, Proposal, or
reply on a contract to provide any goods or services to a public entity; may not submit a Proposal,
Proposal, or reply on a contract with a public entity for the construction or repair of a public building
or public work; may not submit Proposals, Proposals, or replies on leases of real property to a
public entity; may not be awarded or perform work as a contnactor, supplier, subcontractor, or
consultant under a contract with any public entity; and may not transact business with any public
entity in excess of the threshold amount provided in s. 287.017 for CATEGORY TWO for a period
of 36 months following the date of being placed on the convicted vendor list.
SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENT: No additional submittal is required. By virtue of executing this
affidavit document, Proposer agrees with the requirements of Section 287.133, Florida Statutes,
and certifies it has not been placed on convicted vendor list.
Litigation History. Has Proposer or any of its Lead Team Participants or principal or employee of
the Proposer (relating to professional endeavors only) been the subject of any claims, arbitrations,
administrative hearings and lawsuits brought by or against the Proposer (including Lead Team
Participants) or its predecessor organization(s) during the last five (5) year:s.
l__l Yes I-_l ruo
SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENT: lf yes, list all case names; case, arbitration or hearing
identification numbers; the name of the project over which the dispute arose, a description of the
subject matter of the dispute; and the final outcome of the claim.
8. Bankruptcy. Has the Proposer or any of its Lead Team Participants filed any bankruptcy petitions
(voluntary or involuntary) which have been liled by or against the Proposer, its parent or
subsidiaries or predecessor organizations during the past five (5) years. lnclude in the description
the disposition of each such petition.l-l Yrs [__l r'ro
SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENT: lf yes, list and describe all bankruptcy petitions (voluntary or
involuntary) which have been filed by or against the Proposer, its parent or subsidiaries or
predecessor organizations during the past five (5) years. lnclude in the description the disposition
of each such petition,
6.
7.
PRD 20 ] 6{Z ]-KB 21
44
9.
10.
11.
12.
Principals. Provide the names of all individuals or entities with a controlling financial interest in
Proposer. The term "controlling financial interest" shall mean the ownership, directly or indirectly, of
10% or more of the outstanding capital stock in any corporation or a direct or indirect interest of
10o/o ot more in a firm. The term "firm" shall mean any corporation, partnership, business trust or
any legal entity other than a natural pemon.
Surety Companies. Has a surety company ever intervened to assist a governmental agency or
other client of the Proposer or Lead Contractor in completing work that the Proposer or Lead
Contractor failed to complete?
l-l ves l-_l ruo
SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENT: lf yes, submit owner names, addresses and telephone numbers,
and surety and project names, for all projects for which you have performed work, where your
surety has intervened to assist in completion of the project, whether or not a claim was made.
Has Proposer or Lead Team Participants ever failed to complete performance of a contract? lf so,
where and why?l--l vEs [-l rlto
Acknowledgement of Addendum. After issuance of solicitation, the City may release one or
more addendum to the solicitation which may provide additional information to Proposers or alter
solicitation requirements. The City will strive to reach every Proposer having received solicitation
through the City's e-procurement system, PublicPurchase.com. However, Proposers are solely
responsible for assuring they have received any and all addendum issued pursuant to solicitation.
This Acknowledgement of Addendum section certifies that the Proposer has received all
addendum released by the City pursuant to this solicitation. Failure to obtain and acknowledge
receipt of all addendum may result in Proposal disqualification.
lnitial to
Confirm
Receiot
lnitialto
Confirm
Receiot
lnitial to
Confirm
Receiot
Addendum 1 Addendum 6 Addendum 11
Addendum 2 Addendum 7 Addendum 12
Addendum 3 Addendum 8 Addendum 13
Addendum 4 Addendum 9 Addendum 14
Addendum 5 Addendum 10 Addendum 15
lf additional confirmation of addendum is required, submit under separate cover.
PRD 20 I6 OZ]-KB 22
45
The solicitation referenced herein is being furnished to the recipient by the City of Miami Beach (the 'City") for the recipient's
convenience. Any action taken by the City in response to Proposals made pursuant to this solicitation, or in making any award, or in
failing or refusing to make any award pursuant to such Proposals, or in cancelling awards, or in withdrawing or cancelling lhis
solicitation, either before or after issuance of an award, shall be without any liability or obligation on the part of the City
ln its sole discretion, the City may withdraw the solicitation either before or after receiving Proposals, may accept or reject
Proposals, and may accept Proposals which deviate from the solicitation, as it deems appropriate and in its best interest. ln its sole
discretion, the City may determine the qualificalions and acceptability of any pa(y or parties submitting Proposals in response to this
solicitation.
Following submission of a Proposal or Proposal, the applicant agrees lo deliver such further details, information and assurances,
including financial and disclosure data, relating to the Proposal and the applicant including, withoul limitation, the applicant's
affiliates, officers, directors, shareholders, partners and employees, as requested by the City in its discretion.
The informalion conlained herein is provided solely for the convenience of prospective Proposers, lt is the responsibility of the
recipient to assure itself that information contained herein is accurate and complete. The City does not provide any assurances as to
the accuracy of any information in lhis solicitation.
Any reliance on lhese contents, or on any permitted communicalions with City officials, shall be at the recipient's own risk.
Proposers should rely exclusively on their own investigations, interpretations, and analyses. The solicitalion is being provided by the
City without any warranty or representation, express or implied, as lo its content, ils accuracy, or its mmpleteness. No warranly or
representation is made by the City or its agents that any Proposal conforming to these requirements will be selected for
consideration, negotiation, or approval.
The City shall have no obligation or liability with respect to this solicitaiion, lhe selection and the award process, or whether any
award will be made. Any recipient of this solicitation who responds hereto fully acknowledges all the provisions of this Disclosure
and Disclaimer, is totally relying on this Disclosure and Disdaimer, and agrees to be bound by the terms hereof. Any Proposals
submitted to the City pursuant to this solicitation are submitted al the sole risk and responsibility of the party submitting such
Proposal.
This solicitation is made subject to conection of enors, omissions, or withdrawal from the market without notice. lnformation is for
guidance only, and does not constitute all or any part oI an agreemenl.
The City and all Proposers will be bound only as, if and when a Proposal (or Proposals), as same may be modified, and the
applicable definitive agreements pertaining lherelo, are approved and executed by the parties, and then only pursuant to the terms
of the definitive agreements execuled among the parties. Any response to this solicitation may be accepted or relecled by the City
for any reason, or for no reason, without any resultant liability to the City.
The City is govemed by the Govemmentin{he-Sunshine Law, and all Proposals and supporting documents shall be subiect to
disclosure as required by such law. All Proposals shall be submitted in sealed Proposal form and shall remain confidential to the
extent permitted by Florida Statutes, until the date and time selected for opening lhe responses. At that time, all documents received
by the City shall become public records.
Proposers are expected to make all disclosures and declarations as requested in this solicitation. By submission of a Proposal, the
Proposer acknowledges and agrees thal the Cily has the right to make any inquiry or investigation it deems appropriate to
substantiate or supplement information contained in the Proposal, and authorizes the release to the City of any and all information
sought in such inquiry or invesligation. Each Proposer certifies that the information contained in the Proposal is true, accurate and
complete, to the best of its knodedge, information, and belief.
Notwithstanding the foregoing or anything contained in the solicitation, all Proposers agree that in the event of a final unappealable
judgment by a court of competent jurisdiclion which impses on the City any liability arising out of this solicitation, or any response
thereto, or any action or inaction by the City with respect thereto, such liability shall be limited to $10,000.00 as agreed-upon and
liquidated damages. The previous senlence, however, shall not be construed to circumvent any of the other provisions of this
Disclosure and Disclaimer which imposes no liability on the City.
ln the event of any differences in language between this Disclosure and Disclaimer and the balance of the solicitation, it is
understood that the provisions of this Disclosure and Disclaimer shall always govem. The solicitation and any disputes arising from
the solicitalion shall be govemed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State oI Florida.
PRD 20 I 6-0,/ l-KB 23
46
I hereby certify that l, as an authorized agent of the Proposer, am submitting the following information as my firm's
Proposal; Proposer agrees to complete and unconditional acceptance of the terms and conditions of this document,
inclusive of this solicitation, all attachments, exhibits and appendices and the contents of any Addenda released hereto,
and the Disclosure and Disclaimer Statement; Proposer agrees to be bound to any and all specifications, terms and
conditions contained in the solicitation, and any released Addenda and understand that the following are requirements
of this solicitation and failure to comply will result in disqualification of Proposal submitted; Proposer has not divulged,
discussed, or compared the Proposal with other Proposen and has not colluded with any other Proposer or party to any
other Proposal; Proposer acknowledges that all infonnation contained herein is part of the public domain as defined by
the State of Florida Sunshine and Public Records Laws; all responses, data and information contained in this Proposal,
inclusive of the Certification, Questionnaire and Affidavit are true and accurate,
Name of Propose/s Authorized Representalive:Title of Propose/s Auhorized Representative:
Signafu re ol Propose/s Authorized Represenhtive:Date:
State of FLORIDA )
)
On this
-day
of
-,
20_, personally
appeared before me who
of
County of ) stated that (s)he is the
a corporation, and that the instrument was signed in behalf of
the said corporation by authority of its board of directors and acknowledged said
instrument to be its voluntary act and deed. Before me:
Notary Public for the State of Florida
My Commission Expires:
PRD 20 I6.0,Z I-KB 24
47
EXHIBIT 2
48
MIAMIBEACH
City of Mismi 8eoch, 1755 Mer,C,cr, Avenue, 3 Fk:or, Miomi Beoch, Flcndo 33139, ww.miom;iggqlr[i qov
PROCUREMENT DEPARTMENT
Tel: 305-673-7490 Fox /86"394 4C02
ADDENDUM NO.1
PROPOSAL REQU r RE ME NTS DOCU M E NT (PRD) 201 5-245-KB
Notice of Receipt of Unsolicited Proposal and
Request for Alternative Proposals for
Light Rail/Modern Streetcar Project in Miami Beach
January 15,20'16
The PRD is amended in the following particulars only (deletions are shown by strikethrough and additions are
underlined).
r. REVISIONS.
SECTION O2OO INSTRUCTIONS TO RESPONDENTS & GENERAL CONDITIONS,
subsection 5. MANDATORY PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE (INDUSTRY FORUM) has
been revised as follows:
A Mandatory Pre-Proposal Conference will be held as follows:
DA+H+ME-AND+OC TION TO BE BETERMINED AND RETEASED VIA ADDENDUM
Date and Time: Fridav, Februarv 19, 2016 at 10:00am
Location: Citv of Miami Beach. Commission Chambers
1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, FL 33139
Attendance is mandatory and each interested party shall have at least one representative at
the Mandatory Pre-Proposal Conference. The City will not consider Proposals from parties
not represented at the Pre-Proposal Conference by at least one Lead Team Participant.
Any questions regarding this Addendum should be submitted
the attention of the individual named below, with
Rafael Gra nado@miamibeachfl.qov.
in writinga copy
to theto the
Procurement Department to
City Clerk's Office at
Procurement Contact:
Kristy Badq
Proposers are reminded to acknowledge receipt of this addendum as part of your PRD submission.
ProQurement Director
\
I
Telephone:
305-673-7000, ext. 621 B
Email:
49
AANAMIBEACH
City ol Mrnmr B**lch, : i. r .{,1r '1 ,:' .i
;'f, ..,1 .I rii :.s,{L \,1 " i"rf }&il l',UIli I
ii I i.I i .:"1; ; i .;, :, ^. :;J .l I -
ADDENNUM NO.2
PRO FC$AL REQU{RE|\,,ImFIT$ nOC U l,',lENT t PRD r 20 1 6-0 7 1 -i{8
l.Jotrce of Recoipt nf Unsolrcited Proposal and
fisquest for Alternalrve Proposals for
t-iglrt Rail,rhtodern Streelcar Pro;ect in fu'liami Beac.h
February 10,20'tS
Tlrs FRD rs frmBndrC rn ine follcr,uns par'liculars tr$ly {alm{otions arB shcwn by strrkelhrflugh 316
add itrons are underlrned ).
I CLARIFICATION
1 The 'Frolect rs deiined ,n Secttons 1 flnC ? *f ths Frnposal Regutr*n:ents
Docurnenl. The Crty. at tts sc,l€ rlisnre{ron, wril a{so constCer aiternaltve
proposals lhal may inclrrds, as part *t the Prolect" addrttonal routes alc'ng
Altr:n Rcad. 17th $trs*{, Oade tsl'ud.. fut*r;dian Avenue or Conventtcrl Center
Drive
II. ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS BY PROSPECTIVE PROPOSERS:
C1 trq&:uld it be possible lc vrew a plan hc,der's iisl for tho suhject biC?
41: Attached as Exhibit A.
O2 lf ava,lable, I would lrke to r*qu*sl a ccoy of the Unsclrcited Propo*;rl sutrrrtitled
In th* Crty of lrlian"u Eearh lor the ltghl ret,,'ntodern slreetcar prciect?
A2: Attached as Exhibit B.
Q3 A,s a supolier of N,Cad and LrOn hmlturl*s fer th* transrt r rari mar{et, I na'ie re;tcl
lhr3r*e1.. :ne specif,cation$ releas*tj ;lild sarnct fir:d the quarrlity of slreetcars lhat are
lo bs supplred, Do y*u krr*w tne ansluer tr: itrisr
A3l Specifications regarding the quantity of struetcars that are to be
supplied will be provided as part of tho instruction for Phase ll
sr,rbmittals.
Q": I ,r,ouid like to requ*$t n ni$otrng r..vrth the ap:rcprrate represenlatrves {rnnr the
Crty of l,*lritmi Bmach and it* prccureneri: C*partmenl to Crscus$ lh* "Request fa.
Arterrr;rtivs $)rnposals for Lighi Rarl,,l',loCem Stre*tcar Projmr{ rn f-{lanri Beach"
ildvsri;son:ent issueo on Jan*ary 12 lf ther* ar*;)ny other stsps thal sh'culd ne
tsk*n to facilitate a rneetrr:g please lel nle krnw.
44: One-on.one n'leetings will be held on February 19, ?016, followit'lg
the Pre-PropCIsal Confere*c*, One-on-one meetings wilt ha scheduled on
a first corns, first served basis. based on the prioritios established in
Exhibit C. The City will allow for 50 minuto rneetings heglnning on the
hour from 2:00pm to 8:00pm" Additional rn€stings may be scheduled on
50
Saturday February 3fi, 2016. or in the following weeks. as needed,
lnterosted pariies will be required to execute and subnrit the Proposer
Consent Form (Exhibit C) prior to the City providing a scheduled time for
its one-on-one meeting.
Parties interested in scheduling a one-on-one meeting should subrnit
their Froposar Consent Form (Exhibit C) with a meeting raquost to KristyBada, Procurement Contracting Officer ll, at
kristybada@rniarnibeachfl.gov. A maximum of '10 representatives per
team is allowed at the one-on-one meetings.
05 ls there a prs-r*grstrat cn requirernent for the Feb 1g " Pre-Fropnsat
COnf6rg6qg?
A5; There is no pre-registration requirernent fon ths Pre-Proposal
Sonfarence.
Q6. Crt;ng the requtrements und*n Tab 3 (Page 14j and the instruct;ons in Section
0300-Parasraph 2 (number *f c*pi*s tn b.e provrdey: given the aggressrve corporal*
sustarnabtlily p,rogrfim$ ffiHny *f the industry players have rn place, ,auroukJ the City
f;nd rt acc*ptahle to provide *nly 'l Lcne) harC copy of the fi1ost recent f;nancial
slai*rlgnts nnd 1 {one) e{ectron;c ccpy r6 heu af the requesl lnr 11 hard cr:pres anC 1
{one) electronic version?
A6: Yes, it acceptable to provide only 1 (one) hard copy of the most
recent financial staternents and 1 (one) electronic copy in lieu of the
request for 11 hard copies and 1 (one) electronic version"
fi7 Crtinq Tab 4 ltent I - reeuesl lor organr.ralrcnal chartn wsuld the C*iy ccnsrder
1i rgmoving the organiza:rorlrri charts frcm the ovorall SffH* count for this secttorl
grven that prolridrnQ lte Crty a ccnlpr*h*n$rve view of the "chairr cf ccmrrarrd r:ray
l":e best ach;eved in mulhple charts. *nd t) allc,wrng lhe orqanizatronal charts io he
:lrrrteC On 1 I x l7 St;ed p6p*l' ulhiCh wl;l ASSlSt the reaCer rfi rg,;rs,,y1pn th* nharls
ATI 1) The organizational chart will not be removed from the overall
pnge count.2) The organizational chart may be submitted on a 11 x 17
sheet, which shall account for a $ingle page.
Any qu$si;tlrs regarding tris Addendunr shouid b* subn'rlted in writing tc the Procurem*nl
Departrttenl to the attention cf the individual nan:ed be io'r,,. rr,rth a copy to {l-:* grll, C{erh'n Ofiic*
a : ReleelC ra naco,.OrqlratUbqad{l fl sv
Procureqrent Contrci Te,epnone Enarl
Kls-ly_Bqda 3C5-673-7CC'C exl S?1S KnstyBada@rniamrbeachflgov
rrt Drr*clur
51
EXHIBIT A
PLAN HOLDER LIST
52
;\i,.(;i;s.s HrjIr( "
i1.1r-:rtC y
BriJ Nir l:ttr,r
Br* Ttti*
Vendor Name
ftesr:ur{)e $,r.sf*nrs (jlil!]lr if .,::
t $l lrn*rrrlnt;ll s "qli:rrs R,rs* r:i
trhfl {:{ln$Ull[ri; ( ilrlrir ol -\lull'
iry' :)rliir.Jrl:€r f e,..lrrtrlirqtcs
llr,rtcn ,3 ti;tllitnrs I [.[r
! r:n(i{:r $ui)ilon .,\rrrtlr.nl
lt l!i I rnnsit $ulutir-rrr*
$t"lL) il,h.Lri ti:t{ ht*rt *ls,..tr :r
lhs Ull,* B{ru[ i]u,l,lrx] l:. i..{iri:
Hfiilt$a(t tr:nl|:lr t P
frtnlder
u*rk,tanl
(lI l.JN Archrtccri* $ l.rulirr;oltt
rL:ler: L trqre*.r t,ilii t itrlsll
i'ir;r'rRubrnsnn
l{)r(* [ ili$ L(rl:Nr; l.$w Firlrt
HFIJ & .{su-n'i;lirir, ln.l
efl {.){)hl
ilf: ,jjrf,tKS ll.l.j
H.\ I i) L)el ..1n {,rr{il
{f*aler lnlrislf.Jr.'lt.r rl
l)rc,lllere i lr.srtJr' \. lr-t r:l - l' ,
I eff+f lli{)tt Ini:
5d10rl*$qn lri$'llI{rk:
.Af;$ lnlrfi $tft.cilir,rr [ )q' rr,i-rr:n i:
(l{I|'l
Hurrl
St-raf :.rr: 5ri,,.r[. tr's ' I
\, AS ISA :lJi.l
lnltlf i-.r1 '1,:r I ::rlrli)qr 1r,q
T lulr,s T t;*rr*;x.:{ t J. .5r:(.urll.
.\ltc $*ls{,i N'}txx u:q
t'irst Irl}nl;l1. tnr
$h;rruk.r Lr5;l
r\,,llllhi: []ds!+,"'!;r;r 1'.r rstt
I irdsa., t.,,rl.)e i_Lr .
l'.1(l(-) (-lri)ri:)
Slir't _}.lt rs iilli;ir.9
i*rr.l{.{)rt i..ril niiltiqfrl ll-ii
i ii.1 A [;rl'.
fifilss l"ri{illr'hli {-:i.rn1 l:l{tit{rI i ,)
Kpf,,l{.;
l:J tli,tielrr)
i, {f,l Irrltcl L',\lr./.r: . l::.
i:.t.lr;t'.itl I :ll,l r l'F.,r, {1"'lIrr.l}*
C'tr ,;l lt'lixtnt B**r ir
i{} 1ii.{)r 1 -KB
l',iotirtl sf Re{*ifit 0l Unsoil,:ltod Frcrros;il fr-lr Ltqht
Accossod First Time
lit16{-11 11 lC.l+Air,t I:5I
?,1 l6 0 I 12 02 trri Pf,.l [$i
lSld"0 IJ1fi/lpl .\MilSf
.l$16 fl I I i) il8rl 1 Pf,,'l E$i
:t$ I iI {};}'{)t (.1)
")
i }}L'1 f ! f
Iill$.fit 210t 1r pl-! ESr
!{}l$,irl t:! lrl 0,),,rt,t f St
in16{1 I } 0i ?.t f,t,.! L$ I
Itl16$1 1 i il.? aI8 Atr [$l
lt:'1601i5oliljfihl [$1"
201* * t :r) fi1 I,, $x[t HSr
t0l6-Sl'15 fi 1 rll rl,{ [Sl
ilsl{i,$1 }} 0? rl.l Pt} [:$T
;l$16-$?"il I 00 09 AL! [. s I
.lslti,ill 1B0l 03Ft,r rqT
:)n16i.1 I 1? 112{At,l L:l
?D16 C r lS Lr2 ?$ pr,,t Ftr
lDr60l 1s 115i nt,t E$r
301rt {}?,u1 {iLl lJ di.l r$T
21,1 ]q C1 13 lU {)6 Af,,f LSl
1r.)lti 01 )? 1ll i*l Plil [57
;)nJ6."S 1 1: 1t} }l .\l,t i:51
3l1ri 01 1J [.] .? I l)l,t t 5 r
]l 16011-1 tiiJ:t)1,! tst
lrl lri 0 I 15 l)l lJ Pt.' f Sl
,71;r,,j..i)1 )it ir2.:].r phl L.til
.] j,6 tlJ oJ ili tiI Pr!{ [$I
)i,1 1$-il 1 tli n? 0{i pl"l u $'l
)';1ii *l J$ Ui :l.l r\1,,r [$l
ffllfi{} 1 !i 10 r'0 dil L5 l
Jt):rj$t ,li)1 l1rpil FSr
r"]!fi,il 1 r3 08 16 ltil rsr
Jl-lri0: J,-i i)iJi [1l"l FSi
l:-;16.1) 1 2fl t:ar 5.: Plvl t $|
.)t'1,1"{I !: CJ 1I t'il [:$I
I:'!{1 {}1 ii ffrl fl8,\ht 1".sI
.ii)1{ {:t 1 }5 0.t.Jr} l,l,f i:t i
fr:tss1l{) !? ?lFl,,r IsI
$ ld i] 1 !8 rJ .l.l [,t,r ts l
J1lliir.)r 'J t\il /'.1t,1 FsI
J,t !,j il !. 1l ll.l .lJ Pl,l I SI
l:tlii 01 ,l I ?{r l{l ^\l,l i:57
.) ' 1 if 1 'j- j ,l llil .11 ,r,il L. S {
.lt r 4. ,); iit) rfi fi$ &l,l U S t
ll 1,-i {l I -J1} 1.}.3"1 fil,,t LS l
Most Recent Accss$
?illh 0t li) $1 J,l p'f't FSr
l{)16-$1.1} S? ?i PLl tsl
JrJlr.j Ul 11 0I:ii ril FST
20 16-01-r51 01 .!l At,l LSI
201o irl C-lllli J:,11.1 tst
.10 16-i-r1..? ! 01 15 pill L$1
,u16-ill 1i 1lr{} {:'h{ f $T
lrjl$ "11 1ll s5'l.s pl\l e $1
;l)1{;.i11 1U l} ,11 .\N FSI
Jl)1$ 0l-In 0S 11 il.fl,l tST
p[lii.o? 'ti
'] ] tll plll E SI
;lillii-c1 t:)01 ll PhiEST
ll]16 01 2r 0i.' 2ij t)Lt f tT
J';:ii il-0? 0{ "),' Phi i; $T
ll:6 {'l 'tlii 0t il3 p|!l r$r
i,J"s c1.1$ r.i -{p phr [$f
;fi1s"ff1-?s il, xl pt"f tsl
J$rs 0l-01 03 2r pi,t [sr
:S1B 0?-01 0g -t? .\lvl ESI
2t lri 0I l5 02 I:.1 PLI EST
?a.trl at 2l 01 0.1 Phl:Sr
lij'6-0 1-1J 1fi il Atr,t FST
.{:6 0 !"t? rl'l :r' Ptot ij$ I
Jl: I $-tl r, t'l tl,} ]{i pf,t i. s I
l{rr6-{rd} $s $l} -t.} l1[l :5I
J{trit.i)t-28 rU.t.l pf"l t5r
.r{"116 fi} *t ils it tri.l isr
.i{ll() i},i illl 1tl :xl q[t IS'
.)c tri.c I 21 02 xl tllil i5 i
lOl'j,)'! li,;02 't .r PLI [S;
71r:6 ill c8 i:.J1 pht LTI
ttr601 r:0t**l phlfl$1.
fi-116fit ?8Si il f,l"tti5]
J$,1$ fln )1 fili il ei\l f 5r
,lt,lii{i-rl l.} 1i Plil is'
3il lrr 0J ,) l lll tilt .r!',t FS=
'ltl lii fi !'7li l']l -?6 P:"1 [S;
-lC16lll Jrl ]J -t! f'\l t51
?{ild-0! l8 1? ".1{ PU fsl
ft; f 6 il t l2 i:,il :i5 Atul [$1
Jt-: lt) t)! XLI lli) 0X R&l i:$i
;fin6 dn ;il 14 lJ .{hl iSr
lxll[ i]] 08 |)ll l'; Ai.l iSi
.)iirfi"il? *l 1t) 1:: "'1hl l-S;
J1j'tr li 1 .)i: {) l t;; F|i,1 F:r
53
,..|rt,tr.rn i'rllr:r:l l.l,in,trlt:,rrry "?lr6 i]1 ?* li Jl PLI Ftl
l{,'I"ie! i'r)t'l;rrl ..\s*r;rt;llrx lr Iillri 01 1} iiiil5 rllLf LST
l,le rirlrart llorll'..l.meilcii l]*nr 70 lf, fl1 15 tl"l.28 Fli., f lil
I Cr'; (:(ll'{-'i I Qt l( } {.)[ij J0 1 d {) i 1ti il,l.2ri Pf"l t s'l
Firridlrs Silnrl{irtilll lp( ]01S.{)l l5 flt 2fi Altl FS'I
i.i lolil lv ! :r ln,r {.{ tlnr'}r"r$
,,^; J btai t {]riiurtx hL\rr
l" 0(j9 i.:.ipiisl ilr*i$l$
liLi-)urilt rtJllL lj 1 LL C
r \i\r Piltlt.r)rs
i.. rxlslltt(:t,i.\!r rf hlrlirl
l.)lt.i-\ $.slH|I]rt in{l
:a: fl 3crlll
i; ri I ;.;.,rgl$r. $', sls$t$
\rs"ilao Sl $ ,,1$.r.. lrrr:
J $.tlr! r.
[ . i-:i1] i-: lti $.t ARl.:i1
Itii.; lrrl*rrr;ritr:r;tl { iri:l,it irl
\.. )rl.-:1 , '".1 I l.t-l
.i{)1s"fi I t t f2 "15 plJ [51
?stfi {)1 ?} 1l} 3; prtl FSr
l\i li]i. $ 1 1 ? fl$ li .\l!"'l L:i r
ffs1s-{:}1 ?i 0; t.r pr..r r5T
1{}1fi-*1 ?l r}2 }i pr"l [sI
;01ii"f,}1-1S fi.l nii Ar"l f:il
?AIS"{11-1ir} l-}l1 a5 P},! FST
t0rfr"tln.?$ $"t.,H pht Isr
;ill{l $X ?l Sn 'r} Anr rsr
tulii iil l5 fit 16 Pht l_5t
IfJt6 fl1 J5 l,L' ?1 AM:ST
2ilI[},01 12 Sli 12 .\i.l ES:
?illS il1 1?'3i.43.1.,'.1 trsi
l}.$rs 01 1"1 ils ]3 pr.l Esr
;sniri-$I{J$ l? $1 pt,r L"st
i$r6-d1"!3110r AIJ i$I
jr,fl t{i fiJ- n} * t ,llr trtr} l5l
;[1d fi1,.]fi fl.| t/ Pr,.t l'si
3i116 {}r 1 } ilti l} ,,11J tt I
)il1SSl 1]ilg:rinl!iSi
)tj t,t I -):l 1-) ?: Fll"l i: 5 I
};1o i:1 12 l-r," :'d .\\l i:SI
..l.".'ii C 1 ?6 I'l 'l{ Fl"l EST
2016 Cl 2r) 1l li,\tl E${
.?C16 I) I Il: i)i flf P[{ fST
?cti] 0r 1,1 {}2 15 FrtJ ESr
.:0 l6 0t-75 r? -lil Pi.t r$I
2Ll16 0l 12 0! 15.\l'l [:SI
2rl.t6{1,28 0s 35 Ahl f sT
3015 S2 0! 0t Jrj i\&l &St
10'!6-{i I 1 :i 0i iu A:"t [$ I
;l-,'1d il? 0.s tr6 {0 rc"1 Etl
}]:6 C1.19 07 0.1 P[.r [$T
ti 16 0'r il Bd 55 AH [sr
/t'6-0 ! -,).) t{, I ? Altl Fs;-
2C16 02;1 0& 4?,.\l,t LSr
2C16 {Jt t? il:.xl Fhl r$J
20 16 0l 12 i9 +0 ,\f,.1 E$l
It() 16-{/ il:i 11 /1 Pht FSf
20r64 I 1!0'l l? Pt"t r5I
201ii i)t.t l lt .t3 Ail F.sr
2016 01 23 0i {2 Pnt [ST
/f) 16 C2 r)5 0l .ld l,r"t ES I
]016 C t l: rl2 1: P\l LSi'
21)ld 0l zii 03 2l P.i,t ESr
2f16 C2 0l 06 51 ALl ISI
?(),601.?! !r lTAlltsi
1016 0l l? 09 JIJ lrLl ISI
J0 l6 (Jl lJ 03 t2.\l\l L$,I
2fI6 01 t5 l.) 5{ t'r,t r 5l
Jil1ti 01 1 108 ]l P&r EST
.)tllrj-i l-15 tl :llPldf-ST
lr)16-il2 ll lJ ,.S Pll f Sr
?0I1j .* t 15 DJ IS P1t [57j0lii cl Lii; lJ ilil r:\l E$T
r-l'1411-'1'l lr1 t'i"t P\l [Si
:s16 i-]] t]:0-r {i} l,u [sY
.I)t,i.CJ.{)i 0.? .l:.} F'U F:S!
/".:'6 01 l.J riJ lld i,Lt t5:
lf,:6 61..)' tll;>1iirf,l f:$I
:']'6 0J J2 r r ?8 AAt IST
]c16 flt .r.] lf,::i'irl-l [:sl
2C16 0! .?!r C.[ C!,\l.l [$ir
Julii (rl (r'1 I I ]l Al.l Esl
?015 rJl ti'l ll il .\t\l L5[
10rn r)l li i)) {.i:l t}l,l F5T
,0 16cl l]0.) tipi,tF$r
)t)lti i)l .)ri l| -Jd ii,l f:51
70lB.rll 11r'(lr t2 Pti t sT
2016 i:.1 01 1l ?q "\il i sI
?0 f i i- I 1? r-rl.i r'd ,\Ll i 5l
.jlJ F'ix.t ()ilt,{::i, iil{.
Siri!. lrt.xrlrurtbr*r I LriA [.i.(
i h* Cotr.a}nr: {.irortrr
,,Uflrid'J8 [ir:*tnr lnc
I]F AL
t iii.ta.ht,qp!{ ili:}h
fr*rk*ris il g L{-yt{."lilli;:rr ifll{-$1 nt,l r}1 "tl At,t LIT
ril5lDLl lltdft5'i:'t-l[tlr\Tl()ft fl)16$l ?9 ilS.fl[ pl,l f Sr
().!:r)neil Fl*r:tinq I r:rnstl .{ ft,nrl fi}I{i-$1 1} {}:, i{i l,\.t ES'
llt Uh$holn i\r$nrlefls {:$m ;$lfi,{it l.tr {]8 38,nll ESI
i.lill lt'lr:rsltui:lurr: lnt:l{i ltri"fi,t (}} fl! :l$a Al"l F S I
|Jr-x lr f n,;neetirq lnd I nr r:rm{ l$ 16"$ 1 . l t tJ I I 7 Plt,l f ST
!a:rl(nrr sd:):t$rl ,)t)1{i-{.}1-1{ 1I .tJ At.t FTi
Silfr-)ur Seil:r lrlrilslrut:turr. ir 1S16.i) I.?0 ili 3$ Pi,! [ 5f
f {r:r.'(;{, C(n,lril1:lrr,:} ()r.xl }S1tl'$:l{)i 0J ilS t}tl ESI
lhlhrs Tr.ln:':trr1,t $.i:r:uti[,; ]rt 20l6"S 1 rl I 1 ?? Ahl ASI
'ia.t(-o iita Jillii fl1 1l fl! ff -\l'vl aSI
r'.1;s11[.;s,1.*' rr t, rtrrrl.tlr:q Jnl6Ol l?:E 1i,\\l r S'
\FrltlL.l ftr'.'r'ri:.iti ttri"-r{"{.$ ln fii16-Sl 1} t} l.-} Fit f S;
,rJ {lsl ,t
" *.s:(:r\ I ..li,\1i1".{:}i. 101} }i Ptr{ FSt
lirl i:nqineenni; rrlr.{n.}:ul*ffu i$ls-$1 1$01 1.s pltl i 5r
irr.r<'f't.i)rs*il ifi 1${) n.-t 5 ll"I {}-l pili : S I
f.r5 t* rs $ i ',lJ li) 'tJ ,\t i :s I
.;r.r? '.!;tiliJilitrrirlriq lqd{rhln,-r$ J{J t$ il i ;0 lS .11 Af"l ;57
lsrlL.r 'i.x:tn LL,?riItl 0| ll0"1:!3tr[,] LSI'
'-l;lr.; ,.-c'r'ii&l!irq [ 1.,'.) ?0tS $ I ].] t? 5I FU f,b I
'llr: t'l"rn t- iv'iltulrlirlr i hrrli.t;.t Il]1ii.fl1 Ll$ il.S.0? .ill !..S'
. IH Enrl ft,r..lr{J $q:l.rr{:r$ Jiltti-q.1 i.1 1 I I .r1 ,'\l,l ftS"
$r-r:r', rile L,;uri,rlefit ljl.rnr:r".rr ?l) I ii.O l l] {l lli p!,1 E $ -
t rrrsl l. !i1;rrq Infr"{$trlr(-h,r- -fr .}l}1ti.{)1 1 i i}.} }it f }i.l F $ i
S:.rn'r,: l,insulil,r!] llrrJi{rih. h }n1$ $l 1} il.? ll pl.l f S-
| t/ ' r-(:rl)sk)r'rt fl;-.ll,r'rlrlrl f r;tn',,ril1S.{}l ;)li t(l 1$ ALl f 51
54
i i Ii llrli,t:l:l1ii1{1;{i
IJ!)rtlr A,:trrt:1..1 Lrit:t"urrrtrrr{rl t.} ?[r1,ii il1 1] ljij {.lt}.'rl.l ISI
t;rrgrlr {-nqrrt|rr,nry iird [ florin /0 16 {j1 1} 1'] Ji Alt.l tSf
r;-\f tlSA lnr.J$t$"()1.'1) 1' ?{} Ptt.l F:SI
[]irl1e rlr:rrslrrr|tir)fi i:r]fJ]ili]ill, li l*'l{i{J}r)"| 11 03 .rl.{ LS I
I ondon T.nrk',t.crk. lu]fi)r$-01-1? $q'16 At,{ FtiI
tra'S i-l(),rxrrir'rilil ${xrll\:rul ,?S"lS-U1.1? (i"} {i} pl'.| LSI
Er.:irr
[.eo,.\ l)al'r
IY Irnlnt.rn,llk]fi;d
l-.1.1 I B .'-or:icr.: lu:n
l! ] Ll;tn.x;r'nli-'nf
1isL (tv li-:ll -\tt:!r'ltil.: ls
l':llk,ry
lnfrirlintt rir;rs
r lr)r(.rtr(ktl iJittlrrr,t.,s. lr(
frl.r; lln i: n(ilt'fellnq
' .1' i\r:r;tsl'l}t'.i 3 I I {)
i- t,.rniir Firi i{rx;tlirq
i,li,\l
!,1;tr:t1 u;r e. l-,.]l;if.ll
,r! it
3S'r6.01.tii f1s J{} Al,{ FSr
I0l fi"$ '! " 1 ? $'9 $J Ali,! b s I
)S1ri fl1 pii il1 16 FLi FcT
tfl1t5-{ir tE r ! .11 Al,,! ilsl
Jillti'0'l !:i li{}:rj Al,,l isI
?fl1S4 1.tB 1l nll Aht [5I
;0 l() fj I 15 l0 i5 .11,1 :57
tu1ri01-1I03 mFnl gST
ifi1ti01 1lil8 3$A[.]fsr
;1il 1$ il 1 17 r,1 I .,1 1 Frl,l i. 5l
?0,$fl1 Jlfll .ti,-rl,.l ;sl
?filrifll 1/ )8:]n Ai"l i5l
Jil1$ fi1 2l *t ,.1 t Pll {rlI
Jill{i{I f0 }ll {l$ Pl"l r *l
:lflr$.fl1 1J,l{.r"1$ Pf,t :S:
.,'{. f i i) I l:! rl I .1 ,r t-1r,.1 t. 5I
:r) r 6 i-? 1: U+ r't ,\1,,1 L $ l
.,)r)1d .ll 0l 0? l,t Flil t5l
/0 16 C2 Oil trJ 18 lrLt l:$I
2{.)1ti d: 0 r 11 n.l Al,r l:$I
2015 01 'u $U Je A|\l FSI
Jf;!,ii i.l2 {}r 1;) 1r rr!,1 {.$1
.lL'15-fi!.2i 09 21 "\!J L:$I
iillii 0 ! l1 08 adl Alrl fl$'l
?{'6 i-} ! J! f 1 ?: P[.t [$ I
?i:rj Ll! 'tS l,i:' 1,1,J irl'l E$T
ll!ir'l;.1lfll 3; &lJ E$f
t'l;lii $r '! 5Ci 1? tril.| {:$l
?i"1 t il -0 t r'11 r1l: .lil nl'l {:5 f
]1.1 1d il t,t.) !r;li.\1,1 r$1
t1-'16-il I .?i c.l.?$ Al"l L$ I
?'j , rj
',)
I l'{ l 'l }.1 .\f,l F$I
.)': l E 0.i' l{ l i,' ?ti Al"l L 5 l
2'16 01 I I l0lX] Al'l Fi$T
1{j16,0.1 Cll ,Xr i.) {l\l [5I
21-lltiill li l! l,l0Al\lIST
2il l6-0 l-:r t1:,10Al,lLSI
21i16 0l 1i 1J r{; rl,t [$i
20 l6-0t.15 tJ 1i rrl,lh$i
?0 lri 01 lii 1.1 ?i t't''l f $i
.)0 ltl-tll-t) l) f i illtl LS'l
l0 l6 i,)I 2,9 1i; i) I Al,l f $T
la 16 0l..) 1 0 ! J.l Pl',! tr S l
l,-rl6 Ll 'l 1 i 0$ .iti ,rl,l i:S 1
2(r I 'j.i?.il! I I l] ollJ 1.51
.l1.l1t] Lll Jt.t ilJ lif, [)t!'l E$i
Jirl '; i: I .),i 0:i I I ,r[.l [5, i
j',lti; ll ,l.1 i)l .{; pli,l F$ j
lfitB.i,.t I 1 1I ]{t r.$! [5X
l;ti i: I l: il: :i illt.l li5n'
Llileiu:h {.1;:nsLrl'lr:rJ ,t li$lilirqxrr;$16-t}!"i'* i}fi t}f Ff/ [:51
\,rtilm T.rnen,?r1 J'3lS$1.13{)fJ 3i Al,t 551
'j;t-.'Hl{ .1.rrhrl*{'tr.rir} i.l$rni}iirrl! ?*X{3 $1-xal il3: 1? Fr[,! L.S I
F,ir.; a.r)r1$ullir'q, lnr ?st{i 0! &1 its tri Al,,r L5I
irrtx;nrlcri l,1iin;r{r}rrrrrnl Iirlr'.,ir }$1fi't)l'i} l0 2'i &Lt L5l
.\ijt],tf,Jc \.A1.ilfl Ftrp ll{riq,t Jtrli} 0l ?/ n,l {)rj,.\t"l gsT
l-.or'il-er'-,ai lr sut.tnr- l .{*"r;:tt: r;,t :ifl I S-0 1 - I 3 1"10 5I A["] l S ]
t-t.r tri.\rry ijt\.il r:rlt.tsrfit.l{: Iil16.0? {}! ;! !! ,\i,l :s i
,\rr.her 'rrrrrsl*rn (.:r)nlt.r{rk){$. il,l :fi lS .0 i l .l I I J0 dl,l t S f
.\rir i:rrl ,l.y*lruslrr:r, lr.t" ?0 lii 01 1J 10.03 ,\l,l ;S I
'r !iL i_;.lrrrll ;rd dl-:q'r i"pt{lrlu T, }S1S-tl l lE.:'! SI Pt{l i5'
<tr,,;l,1 lnlr;*$trur'litrr:, li*uiltfl{} ;1illfi.il1 1} tX Itt,-\iJ lS:
it.tr .lnrrrir:.;r :q1r*$irutliurr l.);:rl 2{)lti.fl 1 1: ;-:1 ,it, Pfr! i:Ir
55
HXHIBIT B
U NSOLICITEN PROPOSAL SUBMITTED
TO THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
FOR THE LIGHT RAIL/MODERN STREETCAR
PROJECT
56
COPY OF EXHIBIT B PROPOSAL
ON FILE WITH CITY CLERK AS PART OF RESOLUTION NO. 2015.
29247
AND INTENTIONALLY OMITTED HEREIN FOR ADMINISTRATIVE
ECONOMY
57
EXHIBIT C
ONE.ON*ONH MEETING REGISTRATION
AND
PROPOSER CONSHNT FORM
58
,\AIAMIBEACH
Ciry of lVh*rni B*neh. I I' I .r.r"' I .1 , '
1 li.':-ri:l"iq [\ti:r]' ll i[.{[ ar.,',it . I
I,, i'r:r.'-,, .1 ',.:..i,1_l'",
pRcpcsAl REQUIREL-tENTS DOCUi,-IENT {PR0} 20 16-$71-KB
Noiice of Receipt ol t-lnsalicited Proposai and
Reqrl*st lnr Allernatrve Proposals for
Lrght Rarl,ifi,,tcCern Streetcar Prrlect rn ['liarflr Beactr
9"NE-ON"ONE MEETTNG
REGISTRATION
l"lame cf Reqrres:irq Fir'rrr
Contact P*rsfrn
Ielephone
Ertra,l.
To;rrrt l"'lemf,,:.;
Ple;lse check lhe slalennqnt fhai hest descrrbeg thestflp".i-el"tll?_Gg!_-esjlujg$SL
_ . Fnr:r ty 1 Is;:n. rs a reaCy i*rn'*C or partra$ly formrd lo plrrsrie the Prtiect thal r'c;udes
key elenrer:ts rf tne te.:m such H$ #quily ir:,,,Bstors, rna.cr contr"actor andirr techn*l*6y
cor]lpany.
plrgrit! 2 Equr:yi t.!rslors:h,Ji sre cnnsif*ring fnrnrrn$ fl tgarx t* pursue il:e Prcl*ct.
___ Prronty 3 hl*1*r *rinirfl{:(or$ arrC tsr:hrrcicgy ccn.panres ccnsrderir6 tenmtnq tu pursue tht
Frnlcct
Prrc'rri1't.l !tla1,:r ijr'Cr'-8irtr'J frrrr's:finSrderrnE tearnrnq to pirrsue th* Prr:1*r:{
_**. .. Prlr;rrly 5 L*r"lC*rs rbalrks, r';est'le!rl na"kersi ccnsiderinfi te;imrn{} 1$ pr.rs;* ttrt
Prrjer:1
59
PROPOSER CQNq.E.UT REQARO|NG ONE-ON-ONE MEETTNGS
This acknou,k:rlqrnent is mnd* this rlay cf -",,2n1S ny,
,,r,,ho rs authorrzed to srgn r;n behalf of (''Proi:cscr'' ) rr,ril-i rfi f,;rilncc
to the follcllorrnn.
WHEREAS on Januaqy 11.2016, the City initrally adverlised its n*quest for alternative
proposa!s for a publici'private [jartner$hlp {'"p3"), in accordance rrith Florida Statuts 28f.CIS712.
for an off-r,virm or "wirstess" lighl railimodern streetcar $y$t$m frnnn Sth Street, via lVashingtitn
Avenue to the li"liamr B*;lclr Convention Center {the "Project''). and
WHEREAS. as part c:f an industry r*vimw proce$s for the Project. tne Crty anC rts ililn$ultflnts
int*nds t* hnld sne-on-sne meetings with propr:$sr toam$, inciuding the Prcposer. to drscuss
various issues relatrng to the RFP.
NOW, THEREFORE, in ccnsideratron of the mutural covenants set forih herein, thc Pr*po*er
acknowledges nnd sgrees to comply with the follorrring rules ancl restrrctions applicaLrie io these
meetings
1. The purpo*st: of lhe meettnil$ sre fur the Crty and its consultants to perfornr fact-finding
actrvrties, prnvif,e pr,Jposers with th+: opporiunrty tr-r betl*r undorstand the Project, and provrde
the City anc its consultants with the ability to obtain a better understandrng fr*m the industry on
r*lerrant Projeut-relaled issues
2. City particrpants rn lhe meetrngs with proposor t&ams will have nc ciecisron-nraking
authority to ntcdify Prcl*ct dc,*urflents or the Prolect procurem*nt proco$s g*llerally
3. The prcpaser t*ams shatl not rely un $taterr)ents n'iade b'y City and,'nr its r*pr**entatiues
that rnay fr* lnterprete'J as a cornnritment to change or rnodrfy the Project docunrents crr to
otlreruvtse change the Prolect prnnur*ment process The City wi{l forrnally csmnrunicate any
sr.:ch char"rges tr all prc;:osers through an aricl*ndum to the Pl"cpr:sal Requrrerorents Document.
if any
4 Sunlect to ParaEnaph $ below. ttie Propaser and Crty ,,^rril nrain{nrn thm rnnfrcjgnti;rlity of
irrforrrlattnrr discussed t1u:rtng th* rlns-on-onts meetir"lgs to the fullest exteni allor,veri uni-ler
applrcable larv.
10
60
5 lf Crly r-i**m*,t atJorisahte at rtg scilr drscrrtr,;n Crty nlay r$$il8 [r;rrrriel ',trrt'ltijn rr.:$[-1,,3nses t{,'
nll olf th* *r:rflr-lsr-1. trlarirs aCi:jrosStn{] ',tritle11 (lr.]8$h{Jr1$ r;lr$*{J Ol th* rrnr:j-on-nnfl rlltlr:trnSS. lf CilT
ei*cts to r$sun y,'r",t1flr rij$pfln$*$ it rr:ll ntt ir1rntrfy the trlr.)[,os*r tr:;lm{xi r',rf''tch rulsed the
qu*siions *r issues
ri The proposer t*a,.n$ may $oek input from the Crty regarding the Frnlect. but shall not
si)*k to ohiein cnmmitrnents from City in the one-*n-one m*etings r:r othe*nvise sr:ek to $btatn
an Lrnfarr compeirtivt: advantag* ovfrr flny otl,er proposer tearn"
7. Nn aspect of the cne-on-one meetlnss is intended t* Brovide any proposer team vrith
jlccess to rnforrnait':n thai i$ not sinriiarly availahlc to other proposer leafil$ fifid no part r:f the
eyaluallon *f Frnlecl prnposals will be based on the cofidLrfil *r dlscussi*ns that occur durinE
these rneetings
S Prnpns*r lraives any protest rights regarcling City *r its corrsultants conducting the one-
on-one m*elrngs ',.lth Prolect proposer teams
Proccser
$rgnature
Namrer
Trtle
61
AAIAAA[tsTACH
City ol Miornr Beoch, I ,'t ,""J.* i.r- "1....- i
; [: -]i.:i- ,{;,\1f flt t)tf,Aii 1r",,:i.. I
i, , ,_: 1',.i .r,1 ; i .i. ,i .. . ,.i .t I ..
ADDENDUM NO.3
FROFOSAL REQUIREh,IENTS DOCUtutEl'JT tPRDi 201 6-il7 1 "KH
Notice of Recelpt of Unsohqtsd FrapuseI and
Request for,4lternatlve Froposats for
Li6ht Rai{rfu1odsrn $tr*elcar Froject rn lvliarnr Beach
February 25, 2016
The PRD is an"rended in {r'g f6ll13',r;tng partinulars oflly id*letic,ns are shr-:,.rrn by sirrkelnrf,Li$h and
aCditrorrs ar*,;nderlrned),
I" ATTACHMENTS
Exhrbit A. Pn&sontaii$r: fron Fre-Proposal tlleetinE heid on F*bruary 19 2C1i)
ExFrbri B: Srgn-in sheet from Fre-Frnpcsal [,{Betrng held cn February 19 2016
Any quesirons resardrng this ,ACdendum should be subm:tied in writing to ffis Frocurenrent
Departm*ni to the attention of tne inCivrCual narred belcrri, ,,rrith a fiopy tn the City Clerk s Office
a t RefucX$r"anaCo;$nr ramrbeaph!,qev
Prncr"rer.eq'Contact Telephone Emarl
Kristy Boda 305:673-70_-0!-, pli,6?.1$ KrrstyBacla@nirarrrbeachfi gou
Proposers ar* r*nlrnded tCI aokno',vledge receipt cf thrs add*ridurn #$ p;lrl of yorir PRD
suprf[sao''r
o "j,*--"
;,\
'/'
AIF-f,Denrs
Pro$-,roment Diractor
62
EXHIBIT A
PRE$ENTATION FROM PRE.PROPOSAL
MEETING HELM ON FEBRUARY 19, 2016
63
fYIIAfVII BEACH
LIGHT RAIt/fvlODERN STREETCAR
MANDATORY
PRE-PROPOSAL MEETING
Fehruory I9,2Ot6
IO AM
S,,tlA,\,ilBtACH
Overview of lYtiomi Beoch
r lncorporo?ed in tr 915,
celebroted I OO yeor
onniverrary
. 1OI4 populotion of 92,OOO*
r Ail Deco Historlc Sisfrict, one of
greotert concenlrotions of Art
Deco orchitecfure in U.5.
. World fomous South Beoch, Art
Bosel snd Oceon Drive
. Moior indurtriss cre tourism,
health csre, construction, food
& beveroge
. Blend of residenfiol, business
und visilor community
64
AVERAGE DAILY POPUIATION
INDICATOR
Avef iSe Oaily Populstisfl
ffi
;o*r
_
ts.,iin{
ffi
I
Reces$ion
Unemployment Role Building Permritr
Strong Recovery From
10.11 9r
I 51to 15,000
14,000
13,000
12,000
11,000
10.0002"9'r ryo
lu t\) t\)(3oo
{D(o
1n.009e
1S.S016
9"00%
8.00%
7.00%
6.00s*
1;,1 5"00ft,6ss*,,.,
4 00o/o
3 00%
2 00ori,
ru Nl t\) N N)
]JJJor!\)(rar
(Or.-@gtO-C-{CDrtlt)
LJUI-/LJFFFTTOOC)OOOOOO()f!NC\NC!(\l(\(\JOtf\
14,3$S
65
Re*rl Estste Tronsoction Highlights
One Block of Lincoln Roqd
sold for record $374mm
t {O room SLS South Besch
Hotel sold for $ I ?Smm
9O room $etoi lUtiomi Beoch
hofel sold for $90mm
Over $55mm being invested
in group of hotels ond
oportments in Collins Pork
neighborhood
Foeno ilouse - Upscole 44
unif condo
- 22 unitr sold thus for for totol of
$l 03mm, overoging $3,ot O/sf
- Penthouse unil sold for
record $60mm, ot $5,295/sj
j.-w iq,r- l ;n"w-r',* i r' rml 1*x, -"r 5* g* i*r -,* a--
w
U*
Hoisl
Hotel
Aportments
tnduntrrial
Holol
Horcl
Rotoil
Hofcl
Aportmcntr
AFrrrtmcnlt
% of fY{.Gtrre
TV
r.33%
o.93
o.8I
o.76
o"46
o.45
o.4d)
o.40
o.3g
o.32
Tcrxsblc Ynlue
$s27,513,062
229,gOO,OO0
200,81 l,il36
I86,802,731
I I2,860,000
I l0,0?5,39$
98,OOO,OOO
97,4?9,2&
95,5fO,OOO
79,g&,@o
s1,539,691,81{
Miomi Besch Top IO Toxpsyers
Toxpoyar
Fountqinbleou Hotel
lllB Redev/Loaws Hofal
22Ol Collint Foa LLC
Florido Power & tight
Di Lido Beoch Hotel Corp.
2377 Collinr Rcrort LP
VCF Lincoln Rocd LLC
Edcn *oc LtP
tlCZ/Ccnlrum tlorningo ll
IJtcZlCentrum Flomingo lll
Torol 6.25?5
5qrcr 2S1 IM.€6,Oa.&Cr}Advd*rm&smcnf*.$i}ii{&{osmo&{erhsf,dJ$pei B.*t.,rtr:lii
66
Cit), of Mismi Beach Ttrx Bqse
nrol Property
Finol Arlccrcd
Voluo (in billionr)
aD
ltxres:c
YOY
Itillogc
Rota*
Propcrf Tax
fauunurrl
&
lncrgore
YOYFYE{in millionr}
?006
2007
2008
2009
2010
20t I
i 2Ol2
20t3
20r4
20r 5
20I6
17.r5
22.2$
26.t4
25.89
23"?{
20.97
20,73
22.O7
23.64
26"27
fi.70
23.7".'l
29.fi%
17.4"/"
- l .0",,5
- t 0.2$6
.9.8%
. t.0%
6.r%
7,4%
I l.l%
t6.916
7.481O
7,3740
5.655s
5.65S5
s.6J5s
6.2155
6.r655
6.0*00
5.8634
5.7942
5.709it
I I t.69
r40.31
r15.35
r25.94
I r5.73
I I t,l4
I I t.29
I r4.32
I17.41
t2r.76
!4{1.r6
4O.7"ro
15"6"...;
-1o.7"1"
o.5".i
*8-l "6
-3.r%
{.8%
2.7"h
2"7y4
8.8"6
l2.r%
CIfy of Miqmi Beoch
Other Funding Sources
Funding Sorrcer rff 201I rYE 10tt rYE 2013 FYI 20t4 rYE totc
Generol tund
tuilding Drvnl*prnrnt fce*
fronchirc ond lJtility Toxer
Iotol Solcr ?ox Prcrccdr
in*|. [o<ol GorrFHolf (cnt
Solcr Tor
Non-Gancrcrl Fsnd
*rrorl lox
karl Porking
diqw{htqs-lrcnrportctioa Concurrcncy
ilonogomrnt
torr in Ucu of Pnrling
Citirms' lndrp;ndonr
Iranrporrorioa truo (CltT)
toA
I1,700,670 t4,945,8t2
24,O74,326 2{,998.20S
7A22,?& 7,485,716
17,004,150 Is,916,0f3 2.2,472,&1)
11,003,t67 24,a57,161 24,t94,41!4
7,900.t 29 9,.160,029 9,843,12rt
aL77l,E9r
4t,075,E20
s2?.lrr8
1,025,a69
2,9t0,064
33,3rO,rt4
53,920,167
41,856,519
l,G54,O6l
4,334,823
2,T78,OI8
tt,oa9,9t6
58,ttr,092
{4,330,39t
1,269,a9t
g?[,1r3
3,149.5E0
t2,t3t,7ra
61,760,51t
/ail,4t5,96g
r,939,Ort
l,07l,tt1
3,13r,570
3r,7t7,&'
67,qqn,9t6
Itt,924,too
2,5?0,819
7,W"t23
3,r71,376
3N,31I,614
67
New Ptrrking Rotes
Rtrtes incretrsed in Ocfober 2OI5
lncrensed reyenues direcfed to fund
- lncreosed porking copocity
- Tronsportolion lnitiotives
# Overnight Visitors to
Miomi-Dode Counfy
# Stoyed on Miomi
Besch
% Stoyed on Miomi
Beorh
Overnight Visifsrs
20r 0 20r 5
I 2,604,1 OO I 5,40O,20O
5,558,408 7,238,000
Mah 47o/o
otlo
Chongo
Sincs
20ro
22o/"
30%
7o/o
68
Miomi Besch Hotel Performsn(e
# Hotel Rooms
Room Nightr Sold
Occupancy
Room Rote
Rev PAf,, (Rev per Arsil Room)
0espite increose of over 5,400
rooms since 2008, occupoRcy
hos remoined obove 70%
And room rstes ond RevPAft hcve
steodily incressed
$1",;s $a*,\ fiima (s**r'ch P4c*o i'stx lt&oa, C;n'rr:. :-: r,r.";.1 iurcr
FY 2OId
\7,731
4,791,979
771b
$2sz
$tse
rY 20t 5
I9,545
5,059,50O
75"/"
$2oo
$le8
Arcq Prcmrtyttmrc
New Hotels in Miorni Besch
Qtning #oa
Dafil Qmms
iC Thonrpeon &lcrni Bssh
f3nDA I Holsl &La*fudcncer
iiE AC tloral hy ikriorr
trt Thc Angl,e/r lorricfr lbrcl
*lBfiPA flycn Ccr*ric Sout Eeah
I3f,DA Aloft Sodfi Bach
&3 Tho lfdl Sqdr Bosh
f3 fcnolb.tl
tb-t5
Apet5
Jwr-l5
Jun-15
Jwr.I5
Jun-I5
ftts15
OG{-15
tlec -I5
3e
4S
IS
Itt
r6
235
r63ta
rtor3 *"".^-1.*.rl*pjsxikul
To.d 2OI5
,lr3 Hltgr GcdGn lnn Sor.rth Eccln
f,; *rrlderrc lnn
l,r'l&l
.lct 16 S
Jrrrld I 16
IwrIO 70,q" --..*Jqd! t{dalTd 2016
ford t$wllotel SrJpply
xl
2,8
&.tr l' i* !...F :rq.f rJ t rttrl krwu .{[ l"scril
.l'--r I .. ;-".,.3er blls*
, BG L : r. aq lfo*rr ,,;rJcitr ;.. 'Ji
69
Credit Rotings
CIfy of Miomi Beoch, Florido Resort Tox Revenue Bonds
Series 20 I 5
. Rolings: Ao3/AA-
Misml Seorh Redevelopmenl Agency Tox lncrement
Revenue ond Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2Ol5A End
Toxoble 20158 Ratingr: Al /A
Ci'l,y,,nl,&l[[rum[ Besch, Florido Porking RevenuE 8onds, Series
20t 5
. Rolingsz A2/A+
Cify of ft{ismi Beuch Bond Roting, As2/Ar[*
WHY THIS PROJECT NOW
&' ,. :*da*roi,*
I\TIAMIBEACH
70
Proiect Locstion
Trqffic Condirions
Regionol Highwqys
. In the lost 5 yeors, norfhbound l-95
trqffic volumes huve gro\fi/n by
qpproximotely 2O%
t Indicotive of the growth in the region
, .iliffll"l -r ",
71
Trqffic Conditions
l-395 lUlorArthur Cnuse\,voy
From 2Ot3 to 20I5
- Duily eostbound troffic olong MocA*hur Cousewoy grew
7% Eqvivolent to opproximotely 3,500 vehicles per doy.
- Daily westbound troffic olong MocArthur Cousev/oy grew
3?;
2OI 4 *o dnte
I r,t. ,'r':i;ii't;i;i't.'gyeroge doily westbound troffic hos grown 5%
- 20.l4 drop due to the Alton Rood reconstruction
Trcffic Conditions
l- 195 Julia Tuffile Cousewsy
From 2OI O to 2OI 5
- Eostbound ond westbound troffic grew by 'l 5% ond
12Y", respectively
- Equivolent to on odditionol doily troffic of
opproximotely I5,400 vehicles in o S-yeor period
; Represents on sdditionol 'l 'l vehicles per minute-
entering or leoving the City
72
Miomi Betrch Mode Shtlre
| ffliomi Beoch Populotion is olreody pre-
disposed for olternslives fo the
outomobile
I ln 2O14, 47ya of South Beoch Residents
survsyed responded thof do ntrf use o
cqr os fheir primury mode of
trunsportstion
Circulsfor Rldership in South
Beqch
FYE 2OI3 FrI 2OT4 FYE 2OI5
sC'UTH BTACH IO(AI.
ALTON-riltst rnOU.EY
r,300,300
roTAr. r,309,300
'l ,222, t 63 t,079.327
2ts,930 160,t3t
1136,093 1,439,458
73
IYliomi Besch lVlode Shore
Existinq
[To, From, ond wirHciryl
64% Ir
As conrpqred to trsnslt rnode shore of 2%
in Florido
% r0%ro/J/O r0%
,ffi
? :')- I Vi-..li-i t:iaa - rsin:f ll6ir t*,
.s * {rfr y. :.ida: !. / {O:rB.!p, ffid,i* ,i{ ro ffS,try,, e$&d ir#! ldtiw
Miomi Beqch Mode Shqre
And we wonf io do more
Existing
&*$6 't1ch 10,.;
203 s
43td 20)r,ta:10orl:10o,;
oso@o
Representr c reduct;cn of opp'roximrtely
99.? Metnic Icns of Green
houce 6crel per doy
o*@"o @ o
74
Trnnsportstion ffluster Plon
. The City's Droft Tronspor?oiion lVlsster Plan
(TfrtP) is in the process of review wifh odoption
onficipored ffiis Spring
. The Droft Tl\,lP Is btrsed on o Mode Prioritizsfion
clpprosch which prioritizes tronsif, pedeshions
ond bicycles oYer vehirles
The Cif!, Commission odopfed the mode
,.,pdoritizotion by resolution in July 2OI5
. The Droft TMP recommends Dedicoted lgnes for
Trqnsit on Woshingfon Avenue ond 5ft Street ss
o Prioritf I proiect
Wushington Avenue Mosfer
PIon
' Focilitsted by Stokeholder Toskforce
. Supporftd DedicEted Lones for Trsnsit
,il?i*$.:.".t
75
CONVENTION CENTER
RENOVATION
AAIAAflIBEACH
Connecfiv;fy Needed fo
lnvesfmenf
25
Moiot Cif!.
Froject Cost
Convention Center
Convention Conter Parking
Total Conventircn Center Cost
(in $ millions)
551.0
64.8
615.8
76
Connecfivify Needed fo Moior Clr)t
Invesfment
2014 Convention Center Attendance
lneremental Jobs lmpact'
*J
I
'Crrr.i:l rnf,trH(1 and mducedroh$ $rlp{!,{?'1Bd bt tf.e trio.n.J lpqrdrn; b,i rjofluecilr-'.r.r B.slr}fi $ue$i$ $orrrce. iLfpLAfi
Convention Cenfer Compored
to Alignment
[rl,aml Brach Light B.rrl]Modci,{ Strccicnr Project
iO
r !f
\.s*
"ir'a,a
to
iataff,xrEr6f*itrI
d
$
I
l.i{I
,l
l
.l
I
I
I
j
-t I-,)T
-
77
PROJECT DEFINITION
AAiir.\," IBEACH
Froie(f Overyiew
" CitF of ftliomi Beoch developinglprwuring tight Roil/Modern
S?reetcEr rystem for people, businesses ond Etfrsctions in
South Beoch
. The_ Sysfem will be of independenf utility on ftliomi Beoch
snd inter-operqble with Bauchline proiect ocross the
ItlocAilhur Cousewuy to Downtown Miomi
'i,'" Ttrpl^ffi/ffir Sheetcor witl be cotenory-free or off-rrire
rlfhnology operofing on o dedicoted righr-of-wuy in rhe Ciry
of Miomi Beoch.
29
78
Proiecf Definition
Proiect includes fwE corridors with
trocks in deditoted right-of-woy:
* Phose I : 5q Sireet to Wsshlngton Avenue
north to Dode Boulevord
- Phose 2: 17'r Street to Alton Rood south to
South Poini Drive
* Phoses moy be concurrent
r Stotions to be locoled 6very 2 to 4
blockr
" Vehicle Sforoge ond lblsint*n$nce
Focility site to be identifiedlprovided
hy City
. Vehicles must demonrlrtrte copocity for
fully cotenorylesf operations
. ?he Cify of tliomi Besch hor
odopted s Resiliency Progrom
. Ysriour proiects ore octive
under the Resiliency Progrom
. LRT/Modern Streetcor P3
Frogrom will foll within the
Resiliency Progrorn
poromeler*
. Concessionoire moy be
ncsponsibb fior upgroding
streetr fo meei the Progrom
requiremenfs, funded
seporoiely by the Ciry
o
Cir), Resiliency Progrsm
79
Resillency Progrqm
Fublic roodwoy segments include roising elevotion of
roodwsy to minirnum height ol 3.7 NAVD ot edge of
right-of-wsy with minimum elevotion of top of rstrh
bssins ot or Ebove 3.O NAVD while mointoinlng o
stundsrd poyement cross-slope of 2,0O16
Underground utilifies (wofer moin, sonitory sewer, ond
slorm sewer) within vicinity of route will bs relocsfed,
upgnndpd und/or protec?ed os porl of rhis proiecf
Technicql Proiecf Teum
Kimley Horn Teom
- Techhicul Supporf Teom
r Kimfey-Horn
r HDR
r WSP - Porson Brinckerhofl
. LTK
- P3 FinErcisl Supporl Teom
r Cloy Consulting
i*{ri;ee;:..
o Cgstqfio Advisors
Public lnvolvement
r Medio Resources Group
n Cornmunikolz
Outride Legol Counsel in pracere
80
PROJEff SCHEDULE
(ONCURRENT
ENVIRONMHNTAT REVIEW
AAIA&4IBEACH
Environmentol Review
I Ciff of filismi Beoch will comple?e the Environmentol
Prscess
t Closs of Action experled ro be Environmenfol Asrersment
(EA}
;i , t Expecied to be completed in eurly ?OI7
I l\'il
. Primory ir*u*r expected to be historir resource$,
resilionty, truffic, noise ond construction impocfr
3s
81
Environ mentu I Review Proiect
Schedule
Engineering / Froject $en"
Envimnmental Process
Puhlh $uhnnh
PrCIincrtFunding Plan Mr rvluvl r urnE.rrS . rsrr
I
POTENTIAL FUNDING
SOURCES
u rr' ..iti&Sfiir
MIAMIBEACH
82
Proiecf Fundi*g Flun
* Proiect Funding Plon ossumes o Cify,
County qnd Slate Pailnership
. Funding sources will be developed
concurrent with Phose I of the
Procuremenl
" Drofl Funding Plon provided with other
drufr documents lo iesmr r*lecfed in
Phose I of Procurement
PROCURETYIENT
REQUIREfTIHNTS
;,AFkr,:.'
MIAMIBEACH
83
Procurement Proces$
Prorurement in occordonce with Section 28f.SS l2, Florido
Stotutes
Tw*r Phoge FrocessI Phose I - Ivlinimum Requirements & Quolificotions
- Oetoils for Phose ] ore included in PRD
PhEse 2 - Technicol Proposols & Cost/Finonciol
Con,nilderElions
''t"'Finbl Detoils lor Phose 2 will be r"elessed to sho*-listed reoms
following Phase 'l
PROCUREfr'TENT PROCESS
PHASE I
AI,IAMIBEACH
84
Proruremenf Process phuse I
Minim um Requirernents:
A" Terhnology und Leod Contrsctor Requirernenls:
'l . Demonstroted copoci$ of iully colenoryless revenue operotions
in Miomi Beuch with olignment on dedicoted right of wcy
?. Demonstroted tull performonce copobillties including oir
conditioning in vehicles for climote similor to Miomi Beoch
3" Able lo cperote in o typicql centenory sysfern in the United
Stotes {750V DC)
4. Demonstroted ccpocity to oddress minimum ridership of 20,0/5
people on o doily bosis
Procurement Process Phose I
IYlinimum Requirements {continued }:
5. Proposor's Leqd Controctor Bonding copocity of not
less thon $ZOO million
r Letter of honding copocity from on A-roted, Finonciol Closs V,
Surrefy Compony
6. Successfully delivered o design/build or other form of
construction contrsct, ot leost (l) public or
publiclprivote infrostructure proiect of ot leost $ 1 50
,*,:. million in the lost {5} five yeors.
B. Applicotion Fee in the om'sunt of $ I00,000, poyoble to
the City of Miomi Beqch.
85
Procurement Process Phqse I
Other Considerotions:
! Vehicle/System suppliers rnoy porticipote on more thon
one tesm
. Ofhsr Leod Teom Porticiponrs limited fo one Proposer
fecm
[eqd Teqm Pqrficlpt nts
l€od Controcton firm responsible for construction of the
Proiect
teod Operotor: Firm responsible for operotion of vehicle/
sheeftor system
Leod Engineer; Firrn primorily responsible for completion
of oll Proiect relqted engineering
l.ood frloinfenonce Enfify: Firm responsihle for
maintenonce of Proiect
4@a.rl
teod lnvesfor: Entily primorily responsible for providing
equify for the Fnoiect
Yehklel5ystems Suppliers: The streetcor vehicle or
systems technology supplierr
86
Procurement Documenfs -
Phtrse I
Phose I Proposols, 3pm EDT, {i,loy t O, 20 I6
tlsin ($mponenfs of the Phose I Proporol shull include:
Tob I - Executive Summory, Forms ond Complionce with Minimum
Requirements
Tob 2 - Experience ond Guolificotions o[ Proposing Teom
Tob 3 -Financiol Copocity
,r,"1;1,,,,'rli -,.
r{ { i)i 1,1{' Tob 4 - Approoch qnd Merhodology
Procurement Phose I Evuluctlon
Phose I Proposol tvaluolion will follow the following
steprr
* Slep I: All Proposols will be reviewed for Responsiveness
- Step 2; Proposols will need to meet the minimurn requirements to
he ellgible for considerotion by on Evoluslion Committee
oppointed by lhe City Monoger
* Step 3; The Evoluotion Commitiee, comprised of members
oppointed by the City Monoger, will provide o recornmended
ronking io the City Monsger.
-f*.
- ,Step 4; The City Monoger wiil review lhe recommended ronking
for considerolion to recomrnend fhe ronking to Ciry Commisslon
- Sgp 5: City Comnnission will review, finolize ronking, ond
opprove shortlisting ot leost 3 but nol msre thon 4 Proposers for
odvoncemenl to Phose 2 of the procurernenl.
87
PROCUREMENT PROCESS
PHASE 2
MIAMIBEACH
Procurement Documenfs r
Phose 2
Shortlisted Proporerr proceed fo Phose 2 of rhe
pro{uremenf - June/July 2O I 6
The (ify will issue documenlr to fhe short-lisfed teoms
wirh the following type of cEntent:
Volurne 'l
:
r The lnstruction to Proposers {lTP}t Generol lnforrnotion ond lnskurclions
I Fhose 2 Procurement Process
r Alternotive Technicol Concepts {ATC} Process
ri"", r I Grmerol Propo*ol $ubrnittol Requirements
. Phqse 2 Evoluotion ond Post-selection Process
r Finql Aword, Execution qnd Delivery of Agreement Process
88
Frocuremenf Documents r
Phose 2
Fhose 2 documents continuedl
Volume 2: The Proiect Agreement
r Pnoiect Terms ond Conditions
" Definitions ond Exhibirs
- Volume 3: fechnical Provlsions {TPs). Design, Construction, Operotions ond Mointenonce Criterio
{Frescriptive ond Perforrnsnce Bosed}
- Volume 4: Reference ln[ormoiion Documents {RlDs}
,, , . Freliminory Design Drowings ond Doto (159'6 to 30Y6 Design);'r' . Geotechnicol lnformotion
r Uillity lnfsrrnotion
r Environmenfol Permits ond lnformotion
r ROW lnformolion
. Stotion ond .Aesthetic Guidelines
Procurement Officisl Contsct
Cone of Silence opplies - oll contocts tol
t Krisfy Bodo, City of Miomi Beoch Procuremenl
Depoltment
- 305-673-7490
- KristyBodo@Mlorn iBeqch F L.gov
Copy iol RofoelGronodo@miomibeochfl.gov or vio Fox
V86,39*-qf 88 (Slerk, Citf of Miomi Beoch)
89
PHASE 2
CONSIDERATIONS
&AIAI'flIBEACH
I n su ro nce / Bond i n g/ ReselYes
. Proposer shoutd trssumes
l 00?t Performonce/Poyrrrent Borrd for design.build
" Open to discuss performonce guorsntee olternotives
depending on totol vslL,e o[ the design-build costs.
Rolling onnuol 100?'; Performonce Sond for Operoting period
- lndustry standord insuronce pockoge for the Proiect.
,,t, Reseryo period buildup oppropriote for Hondbock
Lelters of Credit occepfoble in ploce of Performonce
Bondslreserves ot the discretion of the City
90
Engineer Reference lnformcrtion
As porl of the Phase 2 dotumentotion, severol items will be
provided to Bidders:. Survey lnformation rxnd botq
- Topogrophic Survey
- Supplied in AutoCAD Civil 3D Forrnor
. Engineenlng Drowings
Proposed frsck Geometry ond Alignmenl including typicol Slreet
Cross Sections
Stotion l-ocotions ond Proforypicol Loyouts
Troction Power Sub'stslion Locotions
Conceptuol Vehicle Storoge ond Mointenonce Fociliry Loyouts
Engineer Reference lnformsfion
Other ilems to be provided to Bidders during fhe Phose 2
procurement include:
. Utltriry Infor:rnotion ond Doto
- ASCE 38-02 Quolity l-evel B(+) 5UE Report
Lisi of Utihty Providers olong the Corridor
lnitiol ldentificotion of Utilily Conflicts
. Right of Woy lnformotion ond Doto
"rani Riglil,o{,,W*ry Do}o including Existing Porcel Llmits
Porcel lnformotion including Existing Ownership
r Preliminory Geotechnicol lnformation qnd Doto
* Soil Boring lnformotion ot Approximotely lS00' lntervols
91
Engimeer Referen(e lnformstion
Other items to be provided to Bidders during the Phese 2
procurement include:
. Environmentol Doto
Level 1 Confomlnotion Screening EvoluoiiCIn
. Stotion ond Aesthefk Ouldelines
- Generol Concept Drowings of Tronsit Stoliorrs
- Generol Guidelines to be Followed Concerning Aesthetic Treutrnents
,t,, ,Ftui€$d Ridership lnformsfion nnd Doto
- Tronsit Service ond Operoting Plon
Ridership Eslimotes ond Looding
a
:
P3 Proie(f Finqncing Options
Up to Proposers
Conridering letter of infere;t for Florido StEte
lnfrostrucfure Bonk * "Stote ocrount" - lo be ovciloble to
sll teoms if approved
. Profect does nol onticipote Federol funding which should
provide redufiioms in pro[ect costs
- Cost benefit onolysir of sovings from ilfn loon
, conrpored to onticiputed gsvings in proiecr cosls
92
Pg Poyment Approach
Avoilobility Poymeni opprooch I
30 yeor operoting period {terrfotive}
- Through the City of Miorni Beoch
. Funding "pockoge" will be evoluoted ond developed for
creditworthiness os it is finolized
. Solid City credit rotings demsnstroted eorlier in presentolion
Milestone payments moy be mode during or st
f,gmft$3,ry of conslruction to exlent funds {IrB Evciloble
"Added ltems" - such os resilien(y highwoy
improvemenls poid or work delivered
Q&A
.Sqla. '
,\4IAMIBEACH
93
EXHIBIT B
$IGN.IN SHEET FROM PRE-PROPOSAL
MEETING HELD ON FEBRUARY 19, 2016
94
COPY OF SIGN IN SHEETS FOR PRE.PROPOSAL CONFERENCE
INTENTIONALLY OMITTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE ECONOMY
AND ON FILE WITH PROCUREMENT DEPARTMENT
95
AAIAMIBEACH
City of Miomi Beoch, I255 Meridion Avenue, 3'' Floor, Miomi Beoch, Florido 331 39, www.miomibeochfl.gov
PROCUREMENT DEPARTMENT
Tel 305-673-7490 Fox 786-394-4002
ADDENDUM NO.4
PROPOSAL REQUTREMENTS DOCUMENT (pRD) 2016-07 1-KB
Notice of Receipt of Unsolicited Proposal and
Request for Alternative Proposals for
Light Rail/Modern Streetcar Project in Miami Beach
February 26,2016
The PRD is amended in the following particulars only (deletions are shown by strikethrough and
additions are underlined).
I. GLARIFICATION
1. The deadline to request one-on-one meetings (as per Addendum No. 2) and
submit Proposer Consent Form (Exhibit A) is Wednesday, March 2, 2016 at
5:00 PM.
lnterested parties are required to execute and submit the Proposer Consent
Form (Exhibit A) prior to the City providing a scheduled time for its one-on-
one meeting.
Parties interested in scheduling a one-on-one meeting should submit their
Proposer Consent Form (Exhibit A) with a meeting request to Kristy Bada,
Procurement Contracting Officer ll, at kristybada@miamibeachfl.gov. A
maximum of 10 representatives per team is allowed at the one-on-one
meetings.
Any questions regarding this Addendum should be submitted in writing to the Procurement
Department to the attention of the individual named below, with a copy to the City Clerk's Office
at RafaelG ranado@m iamibeachfl.qov.
Proposers are reminded to acknowledge receipt of this addendum as part of your PRD
submission.
s$ft&,y---)
/rn tt \ .'uJ/.,/-,/Alexflenis
Procurement Director
305-673-7000, ext. 6218
96
EXHIBIT C
ONE.ON.ONE MEETING REGISTRATION
AND
PROPOSER CONSENT FORM
97
MIAMIBEACH
City of Miomi Beoch, lZ55 Meridion Avenue, 3" Floor, Miomi Beoch, Florido 33,l39, www.miomibeochfl.gov
PROCUREMENT DEPARTMENT
Tel 305-673-7490 Fox 786-394-4002
PROPOSAL REQUTREMENTS DOCUMENT (pRD) 2016-071-KB
Notice of Receipt of Unsolicited Proposal and
Request for Alternative Proposals for
Light Rail/Modern Streetcar Project in Miami Beach
ONE.ON.ONE MEETING
REGISTRATION
Name of Requesting Firm:
Contact Person:
Telephone:
Email:
Team Members:
Please check the statement that best describes the status of the requestinq team:
_ Priority 1: Team is already formed or partially formed to pursue the Project that includes
key elements of the team such as equity investors, major contractor and/or technology
company.
_ Priority 2: Equity investors that are considering forming a team to pursue the Project.
_ Priority 3: Major contractors and technology companies considering teaming to pursue the
Project.
_ Priority 4: Major engineering firms considering teaming to pursue the Project.
_ Priority 5: Lenders (banks, investment bankers) considering teaming to pursue the
Project.
98
PROPOSER CONSENT REGARDING ONE.ON.ONE MEETINGS
This acknowledgment is made this _ day of ,2016 by
, who is authorized to sign on behalf of ("Proposer")
with reference to the following:
WHEREAS, on January 11,2016, the City initially advertised its request for alternative
proposals for a public/private partnership ("P3"), in accordance with Florida Statute
287.05712, for an off-wire or "wireless" light rail/modern streetcar system from Sth
Street, via Washington Avenue to the Miami Beach Convention Center (the "Project");
and
WHEREAS, as part of an industry review process for the Project, the City and its
consultants intends to hold one-on-one meetings with proposer teams, including the
Proposer, to discuss various issues relating to the RFP.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants set forth herein, the
Proposer acknowledges and agrees to comply with the following rules and restrictions
applicable to these meetings:
1. The purpose of the meetings are for the City and its consultants to perform fact-
finding activities, provide proposers with the opportunity to better understand the
Project, and provide the City and its consultants with the ability to obtain a better
understanding from the industry on relevant Project-related issues.
2. City participants in the meetings with proposer teams will have no decision-
making authority to modify Project documents or the Project procurement process
generally.
3. The proposer teams shall not rely on statements made by City and/or its
representatives that may be interpreted as a commitment to change or modify the
Project documents or to otherwise change the Project procurement process. The City
99
will formally communicate any such changes to all proposers through an addendum to
the Proposal Requirements Document, if any.
4. Subject to Paragraph 5 below, the Proposer and City will maintain the
confidentiality of information discussed during the one-on-one meetings to the fullest
extent allowed under applicable law.
5. lf City deems it advisable at its sole discretion, City may issue formal written
responses to all of the proposer teams addressing written questions raised at the one-
on-one meetings. lf City elects to issue written responses, it will not identify the
proposer team(s)which raised the questions or issues.
6. The proposer teams may seek input from the City regarding the Project, but shall
not seek to obtain commitments from City in the one-on-one meetings or othenruise seek
to obtain an unfair competitive advantage over any other proposer team.
7. No aspect of the one-on-one meetings is intended to provide any proposer team
with access to information that is not similarly available to other proposer teams, and no
part of the evaluation of Project proposals will be based on the conduct or discussions
that occur during these meetings.
8. Proposer waives any protest rights regarding City or its consultants conducting
the one-on-one meetings with Prolect proposer teams.
Proposer:
Signature:
Name:
Title:
100
EXHIBIT 3
101
MIAMIBTACH
Cary of Miomi Beoch, 1755 Meridion Avenue, 3'Floor, Miomi Beoch Flcridc 3313? www.miornibeochfl.gov
PROCUREMENT DEPARTMENT
Iel: 305-673-7490 Fox: 786-394-4002
ADDENDUM NO. 5
PROPOSAL REQUTREMENTS DOCUMENT (pRD) 2016-07 1 -KB
Notice of Receipt of Unsolicited Proposal and
Request for Alternative Proposals for
Light Rail/Modern Streetcar Project in Miami Beach
February 26,2016
The PRD is amended in the following particulars only (deletions are shown by strikethrough and
additions are underlined).
I. CLARIFICATION
The solicitation timetable is as follows:
Proposal submittals:
Evaluation Committee
City Commission short-list:
Phase 2 docs released to short-listed proposers:
Submittal of Phase 2 cosUtechnical proposals:
Evaluation of Phase 2 cosUtechnical proposals:
Commission selection of proposer:
Commercial Close of Project Agreement:
Financial Close:
May 1 0,2016
June, 2016
June/Ju|y,2016
June/Ju|y,2016
November,2016
December,2016
December,2016
January,2017
February, 2017*
*Financial close date assumes the environmental approvals have been achieved at or before
this time.
ll. ModificationsReqardinsMinimumRequirements
A. With respect to the Minimum Requirements in Paragraph 4.A of Section 0200 of the
PRD relating to catenaryless technology: the Minimum Requirement of fully catenaryless
technology means that the technology solution must be wireless while in operation between
stops along the Project route. Specifically, for purposes of satisfying the Minimum
Requirements, the Vehicle/System Technology does not have to be catenaryless at or within the
maintenance facility depot, and may allow for charging in the air or via ground at passenger
stops along the route, provided the application of the power supply is unobtrusive and is
incorporated within the architectural features of the canopy design for the passenger stops.
B. The Minimum Requirements in Paragraph 4.A of Section 0200 of the PRD with
respect to a "demonstrated capacity" for fully catenaryless technology may be satisfied if the
proposed Vehicle/Systems Technology is in revenue operation as part of any portion or
segment of track within any project anyruhere in the world.
C. Additional Minimum Requirement: Paragraph 4.A of Section 0200of the PRD is
hereby amended as follows: The Vehicle/Systems Technology must include a low floor, low
step design throughout each vehicle to maximize and facilitate accessibility and more timely
102
passenger loading and unloading.
lll. Modifications Reqardinq Lead Team Participants
Paragraph 3 of Section 0200 of the PRD includes the City's instructions regarding Lead Team
Participants. With respect to the Vehicle/Systems Suppliers, Proposer teams may identify more
than one proposed (1) Vehicle/System Supplier as part of their Phase 1 proposals, provided that
each Vehicle/System Supplier must meet the minimum requirements and also deliver to the
Proposer team a commitment letter confirming that it will provide final pricing and other terms to
the proposer team. Proposer teams must include the foregoing commitment letters as part of
their Tab 2 submittals, pursuant to Section 0300 of the PRD.
As part of the Phase 2 evaluation process, the short-listed Proposer teams may then finalize
terms and must submit a technical and cost proposal with one (1) Vehicle/Systems Supplier.
lV. Modification Regardinq Federal Requirements. lncludinq "Buv America"
Requirements
Notwithstanding any provisions to the contrary in Section 0200 or other sections of the PRD, for
purposes of the Minimum Requirements, Proposers need not assume that federal requirements
will apply for the Phase 1 proposal (including "Buy America" requirements).
The City reserves the right to determine, at any time prior to conclusion of the solicitation
process for the Project, whether it will pursue any federal funding or financing for the Project. ln
the event that the City decides it will pursue federal funding or financing for the Project, the City
will issue an addendum to permit the proposer teams to take City's requirements into account
as part of their final proposals, as necessary.
V. Clarification Reqardins Application Fee
With respect to the $100,000 application fee set forth in Paragraph 4.B of Section 0200 of the
PRD, at the conclusion of the Phase 1 evaluation process, the City will evaluate its costs
associated with the review of the Phase 1 proposals, and shall determine the review cost per
proposal for Phase 1. Any proposers who are not short-listed and do not proceed to Phase 2
shall receive a refund consisting of the difference between the $100,000 application fee and the
per proposal review cost for Phase 1.
Vl. ClarificationReqardinqStipends
Proposers will not receive stipends or other reimbursement for development of Phase 1 or
Phase 2 proposals. See PRD Section 0200. Paraqraph 21.
Any questions regarding this Addendum should be submitted in writing to the Procurement
Department to the attention of the individual named below, with a copy to the City Clerk's Office
at RafaelGranado@m iam ibeachfl.qov.
Telephone:
305-673-7000, ext. 6218 KristvBada@m iam i beachfl.
103
Proposers are reminded to acknowledge receipt of this addendum as part of your PRD
submission.
Sincerely,
Alex Denis
Procurement Director
104