469-2004 RDA Reso
RESOLUTION NO. 469-2004
A RESOLUTION OF THE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE
MIAMI BEACH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AUTHORIZING THE
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT NUMBER 4 TO
THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE MIAMI BEACH REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY AND THE STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
MANAGEMENT SERVICES, FACILITIES AND BUILDING
CONSTRUCTION DIVISION (DMS), FOR THE RENOVATION AND
RESTORATION OF THE COLONY THEATRE (PROJECT); SAID
AMENDMENT APPROVING AND ACCEPTING ASSIGNMENTS TO THE
RDA OF THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN DMS AND THE PROJECT
CONSTRUCTION MANAGER, MCCARTNEY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY,
AND THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN DMS AND THE PROJECT
ARCHITECT OF RECORD, RJ HEISENBOTTLE ARCHITECTS
RESPECTIVELY; AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO
NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE ANY ANCILLARY AGREEMENTS
NECESSARY TO ACCOMPLISH SAID ASSIGNMENTS AND, AS A
FURTHER CONDITION TO THE AFORESTATED ASSIGNMENTS,
AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO NEGOTIATE AND
EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH DMS REGARDING THE
DISBURSEMENT OF THE REMAINING UNPAID FEES IN THE
AGREEMENT BETWEEN DMS AND THE RDA; IN THE EVENT THE
AFORESTATED ASSIGNMENTS ARE NOT APPROVED, AND/OR THE
CONDITION HEREIN IS NOT SATISFIED, OR IN THE EVENT THAT
NEGOTIATIONS WITH DMS FOR THE UNPAID FEES ARE
UNSUCCESSFUL, THEN AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
TO MAINTAIN THE CURRENT AGREEMENT WITH DMS IN PLACE AND
DIRECT DMS TO COMPLETE THE PROJECT; FURTHER, SHOULD DMS
PROCEED WITH ITS INTENT TO TERMINATE THE AGREEMENT,
AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AS THE RDA'S DESIGNEE,
TO PURSUE ANY AND ALL LEGAL REMEDIES AGAINST DMS WITH
REGARD SAID TERMINATION OF THE AGREEMENT, IF ANY.
WHEREAS, the Colony Theatre Renovation Project (Project) began as a $1.5
rnillion concept project in early 1999, and in October 1999, the Miarni Beach
Redeveloprnent Agency (RDA) executed a Professional Services Agreement with the State
of Florida Departrnent of Managernent Services ("OMS") (the Agreement) to provide
design, pre-construction, and construction management at risk services for the Project; and
WHEREAS, this is a follow-up item from the RDA Meeting of March 17,2004 and
the RDA memorandurn that explained the need for a substantial change order to keep the
Project rnoving; and
WHEREAS, during the discussion of the Project at the Meeting, the Chairrnan and
Members raised the issue of whether the RDA needed both its staff and DMS to act as the
contract adrninistrator with regard to the Project; and
WHEREAS, the Adrninistration was requested to explore two possibilities with OMS:
1) for DMS to continue on the Project and forfeit any remaining fees due under the
Agreernent; or 2) for OMS to assign the agreements that OMS has with the Project
Construction Manager (general contractor), McCartney Construction Company, and the
Project Architect of Record, RJ Heisenbottle Architects, to the City, and refund a portion, if
not all, of the fees that the RDA paid to DMS under the Agreernent; and
WHEREAS, staff advised OMS of these alternatives and DMS has, by letter,
advised the RDA that its intent is to terminate the Agreement with the ROA; OMS has,
however, agree to assign the Project Construction Manager and Project Architect
agreernents to the RDA; and
WHEREAS, Article 10 of the Agreement, which is referred to in the OMS letter,
allows for terrnination "by either party upon seven (7) days' notice by rnutual agreement, or
should one party fail substantially to perform in accordance with its terms through no fault
of the other"; and
WHEREAS, given the options available to the ROA, the Executive Director
recornmends that the Chairrnan and Members accept OMS' proposed assignment of the
Project Construction Manager agreernent and the Project Architect agreernent, from DMS,
as assignor, to the RDA, as assignee, and, as a condition of the ROA's acceptance of said
assignments, that the Executive Director first be authorized to negotiate and execute an
agreement with DMS, regarding the disbursement of the remaining fees under the DMS
Agreement; and
WHEREAS, in the alternative, the Executive Director would recommend that, 1) if
the aforestated assignrnents are not approved, or 2) the Executive Director cannot reach
agreement with DMS regarding the disbursernents of fees pursuant to the OMS
Agreernent, then the DMS Agreernent should be rnaintained, OMS directed to complete the
Project, and, should OMS proceed to terminate the Agreement, the Executive Director, as
the RDA's designee, to pursue any and all legal rernedies against OMS with regard said
termination of the Agreement, if any.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED BY THE CHAIRMAN AND
MEMBERS OF THE MIAMI BEACH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY authorizing the
Executive Director, to execute Amendrnent Number 4 to the Agreement between the
Miarni Beach Redevelopment Agency and the State of Florida Department of
Management Services, Facilities and Building Construction Division (OMS), for the
renovation and restoration of the Colony Theatre (Project); said Amendrnent approving
and accepting assignments to the RDA of the Agreernent between DMS and the
Project Construction Manager, McCartney Construction Cornpany, and the Agreernent
between DMS and the Project Architect of Record, RJ Heisenbottle Architects
respectively; authorizing the Executive Director to negotiate and execute any ancillary
agreements necessary to accomplish said assignrnents and, as a further condition to
the aforestated assignrnents, authorizing the Executive Director to negotiate and
execute an agreement with DMS regarding the disbursement of the remaining unpaid
fees in the Agreernent between DMS and the RDA; in the event the aforestated
assignments are not approved, and/or the condition herein is not satisfied, or in the
event that negotiations with DMS for the unpaid fees are unsuccessful, then
authorizing the Executive Director to rnaintain the current Agreement with OMS in
place and direct OMS to cornplete the Project; further, should DMS proceed with its
intent to terrninate the Agreernent, authorizing the Executive Director, as the RDA's
designee, to pursue any and all legal remedies against OMS with regard said
terrnination of the Agreernent, if any.
PASSED and ADOPTED this 14th
ATTEST:
~~ rM~
CITY CLERK
T:\AGENDA\2004\Apr1404\Regular\Colony reso1.doc
APPROVED AS TO
FORM & LANGUAGE
& FOR EXECUTION
$"#3/07
Date
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ITEM SUMMARY
m
Condensed Title:
A Resolution Of The Miami Beach Redevelopment Agency Authorizing The Executive Director, Or Designee, To Execute An
Amendment To The Agreement Between The Miami Beach Redevelopment Agency And The State Of Florida Department Of
Management Services, Facilities And Building Construction Division, ForThe Renovations And Restoration Of The Colony Theatre,
Accepting Assignment Of The Contract Between The State And The Construction Manager, McCartney Construction Company, And
Accepting The Assignment Of The Agreement Between The State And The Architect Of Record, RJ Heisenbottle Architects;
Authorizing The Executive Director Or Designee To Negotiate And Execute Any Ancillary Agreements Necessary To Accomplish
Said Assignments; Accepting The Voluntary Removal Of The State Of Florida Department Of Management Services From The
Project; And Authorizing The Executive Director Or Designee To Negotiate And Execute An Agreement On Remaining Unpaid Fees
Due To The State.
Issue:
Shall the City accept the assignment of the contract between the State of Florida Department of Management Services and
McCartney Construction Company, and the assignment of the agreement between the State of Florida Department of Management
Services and RJ Heisenbottle Architects on the Colonv Theatre oroiect?
Item Summary/Recommendation:
The Colony Theatre Renovation project began as a $1.5 million concept project in early 1999. A series of cultural facilities grants
were pieced together during the balance of that year and in October 1999, the City executed a Professional Services Agreement with
the State of Florida Department of Management Services ("DMS") to provide design, pre-construction, and construction management
at risk services. This is a follow-up item from the City Commission/RDA Board Meeting of March 17, 2004. During the discussion of
the item, the City Commission/RDA Board of Directors raised the issue of whether the City needed both City staff and DMS to act as
the .Contract Administrator" with regard to the construction effort at the Colony Theatre. The Administration was requested to
explore two possibilities with DMS: 1) DMS to continue on the Project and forfeit any remaining fees; or 2) Assign the Agreements
that DMS has with the Construction Manager (general contractor), McCartney Construction Company, and the Architect of Record,
RJ HeisenboUle Architects, to the City and refund a portion, if not all, of the fees that the City paid to DMS.
The City advised DMS of these altematives. DMS has formally advised the City that their intent is to terminate the agreement with
the City pursuant to the termination clause within the Contract and will agree to assign the Construction Manager and Architect
agreements to the City. Article 10 of the Agreement between DMS and the City, allows for termination "by either party upon seven
(7) days' notice by mutual agreement, or should one party fail substantially to perform in accordance with its terms through no fault of
the other." DMS has advised the City that it intends to process the current change order that was approved by the City
Commission/RDA Board in its March 17, 2004 meeting to keep the project moving. After this is done, DMS would prefer to assign its
contracts/agreements to the City and provide no further services.
Given the options available to the City and to DMS, the Administration recommends acceptance of the assignment of the
Construction Manager contract and the Architect agreement from DMS. Since DMS has not invoiced the City for services since
May 2002, it is recommended that the City Manager/Executive Director be authorized to negotiate and execute an agreement
reqardinq the distribution of the remaininq fees within the DMS Contract.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
IN/A
Financial Information'
Source of Funds: Amount ... Account Appr()ved
I I 1
Finance Dept. Total
Ci Clerk's Office Le islative Trackin
Tim Hemstreet, CIP Director
ity Manager
AGENDA ITEM
DATE
,~A-
4-Jl/~f/
,
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
CITY HALL 1700 CONVENTION CENTER DRIVE MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA 33139
www.miamibeachfl.gov
To:
From:
Subject:
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEMORANDUM
Chairman David Dermer and Date: April 14, 2004
Members of Miami Beach Redevelopment Agency
Jorge M. Gonzalez g, - /'
Executive Director ~
A RESOLUTION F THE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE MIAMI
BEACH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR, OR DESIGNEE, TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT TO THE
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE MIAMI BEACH REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY AND THE STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
MANAGEMENT SERVICES, FACILITIES AND BUILDING
CONSTRUCTION DIVISION, FOR THE RENOVATIONS AND
RESTORATION OF THE COLONY THEATRE, ACCEPTING ASSIGNMENT
OF THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE STATE AND THE CONSTRUCTION
MANAGER, MCCARTNEY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, AND
ACCEPTING THE ASSIGNMENT OF THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
STATE AND THE ARCHITECT OF RECORD, RJ HEISENBOTTLE
ARCHITECTS; AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OR
DESIGNEE TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE ANY ANCILLARY
AGREEMENTS NECESSARY TO ACCOMPLISH SAID ASSIGNMENTS;
ACCEPTING THE VOLUNTARY REMOVAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES FROM THE PROJECT;
AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OR DESIGNEE TO
NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT ON REMAINING UNPAID
FEES DUE TO THE STATE.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt the Resolution.
ANALYSIS:
The Colony Theatre Renovation project began as a $1.5 rnillion concept project in early
1999. A series of cultural facilities grants were pieced together during the balance of that
year and in October 1999, the City executed a Professional Services Agreernent with the
State of Florida Departrnent of Management Services ("DMS") to provide design, pre-
construction, and construction management at risk services. This is a follow-up item from
the City Cornrnission/RDA Board Meeting of March 17, 2004. The RDA Board
memorandurn that explained the need for a substantial change order to keep the project
rnoving appears as Attachment 1 to this mernorandum.
During the discussion of the item, the City Cornmission/RDA Board of Directors raised the
issue of whether the City needed both City staff and DMS to act as the "Contract
Adrninistrator" with regard to the construction effort at the Colony Theatre. The
COLONY THEA TRE
Redevelopment Agency Memorandum
April 14, 2004
Page 2 of 2
Adrninistration was requested to explore two possibilities with DMS:
1. DMS to continue on the Project and forfeit any rernaining fees; or
2. Assign the Agreements that OMS has with the Construction Manager (general
contractor), McCartney Construction Company, and the Architect of Record, RJ
Heisenbottle Architects, to the City and refund a portion, if not all, of the fees that
the City paid to OMS.
The City advised DMS of these alternatives. DMS has formally advised the City that their
intent is to terminate the agreernent with the City pursuant to the termination clause within
the Contract and will agree to assign the Construction Manager and Architect agreernents
to the City. OMS' letter to this effect is attached as Attachrnent 2.
Article 10 of the Agreernent between DMS and the City, which is referred to in the DMS
letter, allows for terrnination "by either party upon seven (7) days' notice by mutual
agreement, or should one party fail substantially to perform in accordance with its terrns
through no fault of the other." OMS has advised the City that it intends to process the
current change order for which funding was approved by the City Cornmission/RDA Board
in its March 17, 2004 meeting to keep the project moving. After this is done, DMS would
prefer to assign its contracts/agreements to the City and provide no further services.
Currently, OMS has not invoiced the City for services since May 2002, so consequently the
City has not issued payment to DMS since that time. The current unpaid balance within
the OMS agreement is approxirnately $60,000. It is expected that DMS will invoice for a
portion, if not all, of this amount since it may be due.
Given the options available to the City and to OMS, the Administration recornmends
acceptance of the assignrnent of the Construction Manager contract and the Architect
agreernent from DMS. Since DMS has not invoiced the City for services since May 2002, it
is recomrnended that the City Manager/Executive Director be authorized to negotiate and
execute an agreement regarding the distribution of the rernaining fees within the DMS
Contract.
JMG/RCMITH/lr
T:\AGENDA\2004\Apr1404\RegularlRDA MEMO COLONY 041404.doc
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ITEM SUMMARY
At:l:d.C~~.;t -1-
~
al
Condensed Title:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE MIAMI BEACH REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, OR DESIGNEE, TO EXECUTE AN
AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE MIAMI BEACH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
AND THE STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES, FACILITIES AND
BUILDING CONSTRUCTION DIVISION, FOR THE RENOVATIONS AND RESTORATION OF THE
COLONY THEATRE IN AN AMOUNT NOT -TO-EXCEED $396,762; AND APPROPRIATING $1,386,203
FROM CITY CENTER RDA FUNDS FOR THIS CHANGE ORDER AND OTHER ITEMS.
Issue:
Should the City approve Request for Change Order No.3 presented by DMS for additional costs at the
Colony Theater renovation?
Item Summary/Recommendation:
The Colony Theater Renovation project began as a $1.5 million concept project in early 1999. A series of
cultural facilities grants were pieced together during the balance of that year and in October 1999, the City
executed a Professional Services Agreement with the State of Florida Department of Management Services
("DMS") to provide design, pre-construction, and construction management at risk services. Through its
Agreement, which calls for DMS to hire both the Architect and the Construction Manager/Contractor, DMS
provides a practically full service operation and many of the normal duties of the City are fully delegated by
agreement to DMS as the City's Agent McCartney, as contractor for DMS, submitted a GMP for
construction in the amount of $5,568,002 in February 2003. In May 2003, DMS provided Request for Change
Order No.3 to the City in the amount of $557,769. The staff did not believe that the information provided
was sufficient to properly demonstrate that the City is contractually responsible for these charges and
declined to recommend this Request for Change Order to the RDA Board. DMS
subsequently submitted a revised request to staff in February 2004 in the amount of $789,019. This amount
has been recommended to the City by DMS for approval. The Request for Change Order contains a number
of requests for additional costs, for replacement of contingency, for additional General Conditions, additional
Overhead and Profit, additional Management Fees, additional Owner requested items as well as unforeseen
conditions. The amount recommended by the staff for RCO NO.3 is $396,762. There are additional items
not related to the Request for Change Order that should also be funded at this time. These are $301,335 for
AIPP and CIP fees; $500,000 to replace the State grant; and $188,106 for contingency and Owner requested
FF&E items. The total staff recommended aoorooriation with all items is $1,386,203.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
IN/A
Financial Information:
Source of
Funds:
I I
Finance Dept.
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking:
I JECh
Si n.Offs:
AGENDA ITEM
DATE
3f\
3-17-04
600
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
CITY HALL 1700 CONVENTION CENTER DRIVE MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA 33139
www.miamibeachfl.gov
~
To:
From:
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEMORANDUM
Chairman David Dermer and
Members of Miami Beach Redevelopment Agency
Jorge M. Gonzalez ~
Executive Direct~ L
Date: March 17,2004
A RESOLUTION OF THE CHAIRMAN D MEMBERS OF THE MIAMI
BEACH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR, OR DESIGNEE, TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT TO THE
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE MIAMI BEACH REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY AND THE STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
MANAGEMENT SERVICES, FACILITIES AND BUILDING
CONSTRUCTION DIVISION, FOR THE RENOVATIONS AND
RESTORATION OF THE COLONY THEATRE IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-
EXCEED $396,762; AND APPROPRIATING $1,386,203 FROM CITY
CENTER RDA FUNDS FOR THIS CHANGE ORDER AND ALSO TO
REPLACE $500,000 OF GRANT FUNDING THAT THE CITY APPLIED FOR
FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA'S CULTURAL FACILITIES PROGRAM,
BUT WAS NOT GRANTED DUE TO A LACK OF FUNDING BY THE
STATE; PROVIDING FOR PREVIOUSLY DUE ART IN PUBLIC PLACES
ALLOCATION FOR THE NEW PORTION OF THE BUILDING IN THE
AMOUNT OF $66,849; AND PROVIDING FOR CIP FEES IN THE AMOUNT
OF $234,486; AND PROVIDING FOR ALLOCATION FOR OWNER
REQUESTED ITEMS AND A NEW CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF
$188,106.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:
Subject:
Adopt the Resolution.
ANALYSIS:
The Colony Theater Renovation project began as a $1.5 million concept project in early
1999. A series of cultural facilities grants were pieced together during the balance of that
year and in October 1999, the City executed a Professional Services Agreement with the
State of Florida Department of Management Services ("DMS") to provide design, pre-
construction, and construction management at risk services. A detailed history of the
project was previously provided to you as a Status Report in September 2003 and appears
as Attachment 1 to this memorandum.
Through its Agreement, DMS provides a practically full service operation and many of the
normal duties of the City are fully delegated by agreement to DMS as the City's Agent.
The Agreement calls for OMS to hire both the Architect and the Construction
Manager/Contractor through its own competitive process and the respective agreements
with each party are executed and administered by DMS. The City's obligations under its
601
COLONY THEA TER
Commission Memorandum
March 17, 2004
Page 2 of B
~
Agreement with DMS are primarily to provide funding and to pay timely upon DMS'
approval of proper payment applications.
The OMS agreement calls for a number of deliverables during the design and pre-
construction stages. The deliverables are consistent with a standard construction manager
at risk process where a general contractor is brought into the design process at an early
stage to work with the Architect of Record in both developing the design documents and in
pricing the project. In this project, the Architect of Record hired by OMS is R.J.
Heisenbottle Architects ("RJHA") and the Construction Manager/Contractor is McCartney
Construction Company ("McCartney"). The total fee paid by the City to the
DMS/RJHAlMcCartney team for pre-construction services is $313,872, which included the
design fee for RJHA, the constructability review by McCartney, and the management fee
by DMS.
The final deliverable of the pre-construction process is, by Agreement, a Guaranteed
Maximum Price ("GMP"). The OMS Contract with McCartney defines Guaranteed
Maximum Price in Article 7.1 as follows:
'When the Design Development Documents are sufficiently
complete to establish the scope of work for the project or any
portion thereof, as generally defined by a design document
listing to be provided by the Architect-Engineer and the
Construction Manager upon execution of this Agreement, which
is to be used only as a guide in developing the specifications
and plan data necessary to establish a Guaranteed Maximum
Price, or at such time thereafter designated by the Owner, the
Construction Manager will establish and submit in writing to the
Owner for his approval a Guaranteed Maximum Price,
guaranteeing the maximum price to the Owner, for the
construction cost of the project or designated part thereof.
Such Guaranteed Maximum Price will be subject to modification
for changes in the project as provided in Article 10. However,
the actual price paid for the work by the Owner shall be the
actual cost of all work subcontracts, supply contract, direct labor
costs, direct supervision costs, and direct job costs as defined
under Article 9, plus the Construction Manager's fees or the
GMP, whichever is Jess when the work is complete (emphasis
added)."
A gross price for the City's Budgeting purposes was provided by the project team in July
2002 of $6,365.000 which served as the basis for the final appropriation by the City. This
amount was inclusive of DMS, RJHA, and McCartney's fees, including project contingency.
In this project, a formal GMP that is essentially in line with this final budget amount was
executed by DMS on behalf of the City in February 2003. It should be noted that contrary
to the language above, City staff was not permitted to review the GMP prior to DMS'
acceptance and execution of the GM P, despite several requests to do so. The City finally
received a copy of the executed GMP in April 2003. McCartney's GMP for construction is
$5,568,002.
602
COLONY THEA TER
Commission Memorandum
March 17, 2004
Page 3 of 8
L!II
For reasons of apparent expediency (according to OMS correspondence to the City), OMS
authorized construction activities to commence in November 2002, prior to the execution of
the GMP document and over the objections of City staff. City staff objections stemmed
primarily from the fact that the Construction Documents for the project had not yet been
permitted by the Building Department, project specifications were not complete, and a draft
GMP had not been provided for the City to consider. Soon after the project began,
McCartney experienced several difficulties with getting its temporary shoring for the
structure permitted by the Building Department and a Stop Work order was issued on the
project. Other issues arose, including a need for pilings, structural repairs, asbestos
abatement, and plurnbing and electrical issues that, according to the project team, were
not addressed within the GMP. However, the Stop Work order, and the issues that caused
it, resulted in a 10 week delay to the project.
Soon after this occurrence, McCartney submitted to OMS a request to be compensated for
this 1 O-week delay as well as for all of the items noted above from the Project Contingency
in an amount of $78,596 plus an additional 1 0 weeks of time, which was approved by OMS.
Shortly thereafter, OMS further authorized additional charges against the Project
Contingency for remobilization, additional plumbing work, actual costs that exceeded the
projected budget amounts, and some City requested items. The total Project Contingency
of $127,046 was fully expended as authorized by OMS by June 2003. In fairness to the
project team, the original contingency was extremely low to address unforeseen conditions
and Owner requested changes, although many of the items mentioned above do not fall
under these categories.
It should be noted that the City is not a signatory on any of these actions and was not
recognized as an active participant in this process. This was done despite the fact that
Article 7.4 of the Agreement states, in part, "The Construction Managerwill be required to
furnish documentation evidencing the expenditures charged to this contingency prior to the
release of funds by the Owner." In these contract sets, "Owner" is explicitly defined as
"The City of Miami Beach."
In May 2003, DMS provided Request for Change Order (RCO) No.3 to the City in the
amount of $557,769. According to the documents that were provided as back-up to this
request, this amount was requested to replace the depleted contingency, to increase
compensation to McCartney for alleged unforeseen conditions, to pay for City requested
items, and to address overruns in budgeted allowance categories that were set aside
because construction commenced prior to completion of design and specifications. The
staff did not believe that the information provided was sufficient to properly demonstrate
that the City is contractually responsible for these charges and declined to recommend this
Request for Change Order to the RDA Board at that time. Since May 2003, the
Construction Manager and AlE have continued to add items to this RCO and the current
request to the Commission/RDA Board is $789,019. This amount has been recommended
to the City by DMS for approval.
603
COLONY THEA TER
Commission Memorandum
March 17, 2004
Page 40'8
~
Of this final RCO amount, $127,301 is requested to address the initial delay issues noted
above and to address alleged additional costs to the project that have been incurred and
approved by OMS since May 2003. The items in this latter category were funded by OMS
from the Contingency Allowance in the original GMP, in the amount of $127,046, which
they slightly exceeded. The funding of these items were addressed by OMS through
Authorizations, which are similar to Change Orders but are used, under the Agreement, to
re-allocate funding within the overall GMP amount from other contract items.
A summary of the Authorizations is as follows (See Attachment 2) and will be further
described and detailed below:
Authorization No. 1 in the amount of $78,596
Authorization No.2 in the amount of $23,320
Authorization No.3 in the amount of $25,385
Authorization No.4 in the amount of $122,400 (Re-allocation of Seating Allowance)
Authorization No.5 in the amount of $118,357
Authorization NO.6 in the amount of $133,091
Authorizations Nos. 1, 2 and 3 were authorized by OMS, without proper Owner
participation. In Authorization No.4, OMS reallocated the Allowance set aside in the GMP
for Seating in the auditorium in order to cover the shortfalls in the Contingency due to the
above described previous authorizations.
It should be noted that the use of Authorizations is limited by Contract to move money
between line items in the GMP as needed. Authorizations cannot be used to reduce or
increase the scope of the project. In practice, the intent is to use Authorizations to remove
funds from line items where the actual costs were lower than budgeted to other line items
where actual costs are higher than budgeted. It is City staffs opinion that the
Authorizations were utilized improperly in this instance.
Approximately $37,822 of the requests in Authorizations Nos. 1, 2 and 3 is for items that
are prospective. These items were captured in the original GMP as Allowances due to the
fact that the project was not fully designed with specifications when the GMP was
executed. As the design and specifications are progressing, these Allowance line items
are insufficient to pay for the actual costs of the design and specifications that the AlE is
providing to the Construction Manager to price. The present tense is being used here to
denote the fact that portions of the building have yet to be designed and/or specifications
developed.
Additionally, approximately $43,474 of the request in authorizations 1, 2 and 3 is due to
true unforeseen conditions that were encountered during the course of construction.
These include asbestos abatement, and modifications to the electrical and plumbing
systems to fit the proposed design to the actual conditions. In addition, there is $3,218 for
an Owner change for an audio console for operational reasons. The total is composed of
$16,089 in Authorization No.1; $5,218 in Authorization No.2; and $25,385 in Authorization
NO.3. The staff recommends payment of these amounts.
604
COLONY THEA TER
Commission Memorandum
March 17, 2004
Page 5 of 8
~
The staff does not recommend payment of $62,147 in Authorization No.1 and of$18,102
in Authorization No.2 for a total of $80,879 because these are items which should have
been foreseen by OMS and its team; are regulatory in nature; should have been addressed
during the pre-construction phase of the project; or should be funded by the approved
General Conditions in the GMP.
The re-allocations of the Seating Allowance in Authorization No. 4 is also not
recommended for approval by the staff since it was done without prior consultation with the
City and would leave unfunded a fundamental portion of the theater, the seating.
OMS has also submitted Authorizations No.5, in the amount of $118,357, and No.6, in the
amount of $133,091, which potentially further increase the cost of the project..
Authorization Nos. 5 and 6 once again were issued by DMS without the proper participation
and against the recommendation of the Owner. At this time the City had already informed
DMS that their cost proposals and requests for additional funds were not properly
substantiated and that no further approval would be given by the Owner until all items were
clearly presented and contractually justified by OMS in accordance with the Agreement.
These Authorizations also include several items which exceed allowances established in
the GMP which are being exceeded as designs and specifications are completed. Some of
the items, in the amount of $76,261, in Authorization No.5 and $6,200 in Authorization
No.6 for a total of $82,461 are for unforeseen conditions in the project and recommended
by the staff for payment. $7,000 in Authorization No.5 is for Owner requested items and is
also recommended by the staff for approval.
Items in the amount of $43.939, in Authorization No. 6 are for improperly executed
changes by DMS which the City may have to fund because they were not included in the
GMP, but have either been already installed or because they are needed for the proper
operation of the building. These changes are recommended by the staff for payment as
required for the project's operations.
Items in the amount of $35,096, in Authorization No.5 and in the amount of $63,618 in
Authorization No.6, fora total of$98,714 are not recommended by the staff. These items
once again deal with conditions which should have been foreseen; regulatory issues;
allowances exceeded by recent designs not completed prior to GMP; time delays not
approved by the City; additional sales taxes for items not approved; and for items which
should have been funded by the approved General Conditions in the GMP.
DMS chose to ignore the City's comments and recommendations and continued to issue
authorizations which were not properly funded and which continued to make use of GMP
allowances for other required work that would then become unfunded. The allowance for
the seating previously mentioned is a case in point. DMS has now partially eliminated
another allowance, in the amount of $241 ,678, for stage rigging in order to cover further
shortfalls in the contingency which have not been substantiated or justified. DMS intends
to restore this portion of the allowance if Request for Change Order NO.3 is approved.
605
COLONY THEA TER
Commission Memorandum
March 17, 2004
Page 6 of 8
~
Based on staffs request, this RCO No. 3 amount has been divided by OMS into four
separate categories. Some of the total amount is intended to fund the Authorizations
previously approved by DMS which were partly funded by available allowances and which
were not properly justified and not approved with the participation of the Owner:
Owner Requested Changes
Regulatory Changes
Unforeseen Conditions
Scope Chanoes
Total
$202,252
$111,593
$352,465
$122.709
$789,019
Change Order No.3 consists of a request to restore the funds used from the allowances
for the previous Authorizations (discussed in detail above), in the amount of $251 ,703. In
addition, it includes further requests for additional costs, in the amount of $537,316, for
replacement of a contingency, for additional General Conditions, Overhead and Profit,
Management Fees, and some Owner requested items as well as some unforeseen
conditions.
Of the requested amount, the staff recommends that $56,867 in Change Order NO.3 be
approved for items which the Owner requested or which were for legitimate unforeseen
conditions. The staff also recommends that $62,155 be approved for items which may
have been improperly approved by OMS which were not included in the GMP, but are
either necessary or already under construction. These amounts, coupled with the $180,092
previously recommended from Authorizations 1 through 6, add up to $299,114 and are the
maximum that the staff is willing to recommend for additional construction costs on this
project.
The staff also recommends that $13,106 for prospective changes requested by the theater
operators and $150,000 for an additional contingency be appropriated for the project but
that they be rnanaged by staff and not be made part ofthe increase to the GMP in Request
for Change Order No.3. All other costs included in RCO No.3 are considered by the staff
to be the responsibility of the OMS project team, including the replacement of the
allowances used as additional contingency. Therefore, the staff does not recommend
funding those costs.
These additional costs in RCO NO.3 are not recommended for varied reasons. These
include known regulatory issues; items which should have been foreseen during the pre-
construction services phase; and items which should be the responsibility ofthe contractor
as part of their means and methods. In addition, there are costs related to the RCO that
must be adjusted to the approved amounts but are currently included by OMS as if the
complete Change Order were approved by the City for funding. Of these items staff
recommends that additional General Conditions, Overhead and Profit, Bonds and
Insurance be funded based only on the amount recommended for approval which is
$299,114 as stated above.
In addition, the DMS Agreement calls for its fee to be increased by 2.5% with every
addition in funding to the project. This would increase the amount requested in Change
606
COLONY THEA TER
Commission Memorandum
March 17, 2004
Page 70f8
~
Order No.3 by $19,725 if the full request were approved. Based on the amount
recommended by the staff, the increase to OMS' fee is $7,478.
OMS has also presented separately, a request for additional services to RJHA in the
amount of $56,463.98. This request covers three categories; additional Threshold
Inspections and Field Observations; additional design for unforeseen conditions; and
additional design for Owner requested items which are required for the proper operation of
the building. The staff does not recommend additional services for the Threshold and
Field Observation costs because the allowances have been exceeded due to the inability
of the team to obtain proper permits and the delays caused by the Stop Work order and
other structural issues that should have been foreseen and covered under the pre-
construction services phase of the project. The staff also does not recommend the
additional services for the design of rigging and a catwalk since these are essential items in
a theater and should also have been covered in the pre-construction services. Therefore
the staff only recommends approval of additional services, in the amount of $1 0,170. This
amount is acceptable for the design of Owner requested items and for true unforeseen
conditions.
Separate from the recommended additional services request for RJHA, staff recommends
that $25,000 be appropriated for a third party Threshold I nspector to be contracted by staff
independently of the current project team. Staff is concemed that the present arrangement
where the structural Engineer of Record and the Threshold Inspector are the same entity
and may represent a conflict of interest.
The City had previously been awarded a 2003 Cultural Facilities Grant in the amount of
$500,000 that was approved by the CommissionlRDA Board as funding for this project.
However, due to funding challenges last fiscal year with the State budget, this funding from
the State was eliminated and will need to be replaced in order to meet present contractual
obligations to DMS, RJHA, and McCartney.
Originally, this project was managed by RDA staff and the project was transferred to the
CIP Office in October 2002. Funding was not allocated within the original appropriations
for either the CIP Office fee or the Art in Public Places contribution on the new construction
portion of the building. The AIPP allocation is determined to be, in accordance with the
City Ordinance, $66,849. The CIP management fee allocation is $234,486 based on the
percentages established for budgetary purposes. The staff also recommends that an
additional contingency be provided in the project to replace the original contingency already
exhausted. The staff also requests that $13,106 for Owner identified items be funded in
this appropriation.
If these fees and other allocations are added, and the total OMS Request for Change
Order No.3, in the amount of $789,019, is granted, and the grant amount of $500,000 is
replaced, then the request for additional funding at this time would be $1,753,460.
However, as noted above, staff does not believe that the Request for Change Order No.3,
as presented by DMS/RJHAlMcCartney, is fully warranted. After exhaustive review, staff
believes that $316,762 which includes the cost of additional construction, the additional
607
COLONY THEATER
Commission Memorandum
March 17, 2004
Page 8 of 8
fees for DMS and the additional services for RJHA is the appropriate amount for which the
City should be responsible. There is an additional amount, estimated at $80,000 by the
staff, which cannot be clearly established until the final amount of RCO No.3 is approved.
These costs are for General Requirements, Overhead and profit, Bond and Insurance
which are contractually based on percentages of construction costs and for approved time
extensions. Since these are not yet clearly established, the staff is only recommending an
estimated amount at this time. By comparison, the amount forthe General Requirements
requested by OMS but not recommended by the staff is $147,556. This exact amount can
be established after approval of Change Order No. 3 and if it exceeds the amount
estimated by the staff, the difference would be paid from the additional contingency
requested today.
Based on the RCO amount No.3 recommended by the staff of $316,762; the amount of
$80,000 for General Requirements, etc. described above; the amount of $301,335 for
AIPP and CIP fees; the amount of $500,000 to replace the grant; and the amount of
$188,106 for contingency and Owner requests, the total additional funds for the project
recommended by the staff is $1,386,203.
It should be noted that this represents a disagreement between City staff and the OMS
project team. The Request for Change Order No.3 and associated narrative back-up for
the RCO is attached as Attachment 2 and has been summarized above. A Summary Chart
of the staff recommendation appears in Attachment 3.
JMG/RCMITH/lr
T:\AGENDA\2004\Mar1704\RegulaAADA MEMO COLONY.doc
608
~
ATTACHMENT 1
~
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
CITY HALL 1700 CONVENTION CENTER DRIVE MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA 33139
'M'I/W.miamlbeac:hfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
From:
Mayor Dermer and Members of Date: September 10, 2003
the Miami Beach Redevelopment Agency
Jorge M. Gonzalez ~.. ~
City Manager Of/~ U
. STATUS REPORT ON THE COLONY THEATER RENOVATION PROJECT
To:
Subject:
BACKGROUND
The Greater Miami Concert Association, on behalf of the City of Miami Beach, initiated a process
to procure grant funding for the renovation and repair of the Colony Theater. With the efforts of
the Concert Association, in early 1999, Miami-Dade County Cultural Affairs Department engaged,
on a pro-bono basis, the Zeidler Roberts Partnership, Inc., to develop conceptual plans and cost
estimates for the expansion and renovation of the Colony Theater. In September 1999, the City
was awarded a $775,000 Miami-Dade County Cultural Affairs Grant; but the Plan failed to address
many important elements and contained a preliminary cost estimate of $1.5 Million to undertake
the Project.
On July 21, 1999, the City Commission authorized the City Administration to apply to the State of
Florida, Division Of Cultural Affairs (SOF), for a $500,000 Cultural Facilities Grant. The City
pledged $1,000,000 in (2-for-1) matching funds, from the following sources:
Miami-Dade County Cultural Affairs Grant
ADA Improvements (Bond Fund 351)
Cultural Arts Council Loan
Total Funding Available:
$775,000
$ 60,000
$165.000
$1,000,000
On October 6, 1999, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No. 99-23348,
authorizing the City to execute a Professional Services Agreement with the State of Florida,
Department of Management Services (OMS) for construction management of the Colony Theater.
The DMS Program provides construction-management-at-risk and provides municipalities with
project management services from the onset of a project, throughout the design phase, bidding
process (resulting on a guaranteed maximum price), and culminating with construction oversight
and coordination.
On March 6, 2000, OMS authorized R.J. Heisenbotlle Architects (RJHA) - the Architect-of-
Records, selected through an RFQ process administered by DMS - to proceed with programming
and conceptual/advanced schematic design phases for the expansion and renovation of the
Colony Theater. The design had to address programmatic requirements, historic preservation
scope, ADA and other code-related deficiencies. It should be noted that the design development
phase was subject to extensive programming with input received from the operator and users of
the Colony Theater, the City's Historic Preservation Office, Property Management and the
Agenda Item ({Oil - 3A
Date 9-/0-tJ3
886
609
~
Ssptember 10, 2003
Commission Memorandum
Colony 7healBr status RsporI
PsQe20f7
Planning and Zoning Department.
In September 2000, RJHA presented three altemative design concepts to address expansion of
backstage areas, ADA requirements and other identified improvements. The altematives involved:
1. expanding the Colony into and over the alley on the south side of the building,
2. expanding below grade (basement), or
3. expanding to the east by incorporating a po~ion of the adjacent privately owned property.
Given the extent of the improvements/enhancements identified during this process, RJHA
exhausted attempts to design the Colony Theater's renovation within the parameters of the
existing footprint of the building. Because the Colony Theater has never been substantially
altered from its initial use as a cinema, the addition of a fly-space was considered a vital element
to become a true performance theater. The only way to accomplish this was to provide an
"addition" to the structure. At the very least, plans called for demolition of the back of the house,
which was found to have asbestos and other code and fire violations, and to build a vertical
addition, accommodating a fly-space, technical storage and dressing rooms.
. On December 15, 2000, RJHA - represented by Richard Heisenbottle, Terry Siegel and Gregory
Saldano - presented to a committee comprised by Jorge Gomez, William Cary, and Tom Mooney
from the City's Planning Department, Brad Judd from Property Management, Kent Bonde from the
RedevelopmentAgency, and Eric Fliss from the Colony's Operations Department, a new scheme,
calling for the removal of the rear 45 feet of existing building, construction of a new stage house,
small second and third floor service areas behind the stage, a fourth floor "Backstage" area,
elevator, stairs, and the addition of a new vestibule and exterior access ramp to provide ADA
access to the stage. The historic preservation scope involves removing the existing marquee and
storefront on Uncoln Road and retuming this fascia to its original historic appearance and
modifying the interior lobby, office and concession area to be more consistent with the building's
original design. RJHA presented Options "A" and "B" for this scheme, involving different size
additions to the facility. Option uA" involved the addition of 7,950 square feet at a hard construction
cost estimate of approximately $3.6 Million. Option "B" comprised a 9,520 square foot addition, for
a total construction/hard cost of $4.5 Million. According to RJHA, the design could not undergo
further value engineering without adversely impacting the scope and purposeofthe project. The
Administration concurred with this assessment and recommended proceeding with Option "B".
According to DMS, the total estimated cost of the project, inclusive of soft costs, would be
approximately $4,615,000, significantly exceeding the available bUdget.
On March 16, 2001, the City was awarded a National Park Service-Save America's Treasures
Grant, in the amount of $835.000, of which $700,000 was appropriated for the Colony Theater
project.
Total available funding sources at the time comprised the following:
887
610
Sep/smber 10, 2003
CommIssion Memotandum
Colony Theafsr SIa/us Repotf
Pege3of7
County Cultural Arts Grant/PACT:
ADA Improvements (Bond Fund 351)
Florida Dept of State Cultural Facilities Grant-
Phase I:
Cultural Arts Council Loan
National Park Service - Save America's
Treasures Grant:
Total Available Funding:
Estimated Budget:
Estimated Shortfall:
~
$ 775,000
$ 60,000 - City Match
$
$
500,000 - 2 for 1 City Match Required
165,000 - City Match Revised Amount
$ 700,000
$2,200,000
$4.615.000
($2,415,000)
On May 14, 2001, the Administration presented to the City's Finance and Citywide Project
Committee a request for additional funding for the Project, in the amount $1,415,000 from the
Miami Beach Redevelopment Agency (RDA).. The Committee voted in favor of recommending the
appropriation. Based on the Committee's recommendation, the RDA appropriated the funds on
June 27, 2001. The remaining $1,000,000 shortfall was expected to be funded from future
applications to the SOF- Cultural Facilities Grant Program (Phases II and III).
On July 10, 2001, Design Development Plans reCeived formal approval by the Design Review and
Historic Preservation Boards. Design and Construction Documents proceeded with anticipated
completion by March, 2002.
In August, 2001, the City applied for a second Cultural Facilities Grant in the amount of $500,000
from the SOF - Division Of Cultural Affairs. The City identified the additional appropriation from the
RDA and the National Parks Service Grant, as fulfilling the matching funds requirements. SOF
Funds from the second application were appropriated by the State in May, 2002.
The revised funding status at the time comprised the following:
Total Available Funding:
Estimated Budget:
Esllmated Shortfall:
RDA Appropriation on June 27, 2001
Florida Dept of State Cultural Facilities
Grant - Phase II:
Revised Esllmated Shortfall (atthe time):
$2,200,000
$4.615.000
($2,415,000)
$1.415,000 - City Match to the SOF Grant
$ 500,000 - 2 for 1 City Match Required
($ 500,000)
A third application in the amount of $500,000 was submitted in August, 2002, which was intended
to bridge the projected shortfall. Due to the recent budgetary issues at the State of Florida, the
funding process has been delayed. The Project has been ranked favorably and is included in a
priority list for the FY2004 application period.
Using RJHA preliminary Design Documents and cost estimates, in October, 2001, following a
bidding and selection process administered by OMS, a Contract was awarded to McCartney
Construction, for the Construction phase of the Project. At the time, the Contractor reviewed the
existing Construction Documentation and submitted a total Construction Budget Amount of
$3,100,000.
888
611
~
Seplsmber 10, 2003
Commlssion Memorandum
Colony ThetMr SllItus Repotf
Page 4 of7
In January 2002, Florida Power and Light mandated the placement of an 18 sq.ft. transformer
vault within the confines of the Colony Theater property, to handle the facility's anticipated
electrical load. Since there was virtually no room inside the Colony to place the vault, RJHA
presented a proposal to pad mount the vault in the public-right-of way, just north of the 9 ft
easement area, on the west side of the Colony. The proposal required the approval of the City's
Historic Preservation and Design Review staff as well as a right-of-way easement from the City in
order to proceed. The easement was contingent upon certain plans and specifications to be
provided by FP&L.
On February 8, 2002, Design and Construction Documents underwent preliminary review by
building trade, accessibility/ADA and fire inspectors, which triggered the need to apply for certain
regulatory waivers due to hardships encountered in dealing with certain code-related issues,
including, but not limited to:
. Flood plain elevation - in order to preserve the historically significant interior portions of
the building {terrazzo flooring, walls, etc.}, a variance application to the City's Flood
Variance Board was submitted and approved on April 5, 2002.
. Wind-load criteria - the existing elements of the building that do not comply with the
technical requirements of the Code required an application for a waiver. The Project was
set to go before the Board of Rules and Appeals (BORA) for a waiver on April 25, 2002,
however due to changes to the Building Code, jurisdiction over waiving certain technical
codes for historic buildings, including but not limited to, the alteration, repair and restoration
thereof, was shifted from BORA to the local Building Official. As such, the Colony Theater
became the first waiver application to be reviewed by the City's Building Official and
Structural Plans Examiner. The wind load requirements in the historic portion of the
building, required extensive coordination with the City's Historic Preservation Office to
determine the impacts to the project. A mutually acceptable solution was reached in
September, 2002.
. Accessibility - Waivers were sought from the State of Florida's Historic Preservation
Office to avoid a required enlargement of the lobby area to meet accessibility requirements.
If implemented, the enlargement would have adversely impacted its historic characteristics
and reduce adjacent circulation space needed to comply with NFPA egress requirements.
A waiver was also sought from the Florida Building Commission because vertical
accessibility is not possible to all levels of the facility. The waivers have been granted,
subject to certain conditions involving the provision of handicapped accessible seating with
specific sight-line requirements, which have since been addressed in the final Documents.
On March 26, 2002, McCartney Construction presented the design development cost estimates,
which exceeded the available construction budget of $3.1 million by $577,140. The most
significant line item differences from the budget approved in March 2001 were concrete work, life-
safetylfire sprinkler systems, HVAC, Equipment and Finishes. Additional cost overruns not
contemplated in the estimate, included certain interior finishes, required for Historic Preservation,
including but not limited to, the creation of a free-standing ticket booth in the entrance lobby.
889
612
Sep/Bmber 10, 2003
Commission Memorandum
Colony 7lIeater SI&/U& RspoTf
Page 5of7
On May 31,2002, Staff met with the Design Team, McCartney Construction (Contractor) and the
State of Florida's Department of Management Services (OMS), to review the 100% construction
document cost estimates. The total projected cost of the Project stood at $6,335,000 or
$1,720,000 over the Project Budget of $4,615,000. The increase in cost included, but was not
limited to, an estimated $405,000 in requested enhancements that were necessary to make the
Project operational, including rigging, lighting, new seating, acoustical fabric panels and railings in
the auditorium.
On June 2, 2002, the Administration again went before the City's Finance and Citywide Project
Committee (Committee) to request the additional funding to bridge the shortfall. The Committee
voted in favor of appropriating. $1,750,000 towards the Project. The RDA subsequently
appropriated the funding at its meeting on July 10, 2002.
At that time, the total funding dedicated towards the Project was as follows:
Source
City Center ROA TIF funds .
. ADA Improvements (Bond Fund 351)
Cultural Arts Council Loan
Miami-Dade County Cultural Affairs
National Park Service
State of Florida - Cultural Facilities Ph I
State of Florida - Cultural Facilities Ph II
State of Florida - Cultural Facilities Ph III
Total:
Funding
$ 3,165,000
60,000
165,000
775,000
700,000
500,000
500,000
_ 500.000
$6,365,000
% ofTotal
50%
1%
3%
12%
10%
08%
08%
08% (Pendina)
100%
On September 18, 2002, the 100% Construction Drawings were re-submitted to the City for final
review and approval for permitting. The plans reflected changes and comments requested by the
various building trade Plan Reviewers, the Fire Department, Miami-Dade County, and all other
applicable local and state regulatory entities.
On November 5, 2002, the Documents received final approval, allowing the Permit to be issued
for the Project. Contract administration of the DMS Construction Administration Agreement
Project was officially handed over to the Capital Improvements Projects Office.
On February 25, 2003, the Construction Manager contractwas amended to reflect a Guaranteed
Maximum Price (GMP) of $5,568,002 for construction. The Total Project Cost, including RJHA's
and DMS' professional fees, is $6,314,610. The balance of the funding in the amount of $50,390
remains unallocated.
CURRENT PROJECT STATUS
Despite objections from the CIP Office to OMS to release the Project without a completed GMP
amount, ground breaking occurred during the first week of December, 2002, with extensive
asbestos abatement throughout the structure. DMS communicated to the City its authority to start
the construction process, pursuant to the conditions of its Contract with the City. In mid-
December demolition of the main stage house and the non-historic elements of the lobby began.
890
613
mJ=~
Colony TIIea/JJr SI8lus Report
Page 6of7
During this process, certain alleged unforeseen conditions have come to light, which in tum have
contributed to delays and additional cost requests from the Contractor. Contractor identified
conditions include, but are not limited to, weakened/corroded concrete ceiling support beams over
the lobby area, additional asbestos material uncovered in the marquis, a determination by the
structural engineer that specifications for the structural bracing required extensive modification in
order to adequately shore the remaining structure, unanticipated dewatering, and a complete
replacement of a corroded plumbing system beneath the. building.
Additionally, it should be noted that at the time of the last appropriation (July 10, 2002), many of
the line items, particular1y for interior furnishings, fixtures and equipment, including certain
mechanical and HV AC components, were identified as allowances in the GMP, based on current
unit pricing. Since then, as RJHA has developed specifications and drafted details and final
designs, many of these items have been priced higher than originally estimated. The CIP office is
in the process of performing a cursory review of the Construction Documents to evaluate the
extent of the issues affecting the Project Cost.
~
Collectively, these issues, if not contested by the City, will deplete the Project's Contingency,
which represents less than 2.3% of the Project's Budget
At the request ofthe CIP Office, DMS and McCartney Construction have been asked to provide a
breakdown of McCartney's additional costs for which they have requested additional funds. The
estimate, in the amount of $557,769, was submitted on August 12, 2003 and is being evaluated
by the CIP Office. This amount also includes RJHA additional services in the amount of $40,000
and an adjustment to DMS' Construction Administration fee of $13,605:
Additionally, in order to operate the theater, phone lines and a genie lift need to be installed. This
cost is estimated at $10,000 and is not currently included in the GMP amount.
It should also be noted that certain additional administrative costs associated with this Project
have not been included in the original Budget, but need to be factored in now. These include the
CIP Project Management fee of 4.8% of the total Project's cost and the Art In Public Places
(AIPP) allocation of 1.5% of the new construction cost (AIPP applies only to 40% of the
Construction Budget).
Based upon the current information available, the CIP office is not in agreement with OMS that the
full amount of additional funds are warranted. CIP is requesting additional information to support
OMS' findings before any further action is taken, or an increase to the Project is recommended for
Commission/Board consideration. It is still premature to determine what the final recommendation
of staff will be. We will provide regular updates as the Project progresses.
As noted above, this Project is officially and legally managed by the Florida Department of
Management Services (OMS). Within this structure, both the Project Architect (RJHA) and the
Contractor (McCartney) have agreements with OMS and not with the City. However, through
OMS' Contract, the City is required to pay each entity upon approval by DMS.
891
614
, .
Sep/Bmb6r 10, 2003
Comm/asion Memonmdum
Colony Theater statua Report
Page 7 of7
CURRENT COST STATUS
Project Costs to Date as of August 6, 2003
Construction (Hard) Costs:
Architectural & Engineering (Soft) Costs:
DMS Management:
Total Project Cost:
Budget:
$5,568,002
$ 585,272
$ 161.336
$6,314,610
Payments
To Date:
$1,121,995
$ 508,184
$ 101.095
$1,731,274
Cost To
Complete:
$4,446,007
$ 71,088
$ 60.241
$4,583,336
It should also be noted that even though the Project has been ranked favorably by the Cultural
Facilities Committee, the City's Phase III Cultural Facilities funding application to the State of
Florida, in the amount of $500,000, was not funded this year due to funding shortfalls at the State
level. As such, the City or RDA may have to front these funds until funding is approved, if ever.
PROJECT SCHEDULE
Even though the Project has experienced certain delays due primarily to conditions not
uncharacteristic of many historic structures in the City, work has been proceeding at a steady pace.
All grade beams and the concession and stage slabs have been poured, electrical under grounding
has been completed up to the south west corner of the building, the fire alarm rough-in conduits at
the front lobby and under seating areas are underway, clipping and strapping of the Auditorium
framing (wind-load related code requirements) is almost complete, and HVAC air retum duct
fabrication is underway. The current critical path schedule reflects substantial completion of the
Project mi ay, 2004, approximately 6 months behind the original schedule.
.JEC:A~ .
""l'_......_~doc
892
615
ATTACHMENT 2
This is a request for additional funding for Colony Theatre. We ~ are requesting an
approxirnate 14% increase to the cost of the contract. Historically, restoration projects of
this scope tend to cost 20-25% above the amount originally figured. This 14% increase is
considered below average for this type of project. '
~
Increase in funding is necessary for owner requested changes, building department and
governmental changes, unforseen field conditions, and scope changes. Also included in
this change order is $150,000.00 set aside for contingency for future items that may be
affected by the above four categories. Please note that this contract is being performed
under a CM at risk agreement. The owner only pays for the actual labor, material and
subcontractor costs that are incorporated into the project. Unspent funds in this category
are returned to the owner at the end of the project. Due to the nature of this project, some
of the line items are estimates of future costs. The actual costs may be more or less than
. projected. Again, the owner only pays for the actual cost of work-for these line items.
The following pages show a complete breakdown ofthe requested funding. In order to fund
ongoing construction operations. budgeted items such as seating and rigging have been
eliminated and the funds transferred to categories that needed additional funding. After
this request is approved, we will replace the funds in those line items.
When the guaranteed maximurn price was established, the interior design of the lobby and
auditorium was not complete. Amounts were budgeted at the time for these areas, but an
accurate figure could not be provided until the actual plans and specifications were
completed. This contributed to the amount of additional funds needed. Unforseen
conditions such as asbestos and code violations were found after selective demolition was
performed. Because of the asbestos removal, new finishes are required in the existing
bathrooms which were not to be touched as part of the contract. In certain areas, the
existing roof was not tied down to the building. New tie beams had to be poured and
structural members anchored to the new beams.
Since plans of the building did not exist, the structural engineer did not know the exact
location of existing pilings and grade beams. Structural adjustments had to be made as
construction progressed. The existing ceiling conditions dictated changes to structural
members and HVAC.
After removal of the lobby floor, it was discovered that the existing plumbing lines to the
existing restaurant and bathrooms were deteriorated and had to be replaced. The ceiling
in the lobby was structurally unsound and had to be reinforced. The project was also
impacted by preparation for the FT AA Conference. All work pertaining to this change order
is itemized in the following pages.
The funding request is for:
1. CO #3 for construction costs including contingency for future changes $789,019.00
3. OMS Fee
$ 52,316.00
$ 19.725.00
Total $861,060.00
)
2. AlE additional services
616
~
Department of Management Services
Division of Facilities Management and Building Construction
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER
Change Order Number' 1
State Project Number' mMR - QClO4?OIl
State Project Name. Rp:IV\VSI,innco: ~nn RM;'nntltinm: f'nlnny ThMltrp.
ArchitectlEngineer' R' J-l..i...nhottl.. Arnhiff'.C:t, P A
Address- ~.40 Minl\!'t'SII A VP.I1I1P. Snitp. 10
Cil)'" . r."",1 (hhl..,.
StatelZip. Fiorillo n 114
Phone' ";O~..44I\. 77CJCJ
Contractor: Me.f'Orln~ rron_'Nion r.nmpo'1}'
Address. 4ROO ~w fi41h AVP:1lI1p. ~lIitp. 10Q
City: novip
State/Zip. Flnrillo 111 14
Phone' CJ~4-liRCJ.7R7R
DE N OF CHANGE (An""h additional Dal!eS if Decrease In Increase In
See attached: ~
1. Cost breakdown labeled 3 Revised C -
2. Desaiption of items
3. Revised Change Summary dated 2/10/04
Owner requested changes $202,252.00
Building Dept. and Governmental changes 5tI 1,593.00
Unforseen Conditions 5352,465.00
Scope changes $122,709 00
5789,019.00
Notice To Proceed Date: 11/18/02 Original Contract
Sum: 55,568,002.00
Contract Ti"",. D""" Date* . , Sum: $5 568 002.00 55 568 002.00
Oril!:itlal Contract Time 427 1/13/04 Subtotal
Present Contract Time 497 3/28/04 Net A ucO $ 789019.00
This Change Pres. Contract Sum $5,568,002.00
Addffieduct ) 112
New Contract Time 609 7/26/04 New C'nntract sum 56357021.00
This Change Order is an amendment 10 the Contract Agreement between Contractor and the Owner, and all contract provisions shall apply unless
specifically exempted. The amount and time change designated are the maximum agreed to by both the Owner and the Contractor fur this change.
Tn t"lrV1!1:licito:n:.tinn nrth~ fure.(1ling Rcljl'Vrnro:nt..: in rnntMId tim~ AM r.nntMtr.t ~nm thp. nm~Mnr h~p.hy ~lf"J1qf':q OwnP.T finm ~II r.lJ:tim~J ct~1:lnrf~ nr
~.tltP.C: nfBf'fion AT;c:.ing nut nfthl':: trnnC:Arlinnq p.vf":nt~ Anti ncr.ntTf'i'J'lN":!il gjvillg ri~l'": to thiq. rtumgp Order TIli!': writtf'I:M l:h:mgr Orc1P:r ic: thp. fl!rltiTP.
~gT"'..n1f'nt hMwp"", Own..". onll rnn1Tlldor with ~ to thi. OulW flnIp,. No other agreements or modifications shall apply to this contract
amendment mJless expressly provided herein. Thi~ rh~n~ OMf":'I'" l"~~t~ fin~1 A~~' AM-inn p''I1'''II.:l1~nt to ~;rm 170 ~7 Florins. ~?tnt~
(.l2l8).
APPRO D:
"-ignature, Architect/Engineer
Signature, Contractor
Signature, Client
resentative
Signature, Department of
Management Services
DllcsOO6
Revised 4ID3
617
M 0 0 0 0 0 ~
0 0 0 0 0 ~
I"- ei ~ ei ei ~ Sl....
~ 0 ~ 0 a; .:;; CD
10 .... 0
" N <<i <<i N N ..; CDOl
, a: III
.... N N MCL.
=II:
!& ~ a:
I"- 0
<0 0
01: ,.:
OlD 10
C/).r;
0
/1t 0 0 ; 0 0
I: 10 0 ~' 8
'Q.Q N .... ~
-- cD <<i cD N N
CD'-
.- 'Q 0> ~ N N
I.LI:
0
0
0 .l!j
8 0l6; 10
~ ~ Ill)
~ 0 Ea: ~
~ 'Q p)
..... i 0> =1i I"-
m ;g 0> ~ ~~
, 0
0) ~ ~ lD ~ i
..c:..J ~ :E ~
I-u. ~ 0 0 d ....... I"- ~
M 0 ~ CD CD 0> a;
:>. ~g> M
c..c: ... t ..;
0 w 0 w ~ oJ!
0(,) z g z g
-m Q 0
a:: 00) l- I- i:;
U) .0
UaJ UJ W I- ~ 0 ; 0 ~ .... M
W :J a ~ li 0 0 :J 8- Q
0).- 0 (") ..; - l"-
e w a:: OJ 0 ~ x E
..c:E a: CL. I- ~ (') CD ~
a:: z I- :J fI) ;::::
-m a: w 0 ai ~ -c: CD
-.- W !;( 0 i N It) .9 .... 0
10 ~ N -" :J E
o:?i c I- '- '0 U
a: C/) tit ~ ~ :J li CD
C 0 < E
W .2-0 w OJ iU 'Q m <Ii
Cl i:; I:
C!> -m z ~ 0 ~ I: C/) I!!
III
(00 c( ~I /1t :J
Z o a:: J: t m iU u
0 ~ is '0.
<C 1i)c .s; 0 III 0
~ '-CD ID E 1Il
:J: 0)- l .EI: g> ~ C/)
0::8 ~ ~ if! 1ii. U> .
U {J >- ~ ...
l:: I: a: oil 'x CD
~.- r CD CL. EI!! CD fj 1i
..J 01 0 ~o .... c
50 I: 8
0> "" III ;;;::
0 ~ I: ... ~I!! ii: .... ~
.-v ~ ~ 8
100 0> E lii-B t~ fJ
.S 0 'I> 0 ~ I:
>r- ...J ~ :S ID :s; .r; '- .r;
Lt.. >oS -Sl =II: 1;; _CL. _10 U> ...
0 E - lllC/) E '3:
2:l:cU 1:'- I: i I!! oCt:::
C 1Il:J < i 0 ;:]1"- ~
CDO= ._ 0> E
0) c.C/) a: :;::l fj ~ '- ~~
C/) .- - III 0- 0
0:: _u~ E - _Lt.. .r;
OCD -0 N E '0 a: 16 0
1:2ljJ ll)~ t -c: Ol ECD a:
CD 1;; o~ is 0 ... ~ ;:] ....0 J:J
EI:-" I: CD .l: ~ 'B <.c O' 0) I:
CDoo 0> :EC/)~ - -.2 ~S'l c 0
010 III ,-< .c:: ~ 111111 ;s ~
III ..., u.c E cD;;; ~ lii ~ g>E ea:
c: OJ...... 2~ <~M '0 .l: L: 'x of?'
lIle! -co J!J - .E J:l =0 IDa. CD
:E ,- U>_'<t CDCD...I :a - 0 16- ~o - a.
:2.= E~Lt.. i e ..J 001
.g - .- en I:u>~ ,;:] 'Q ....e e - III
8f~ o - ! ~ CD lii 01
'1: 0 :J J:l~ll) 0 'Q CD:: ~~ '" I:
o-lD'" I: .!! e E CD 1;;Gi CD ~
>o.r; M f! fii
ii:liio~ CO:;J SlOD ~ CD '" CD '" 0 r3Lt..
01 C iU lil!! c 'x
oEI: I:OLt.. .- e '" j e g' 01 ~ a: CD
'5i en af CD-C> "" m~ "!...: ;;::
CD '5i.2 z :I:::E- e I e ~ 16
- c. '" 00'- '0 I!! 8 '0 .... !:lCD 0$ '8
as >- 00 > e -!l
Ci5~i5~ ~~~ <~o E~ ""e III
a: 0 .5 :::t :g'o li E
) 8 - 'Q....
'" ... 1& '" ::l~ CD ~
Ii T5 III ii: <Iii 0:::
a: ii ~ ~ 0;;:: li !:l
w 12 CD ~ :w
0::: ~ 0 '0
en ~ I ::l <i. ai <.i ci u.i
il: J:
0
w a::
z z <
~ 8 ~ 61'8 N ..;
"--.-
.
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ai &j g g ci ~ ..... ci ci ci ci ci ci ci a:i 10 ci ci ci a:i ci ""...
N 10 ..... 0 N 0 ..... 0 ..... (D N 0> 0 ~ 0 ...... 0 ">Ol
..,. 0 ..... N IX) IX) ...... ..,. N ..... .....- (D ..... ...... <') 0 <') ..... 0
0) N oi ..f ..f ri .0 as N N as ll"i ll"i ll"i N ci r-: r-: cD cD OlOl
..... OClU
..... ..... <') ...... ...... ...... 10 10 ..... <') <')a.
.....
=II:
0 0 ..... 0 10 Ie (D 0 OC
10 ~ ..... 0 0 0 N 0
IX) IX) 0 0> CO IX) <') u
..f ll"i .0 ri cD ll"i ..f
...... ......
0> 0 0 ..... 0 0 0 0 g R IX) 0 0> ~ ..... 0
N 0 0 0 0 N 0 10 N 0 ..... N IX)
..,. '<t N 10 ..... '<t N ..... 0 CO ..... 0 CO ..... N N
ri oi ..f as as N N N r-: .0 ll"i ci r-: N ri r-:
..... 10 N N .....
N ..... 0 0 IX) ..... 0 0
10 CO 0 CO N ..... ..... N
0 N C!. ..... 0 <') ..,. 10
N oi ..... .0 ..f ri N
.....
0 g l() 0 IX) 0> CO 0
N 0> 0 IX) 0 ..... IX)
<') ..,. <') 0 0> CO N IX)
<ti N ci as .0 N .....
..... 0 ..... ..... .....
....
S <')
0 =II:
"0 u)
I:: 10 i 0
lU N U
ai If)
..>0:: .~ tii" .r:
~ ut
~ 1;' Cl
>- :::J
t) Gl ('oj "0 e
10 - 0 If) If) :5
:::J m N If)
N E Ol
"0 0 Cl III &l
u: 10 ~ N I::
10 CO N ::!!: I:: 'jj
OC I:: '<t IX) lU 0'
u: ';: :l1! ell .r: :::J
ii: c.. U .D ~
C':i OC 0 c.. c..
:;:; OC III ..... ~ 0 15
0 cD '5 'E 0 III CO
:i: -g I:: ..: tl .D N ~ , 01
0 Q) :::J :::J 0 ~ C
E "0 "0 {l
to) to) "0 lJ) ::!!: <') ';:
8 "E ~ ..!!! ~ IX) l!! I C
'ffj cD N 0 '0.
OC ~ B ~ 0 ..... ii: u ~
~ ..... .8
I l() u: OC 01 N
~ :::J ii: c: u.. ~
to) '8 u.. OC OC 'iIl -'" E
';: 1, OC I ~ ~ "0 ~ ,g
III E 0> ~ ~ l!! C
.r: 0 ri I:: lU ~
.r: E E j .....- E Q) CD
to) :;::; .D Ol II)
Q) ~...... (DO Ci) .r: "0"--- :::J 0 e: C
.2 .9 a. .8 ~ III 0
::!!: E -:::J c( g -0 "t: III 0 .8
u..Q) C m -0 .2 :;::; 'jj
.2 ..... :::J oc= "C '6 C
0 00 ~ ~ Q) C III !2 c: cu '6 .~ ~ i
,I:: ~ cu u.. cu ~ :::J c: lU
C ::!!: ~N 2"- co 9l .e ;:; 0
~e OC II) c( 8- :::J Q)
E ~~ '6 C>~ I:: N E Q) u :5
lU N :::J liS ~ .!? 1ii - "0 III
"0 8 :::J Ole: -fi lU c: c: ~
<( 'C ~ .E '1::: Ei .?;> I E
"0 .2 1ii .D - m III .e
"C OC Q)lI> 10 "0 'ffj C .9 'E :::J ;:;
"0 E - "0 ~
lU (.1 - I:: '6 0 e: CD ~
B Q)N c:~ E ~ l!! l!! ~ .e c .e
"0 c,... ~ cue: cu ~ :::J ;:; 1il Q) -
c ~'5. If) <( '5 a. l!! C II> l;:: 8
lU ';: mg I:: i Cl .r: -0 ~ ~ ::l ~ e
0 "C CD i
III .r: II 0 ~ - e: l! .e ~ a. c
8 g'u:: e: .!! ~
.c. '8 :;::; If) a; 'E cu .e l!
to) '5 en Q) - liS 'j!! "5 -g
;;:: Q) ~o:: "0 a. CD ..>0:: l! ~ "0 0 8 u.. >- g :::J
:!: ~ 0 c en .... ~ tIl If)
1 (.1. :eQ)" cu ::l e: 0 - lU .e 0 c:
- ~ cu 0 I:: OC
Q) -c: ~ c.. m m 1ii m "C
1ii l!G> co_ ~ .r:<') :; c.. Q) III ~
e: 'C III ~ 00 i::- e: :::J C C C .?;> Cl 1!! Q)
e- Ei :::JE OlE '1::: u~ 8- 0 .2 c 0 ,g 0 'I::: C -E 8-
)111 t)a.. :m &l ;:; ;:; ;:; :::J ;:; Ol -0
c: 2'5 01 III ~ ~~ l! '5 :0 III '5 '5 '6 lil C c: III e: e
.:; Q) - cr .e~ m "0 :::J U "0 "C "0 0 Ol > 0
a:: Will .5 en~ :r: W :r:..... 0 <( a. <( <( c( lJ) u C> 0 IlJ a.
LJ..: cj :r: -' -; ~ -i ~ ::i d a.: d ci uj r: :::i :> ~ x ~ N
619
0 0 0
0 0 0
~ 8 ai
...
'r"' 0
..; on ~
I'-
0 a>
8 0
I'-
ai N
N
...
1.0
co
~
N
1.0
..,
..,
0> >.
~ - c: 0 0 0
... 0 (11 0 0
... ~
... 8 ~ 0> N
ld .'r"'
'r"' 0 N
c: 0 0 0
(11 'e- ai ai r..:
8 N Z 0. co 18 II)
1.0 Ol I'- (')
'r"' N .c. .c. on cD
-
on N .~ -
-
0 ~ 0 ~ ~ ~
N -0
Ol c:
~ Ol
Ol }j1.
N .c.
-"" c: 'r"' - 0
~ 11 .... <( 0
<( .e 1ii a
CD t1) .!!! ~
(11 't:
co .c. !f .2! co
E S c: (11 u)
~ 0 Ol E f/)
<<:i E "C Z
~ I'- l!! <:: 0
. co '5 (11 ~
Q) ~~ e .:
0
"2 .c ;r
<:: ~o li! .!!! 0
8 010 Q) .: ~ 88
f/) .5'0 <:: .a ::I .no
'L.. 01 Q) 0 <( ~8
Q) .2' 1ii 01 g 0:
Iii ....> ~ <:: 0 aiai
....e 8 u. ~~
<:: .eo. ~
(11 8~ E ' .c 1$-
E Q)t1) ::J ~ ::Jg
Q) <::.... =E t1) 0 ~~
f .~~ en.! - w 0:
0._ 0
-""'- '00 <(
OlOl 0: 0
"C =-0 ~~ OOl 0 Z
(1IOl o.c. us us
<:: Q).... -- ~
III .c.0 coD.. (110 C)
~ -'0 'r"':!: ::J- ~
~l!! .!!! (!) 0"2 iL ~I .i<:
~ i.8 Ol- (1IE 0 0 ~
-<::
~~ Gl::J I- a
llf 01= .c._ z
o.::J -:! z
I .5 .~ ::I <( 0
c: 001 ~~ .eOl 0 U) -
.2 g'<:: "'.... ::;; I- ~ .c.
E >.(11 <( ~ 0)
c. 00. s.g -;;:
.l!! e (11 us z
~ .go 0.0 0 Gl
~ uCW) ~ll >.<:: J: i-= i= II
E~ ~.e -Q) I- ~
, I.... <:: ~ Z us '0
oc: ::I -'
!!: m~ Q).!! m 0 a.
OlC> ~~ I- 0 ::;; '0
~ 6~ .c. .5 ld~ 0 ~
.- 0 ~ ~ 8 ::J
Gl ~~ - "C <::I!! 00 Ol
j~ "CC: Gl- ~~ l- LL =;i:!
<::::J II: ~
.2u... .~ 11 0 <::.-
.(!) <(.!! a.. ._~
.aal - Glc: 0 a.. ~ =Gl
_0 '0'- 0 <( l- .' (11--
(11- ~ 10""<::
....- <::U> <::'fii W f/) CD<::Q)
Q)(1I 0-"" ~ ::I 0
= :8 '2.5 ~$ 91- 0 0 c 1ii '5. (!)
oE 8l-g ~ g ffi e- Q)
<::= a: 'ill)
-Ol <(~ ii:.2 () a: 8 ~;;;~
~ D.. I- <(.5
620
~
.~&
a: (11
..,D..
""
a:
o
o
u
1n
(11_
:2E
"'0)
.S!c:
u...:!:
'0'0
,Sl-
(110.
wt3
~ jg
a: ~
fIl
)
<::
~
~
L:
~
c
o
o
CD
~
~
~
,Sl
:c
e
<(
Ol
E
o
.c
c:
III
Qj
J:
-;
0::
j
:c
~
<(
.m
(11
o
Change order # 3
Cost breakdown
~
A Plaster 320 S F (Q) 20.00 ( budget} 6400
p Plaster @ Aud ceiling ( budget)
Reoairs - Lumo sum 12000
Sorav Tex 4144 S F (Q) 1.00 4144 . 16144
C Carpentry and form work ( budget)
Foreman 1 man 320 Hrs (Q) 35.00 11200
laborer 2 men 620 Hrs (Q) 15.00 9300
Grout 300
Forms 440
Lumber 800
Fasteners 300 22340
D Bathroom finishes ( budaet)
Demo . 3500
. Dl'VWa1l 2500
Tile 12000
Partitions 4000 22000
E Proiection room ( budaet)
Demo 1067
Drvwall . 2464
Vct 610
Elect. 800 4941
F Waternroof mechanical room( bUdget)
Wood base 140 L F (Q) 1.75 245
Drain 744
Reoair wall 200
Waternroofino 560 S F (Q) 4.00 2240 3429
.
G Renovate MO 1 ( bUdget)
Doors f hardware flouvers . 2420
Installation 600
Cut and prep opening 2500
HVAC duct . 2460
Fire damper 1000
Elect. 600
Plumbing 2472 12052
H Structual chanaes ( budget)
Camenter 1 man 120 Hrs @ 30.00 - 3600
Caroenter heloer 1 man 120 Hrs @ 20.00 2400
Laborer 1 man 120 Hrs@ 15.00 1800
Scaffold 600
Material 1000 9400
I Roof hatch ( budaet)
Hatch 1860
Framina . 1140
Ladder 1200 4200
J Staae riaht
Steel - EaQle 9850
Riaaina - budaet 5000 14850
.
K Hardware additions and chances
Farrevs 3565 less 708 credit 2757
Farrevs 4250
Farrevs - auto openers 8.405 less 138 credit 8267
621
Formes and surfaces - revised 50.484 less orig. 35,314 15170
Installation 1 man 80 Hrs (iI! 35 2800 33244
L Electrical UPS - Mr. Electric
UPS n11
Credit -1900 5811
M HVAC - Southeast Mechanical
Auditorium . 8750
Lobbv 9350 18100
N Ora cket
Steel - budaet 1035
Drvwall - oatriot 1385 2420
0 Lobbv framina ( bUdget)
1100 S F ~ 2.00 2200
.
P Public workS fees
Deoosit for new water line 5900
TaD fees - City 19 420 less credit from Bovs (9 000\ 10420
Derm fees 500
Plans orocessor 75.00 oer trio. 4 Derm 6 BD, 6 PW 1200
Prinlina - COMB, Office, Field BD, PW 750 18770
Q . Clean uo and trash removal
. Laborer 2 men 640Hrs@15 9600
Trash removal 6 x 300 1800 11400
R Scaffold rental
2 months (iI! 2835 oer month 5670
... Police Officers
8 weeks x16 Hrs x 30.00 3840
8 weeks x 8 Hrs x 30.00 1920 5760
T Trailer rental and utilities
Rental - Trailers 4 months 1128
Utilities 4 months (iI! 650.00 . 2600
Phone - 4 months 640
Temo toilet - 4 months 760 5128
U Securitv for FT AA
Statewide Securitv 1666
I Mobile Mini trailers 569
Labor 160 2395
V Continoencv 150000
W General Reauirements
60 days x 959.00 57540
.
X Overhead and orofit
C Mfee6% 47300
.
Y Bond 6716
Extend and windstorm insurance throuah 6/30104 36000
aa Genie lill ( budaet\ BOOO
bb Microohones and rack - Mavco 5106
.~
622
~.
~
Change Order #3 revised narrative:
,
/
This change order was reviewed specifically in a meeting
on September 16, 2003. It was presented in two different
formats. The first format is the actual change order with
specific line items for each category. It was then
rewritten into a separate format to show the difference
between owner changes, building department and
governmental changes, scope changes, and unforeseen
conditions. Items I & 2 are self explanatory.
Item A:
This 4-s- for addi tional plaster repairs for the lobby area
in front of the bathrooms. This ceiling was scheduled to
remain as it was on the original plans, but it was
discovered through selective demolition that the original
ceiling profile was still in place above. Since that
discovery of the ceiling was made, the architect and the
ci ty' s preservation office decided it was appropriate to
restore the ceiling to its original condition as required
by the Secretary of State standards. This is the CM's
estimate based on the present condition of the ceiling.
Item B:
This is for additional holes that have been cut in the
existing audi torium ceiling. Due to all the work that was
necessary in the previous submitted authorizations, the
ceiling needs extensive patching, and we need a texture
coating in order to blend with the original finish. These
addi tional holes were made necessary because of the added
roof bracing and ductwork modifications. This is an
estimate based on the current and projected holes in the
ceiling.
Item C:
This is an estimate for additional carpentry and form
work that we anticipate will be necessary to complete the
project. This includes framing at the-rDbby for linear
diffuses and form work to grout cells at the drapery
pockets.
Item D:
The finishes at the existing first floor restrooms have
to be replaced because asbestos was found in these
locations. This was not a part of the original scope of
work. This is a budget item until this area has the
finishes selected and the actual work completed and
documented.
Item E:
623
~
Item E:
The City' s representative Eric Fliss brought this to our
attention. The projection room was not to be upgraded in
the original scope of work. Due to the vast amount of
work that will be necessary in and around the projection
room, it was suggested that new finishes be installed in
this room as well. This is a budget until finishes are
specified.
Item F:
Waterproofing the floor and adding a drain to mechanical
room #3 is strongly recommended, because the mechanical
is directly above the lobby. If there was to-lle an
overflow in the A/C unit drain pan, it could damage the
lobby ceiling below. Again this is an estimate with the
actual cost to be submitted once this is specified.
Item G:
Mechanical room #1 does not meet current code. This area
was originally used for storage by the restaurant and our
consultants did not have access to this area. Once the
room was emptied, it was found that the room does not
meet current codes.
Item H:
This is for structural changes to accommodate air
conditioning duct work and equipment. This was not
visible until selective demolition was performed.
Item I:
A new roof hatch is necessary because the current one at
the projection room will be covered by new A/C duct work.
This is necessary so future maintenance personnel can
access the roof conveniently. A fixed ladder will be
necessary for access.
Item J:
This is for an additional stage right catwalk and
associated rigging. This was initially discussed at the
beginning of the project, but was not incorporated into
the plans at that time. After the rigging was designed,
it was determined that the stage right catwalk and
associated rigging would be necessary. An alternate to
this would be to install a pin rail only.
624
~
Item K:
Throu,ghout the course of the project, several doors have
been added in previous Authorizations that were not
included in the original scope. New doors and hardware
were added at openings 104, 105, 123, Mal-AX. Additional
hardware was added to 11 OD. Also the design of the lobby
doors had not been completed at the time of the original
contract. This item is for additional hardware, changes
to the hardware scope from the original schedule prepared
by the supplier, and automatic openers for handicap
access. See attached list for complete breakdown. '
Item L:
For safety concern~he electrical engineer determined
it would be best to install a UPS system at the ZZ step
lights. When the power in the theatre is interrupted, the
step lights would be illuminated.
Item M:
The changes for HVAC include both the auditorium and
lobby adj acent to the restrooms. Due to the tight
conditions, it was determined that the original duct work
designed for the branch ducts would not fit in the space
available. New duct work was constructed to fit in this
area as per the engineer's revised design. The original
ceiling was found in the main lobby and the lobby
adjacent to the restrooms. After the discovery, the duct
work had to be redesigned and hew linear grills installed
in the lobby ceiling.
Item N:
After selective demolition on the ceiling and the area of
the drapery pocket, it was found that the steel designed
for this area needed to be modified. It was also
determined after reviewing existing field conditions that
the pocket needed a drywall barrier.
Item 0:
After selective demolition, the lobby was found to be out
of square with the existing ceiling. This new frame is to
be installed so the frame walls are symmetrical on both
sides of the ceiling.
Item P:
We were recently informed that there would be Public
Works fees for site utili ties. The cost of the addi tional
Public Works fees were not figured i.n the original budget
for this project. This item also includes estimated
additional DERM fees for revised plans and processing
costs.
)
625
~
Item 0:
This is self-explanatory and is for clean up and trash
removal.
Item R:
Due to the above mentioned work, the scaffolding
currently in place will need to be used for an additional
two months. This is a cost of two months rental of the
scaffold.
Item S:
After the project began, we were instructed that off-duty
police officers would. then be necessary to direct
traffic. We had budgeted an amount previously without
knowing what the exact cost of the officers' impact would
be. Based on what we now know, this is the additional
cost to the.
Item T:
This is additional trailer rental and utilities for both
contractors and owners trailers located in staging area.
This is for four months rental due to time extension
necessary to complete the project.
Item U:
This is security requested by the owner for the week of
the FTAA.
Item V:
Based on the contingency cost needed to date and the
percentage of job completion, the construction team
agreed that this amount would be necessary to complete
the job. Please note that the City only pays for the
actual cost of the work and any contingency balance is
returned to the City.
Item W:
These General Requirements are for the time it will take
to perform work contained in Change Order *3.
Item X:
Overhead and profit is based on the amount of the change
order according to our Contract Agreement.
Item Y:
The Bond cost is based on the amount of the Change order.
Item Z:
Property insurance is for extending the completion of the
project. (January 2004 - June 2004)
626
~,
Item aa:
Owner requested to include a 40' Genie lift to access
rigging and for maintenance purposes.
Item bb:
Owner requested additional microphones, wall rack, and
portable stage managers console.
In order to fund ongoing activities, the rigging budget
of $241,678.00 was eliminated and moved into contingency
by Authorization No.7. As we have documented previously
in-this summary, the team recommended that this change
order be funded in both July and September of 2003. In
the last five months some of the work has had to be
completed in order to keep the job progressing. Therefore
at the present time, the funds for rigging have. been
eliminated and used for ongoing construction purposes.
That is why there is no rigging budget tOday.
627
~
AUTHORIZATION TO ADJUST LINE ITEMS
WITHIN THE GUARANTEED MAXIMUM PRICE (8
JUN 11 ~
~
tEeteRV
Renovation & Restoration of the Colony Th
1040 Lincoln Road, Miami Beach, FL
OWNER'S REP:
State of Florida
Department of Management Services
Division of Building Construction
921 N Davis Street, Jacksonville, FL 32209
AUTHORIZATION No.
DATE:
5/15/03
CONTRACTOR:
McCartney Construction Company
4800 Southwest 64th Avenue, Suite 109
Davie, FL 33314
STATE PROJECT No.
COMB-99042000
ARCHITECT:
RJ. Heisenbottle Architects, P.A
340 Minorca Avenue, Ste 10
Coral Gables, FL 33134
CONTRACT DATE:
1 0/22/01
The folJolMng is a description of changes to adjust the line item values within the Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP). This adjustment does not change the GMP.
Schedule
Item Reason for Change Une Amount Subcontractor
Item
Move the following items from contingency to each category.
Actual Budqet
Permit and Process Fees 7,547 3,000 1012 . 4,547 Bldg Permit Srvc Grp
Actual Budqet
2. Blueprints and miscellaneous 6,676 3,900 1023 . 2,776 Precision Blueprinting
3. Office Trailer - add 10 weeks to contract . 1013 705 Workspace Plus
4. Temporary Utilities
A. Electric - add 10 weeks to contract 1014 125 FPL
Acl\lal BudC/et 9813 4,580 Mr. Electric
B. Temporary Utilities - add restaurant and owner's trailer 14,980 10,400
C. Phone - add 10 weeks 1014 400 Bell South
D. Temporary J oilet - add 10 weeks 1014 280
5. Scaffold rental at Auditorium
A. - add 10 weeks to contract . 1021 7,088 Brand Scaffold
B. - reconfigure at Stage Area due to job conditions 1021 1,440 Brand Scaffold
6. Demolition - remobilization charge due to asbestos discovery and structural
changes 0113 3,000 Wildcat
7. Pilings
A. - additional piling length (for pilings completed to date, approximately 50%) 0117 2,076 Ebsary Foundation
B. - remobilization 0117 2,650 Ebsary Foundation
8. Asbestos - discovery of additional asbestos at. marquee 0121 5,350 Wortech
9. Concrete - tie beam, columns and slab changes, required by Build'lng Department
and changed by engineer 0211 8,269 International Builders
Authorization # 1
Page 1 of2
628
. ~
Sc, ,cdule
Item Reason for Change line I Amount Subcontract
Item
Actual BudQet
1. Plumbing - repair of existing lines and hidden under slab 7,021 2,422 0812 4,599 Bradford Plumbing
& installation of new tines to allow restaurant to keep operating
11. Electric at Food Concessionaire and telephone & data outlets in Room 200 0813 3,140 Mr. Electric
12. General requirements for job delay due to the following:
A. - Discovery of asbestos at marquee
B. _ Review and changes to Lobby slab by engineer .
c. _ Review of deteriorated tie beams at Lobby by engineer
D. _ Review and repair of ceiling joists at Lobby
E. _ Engineering, fabrication and installation of structural steel lateral brace at Stage
Area
.. F. _ Discovery and review of e~ing grade beam and joists joist condition at Stage-
-
Pu1ea .
G. _ Additional concrete work as noted above
H. Delay 10 weeks (50 business days) - contract amount $959 per business day.
Since McCartney Construction was not on the job full-time for 10 weeks, we are
adjusting the general requirements as noted below:
L - 15 days x $959 1100 14,385 McCartney
J. - 20 days x $959 x 50% 1100 9,590 . McCartney
K. - 15 days x $959 x 25% 1100 3,596 McCartney
Amount to be moved from contingency 3127/03 (78,596)
Contingency Beginning Balance
Authorization 1
127,046
(78,596)
Balance
48,450
Architect
Contractor:
Date:
Date: 5/15/03
Authorization # 1
Page 2 of 2
629
AUTHORIZATION TO ADJUST LINE ITEMS
WITHIN THE GUARANTEED MAXIMUM PRICE (G
~
"
"\ '".J
Renovation & Restoration of the Colony Th
1040 Lincoln Road, Miami Beach, FL
OWNER'S REP:
State of Florida
Department of Management Services
Division of Building Construction
921 N Davis Street, Jacksonville, FL 32209
AUTHORIZATION No. 2
DATE: 5113/03
CONTRACTOR:
McCartney Construction Company
4800 Southwest 64lh Avenue, Suite 109
Davie, FL 33314
STATE PROJECT No. COMB-99042000
ARCHITECT:
R.J. HeisenbotUe Architects, P.A
340 Minorca Avenue, Ste 10
Coral Gables, FL 33134
CONTRACT DATE: 10122101
The following is a description of changes to adjustlhe line item values within /he Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP). This adjustment does not change /he GMP.
Schedule
Item Reason for Change Line Amount Subcontractor
Item
Move the following items from contingency to each category.
Revised Orioinal
. Changes to MAVCO's contract requested by staff 154,564 151,346 0822 3,218 MAVCO
Actual BudQet Eagle Metal
2. Structural steel lateral bracing that exceeds allowance 21,027 15,000 0711 . 6,027 Fabricators, Inc.
Actual BudQet Patriot Specialized
3. Temporary Partition at Stage that exceeds allowance 24,075 12,000 0611 \ 12,075 Construction, Inc.
4. Demolition remobilization to remove north slab 0113 2,000 Wildcat
Authorization 2
127,046
(78,596)
(23,320)
Contingency Beginning Balance
Authorization 1
25,130
Contractor.
Date: 5/13/03
Date:
(0.. [(_0'
Authorization # 2
Page 1 of 1
630
AUTHORIZATION TO ADJUST LINE ITEMS JUN 2 5 2003
WITHIN THE GUARANTEED MAXIMUM PRICE (GMP)
.:.V.
If", J
Renovation & Restoration of the Colony Theatre
1040 Lincoln Road, Miami Beach, FL
--...- ~
/',. , '-------:-----
; ../, .>/ r:~
i
i
-- --- - - .
7/b!/,( I'
.v"'~.) 7. fj
OWNER'S REP: State of Florida
Department of Management Services
Division of Building Construction
921 N Davis Street, Jacksonville, FL 32209
AUTHORIZATION No. 3
DATE: 6/24/03
CONTRACTOR:
McCartney Construction Company
4800 Southwest 64th Avenue, Suite 109
Davie, FL 33314
STATE PROJECT No.
COMB-99042000
ARCHITECT:
R.J. Heisenbottle Architects, P.A
340 Minorca Avenue, Ste 10
Coral Gables, FL 33134
CONTRACT DATE:
10/22101
?he following is B desctiplion of changes to adjust the line item values within the GuaranlLJSd Maximum Ptice {GMP}. 7bis adjustment does not change the GMP.
Schedule
Item Reason for Change Line Amount Subcontractor
Item
Move the following items from contingency to each category.
Miami Shores
Replace sanitary and water lines 0821 25,385 Plumbing
.
.
Contingency Beginning Balance
Authorization 1
127,046
(78,596)
(23,320)
(25,385)
(255)
Authorization 2
Authorization 3
Balance
Architect:
Contractor:
Owner's Rep:
R.J. Heisenbottle Architects, P.A
State of Florida
Dept of Mngmt Svc
Date:
Date:
631
Authorization #13
Page 1 of 1
AUTrlORIZATION TO ADJUST LINE ITeMS
WITHIN THE GUARANTEED MAXIMUM PRICE (G
. I l'-'-1 y'"1.
cg~ D\#
AU" . 1
' b J L:ULi3
Renovation & Restoration of the Colony Th a
1040 Lincoln Road, Miami Beach, FL
OWNER'S REP: State of Florida
Department of Management Services
Division of Building Construction
921 N Davis Street, Jacksonville, FL 32209
AUTHORIZATION NO. 4
DATE: 7/17/03
CONTRACTOR:
McCartney Construction Company
4800 Southwest 64'~ Avenue, Suite 109
Davie, FL 33314
STATE PROJECT No.
COMB-99042000
ARCHITECT:
R.J. Heisenbottle Architects, P.A
""340 Minorca Avenue, Ste 10
Coral Gables, FL 33134
CONTRACT DATE:
10/22/01
The following;s a description of changes to adjust the line hem values within the Guaranteed Maximum Hire (GMP). This adjustment does not change the GMP.
Schedule
Item Reason for Change Une Amount Subcontractor
Item
Move the following items from each category to contingency.
""'9plenish Contingency
I-
1. Move seating allowance to contingency . ~ 0727 (122,400) Irwin Seating
.
.
Contingency Beginning Balance
Authorization 1 - 3
127,046
(127,301)
122,400
Authorization 4
Balance
122.145
Architect:
u~..-
Contractor:
R.J. Heisenboltle Architects. P.A
Date:
''i5,/s;j TJ ~
Date:
Authorization # 4
Page 10f 1
632
AUTHORIZATION TO ADJUST LINE ITEMS
WITHIN THE GUARANTEED MAXIMUM PRICE (GMP)
~
Renovation & Restoration of the Colony Theatre
1040 Lincoln Road, Miami Beach, FL
OWNER'S REP: State of Florida
Department of Management Services
Division of Building Construction
921 N Davis Street, Jacksonville, FL 32209
AUTHORIZATION No. 5 Revised
DATE: 7/31/03.
CoNTRACTOR:
McCartney Construction Company
4800 Southwest 64111 Avenue, Suite 109
Davie, FL 33314
STATE PROJECT No.
COMB-9904200Q
RJ. Heisenbottle Architects, P.A
ARCHITECT:. 340 Minorca Avenue, Ste 10
Coral Gables; FL 33134
CONTRACT DATE: 10/22/01
The following is a desCliption of changes to adjuslthe line item values within the Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP). This adjustmenl does nol change the GMP.
Schedule
Item Reason for Change Line Amount Subcontractor
Item
Move the following items from contingency to each category.
'7ield Conditions
1. Structural steel (for marquee, air conditioning openings and steel braces) 0711 15,417 Eagle Metal
(Breakdown of labor and material is on last page of package) 0411 3,722 labor & material
2. Marquee (modify for field conditions) 0718 2,900 Nordquist Sign Co
3. Install additional framing, bolts and straps (at Auditorium ceiling, lobby ceiling and
storage area) (Breakdown of labor and material is on last page of package) 0411 21,630 labor & material
4. HVAC (change duct work to fix existing conditions at Auditorium ceiling) 0811 5,057 SE Mechanical
0114 9,977 Griffin Dewatering
5. Dewatering (amounts that exceed budget)
0812 507 Miami Shore Plumb
0813 7435 Mr. Bectric
6. Computer upgrade for stage lighting (1,000 channel, emphasis 30) 0823 7,000 Miami stagecraft
7. Piling (additional footage for Phase II) 0117 1,508 Ebsary Foundation
8. Provide off duty police officer for closing of alley 1023 4,000 Police
0411 960 Labor & Material
9. DemolitiO/l (Breakdown of labor and material is on last page of package)
1028 1,200 Labor & Material
1030 450 Labor & Material
10. Fire alarm devices (added at Building Department's review) 0813 3,997 Mr. Electric
'-
Authorization # 5 Revised
Page 1 of 2
633
. 0113 700
11. Remove block and pour tie beam -existing 2m Floor Mechanical Room and weld
straps to existing steel 0711 1,080
1030 250 Labor & Material
411 10,380 Labor & Material
0711 5,160 Labor & Material
12. Waste line for future grease trap 0812 7,355 Miami Shore Plumb
13. General Requirements for job delay - 8 business days 1100 7,672 McCartney
Contingency Beginning Balance
127,046
(127,301 )
122,400
(118,357) ~
3,788
Authorization 1 - 3
Authorization 4
Authorization 5
Balance
Architect: I II ~ /.
~~~: ~rchitects, P.A
Contractor:
&[ t {(p.() fr
Date:
'=6/s-lo ~
~~
Date: 7/31/03
Authorization # 5 Revised
Page 2 of 2
634
Au, nORIZATlON TO ADJUS; LINE 11 dS \j)\ F (["j; ~~
WITHIN THE GUARANTEED MAXIMUM PRICE (GM ~I Iwo." ,..' . !0
Renovation & Restoration of the Colony Thea:~ l
1040 Lincoln Road, Miami Beach, FL
OWNER'S REP:
State of Florida
Department of Management Services
Division of Building Construction
921 N Davis Street, Jacksonville, FL 322
AUTHORIZATION No.
6 Revised
CONTRACTOR:
McCartney Construction Company
4800 Southwest 64th Avenue, Suite 109
Davie, FL 33314
fEC~DW~ff\)
Alli-.. 1 ~ i
\J~ . :, i/
-"
STATE
-1
DATE:
7/31/03
CTNo.
COMB-99042000
R.J. Heisenbottle ArchitectS; P.A
ARCHITECT: 340 Minorca Avenue, Ste 10
Coral Gables, FL 33134
CONTRACT DATE: 10/22101
The foUowing is a description of changes to adjust the line item values within the Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP)_ This adjustment does not change the GMP.
Schedule
Item Reason for Change Line Amount Subcontractor
Item
Move the following items from contingency to each category.
~hange Order Proposal # 1, 2 & 3 and Miscellaneous Items
1. Acoustical treatment at east and west walls of Auditorium. Change material 0619 18,450 Kenney Drapery
from acoustical panels to manual operated curtains. Install structural steel 0611 8,700 Patriot Spec Const
angles and drywall soffits. 0711 3,905, Eagle Metal
1021 3,119 Brand Scaffolding
2_ HVAC-(EMS upgrades, fire damper upgrade-and additional duct work) 0811 5,500, SE Mechanical
3. Access panels at 202C and 202D 0611 1,O2!\. Patriot Spec Const
4. Electrical - (GFI's, concession, step lights, relocate panels) 0811 40,704 Mr. Electric
0811 4,602 Mr. Electric
5,- Fire Sprinkler (revisions) 0815 .--.-..,- 3,300 Alpha Automatic
6. Seating 0727 (4,682) Irwin Seating
7_ Carpentry (new steps and front rows at seating) 0411 6,401 labor and Material
8. Plumbing (concession) 0812 I. 6,200. Miami Shores Plumb
9. Chandelier that exceed allowance 0613 19,112 Urban
10. Stage lighting that exceeds allowance 0823 10,042 Miami Stagecraft
11. General Requirements - 7 business days 1100 6,713 McCartney
635
Authorization # 6 Revised
Page 1 of2
Contingency Beginning Balance
Authorization 1 - 3
Authorization 4
Authorization 5
Authorization 6
Balance
Architect:
.~?~
R.J. Heisenbottle Architects, P.A
<g'/~/o~
I .
~s:;
Date:
Contractor:
Date:
127,046
(127,301)
122,400
(118,357)
(133,091) vdd
(129,303)
~
Owner's Rep:
Date:
q~t0,c1
, 636
Authorization # 6 Revised
Page 2 of 2
~
Additional narrative to existing items listed in Authorizations
1, 2, SR, & GR.
Authorization #1:
Items 1 & 2:
Permi t/Process fees and Blue Printing expenses were
i terns were budgeted. to the best knowledge we had at
the time of the GMP. Due to owner change reques ts,
building department change requests and other scope
changes due to unforeseeable field conditions,
addi tional blueprint costs were incurred along with
additional permit and processing fees for the City of
Miami Beach Building Department. These additional
costs were justifiably funded out of contingency.
Items 3, 4A, 4B, 4C, 4D, SA, & 12:
Each of these items relates to the time extension.
This extension was necessary due to the items listed
in #12 A-H. When a job is delayed, items in place such
as office trailer, temporary toilet, electric,
scaffolding, and utilities have to .be paid for as part
of the project cost. See schedule dated 2/17/03.
Actual delays that affected critical path were the
asbestos and selective demolition delay 7 weeks, the
delay in completing the temporary enclosure and
lateral bracing 14 weeks, and the piling delay 10
weeks. The Ci ty of Miami Beach was respons ible for
asbestos testing and the additional asbestos that
caused the delay was not discovered until we started
selective demolition. After asbestos removal and
selective demolition, it was also found that the lobby
floor could not proceed without the engineer's review
and redesign of the slab due to an unforeseeable
structural condition. You should be aware that there
were_np existing drawings available for this building
in the city's archive. Accordingly, the architects and
engineers developed there drawings based upon field
measurements of what was visible. After selective
demolition, we found deteriorated tie beams at the
front on the lobby. These had to be immediately shored
up, inspected by the engineer, and repaired according
to the engineer's specifications. The building
department changed the requirements of the temporary
wall and lateral bracing. The temporary wall and
lateral bracing had to be designed and installed to
meet the wind load that applies to a permanent
building.
637
~
Item 5B:
The scaffolding was erected at the stage area in order
to work on the ceiling structure. After selective
demolition of the floor slab, grade beams on the
existing building were not found to be as anticipated.
They were in a different location and the scaffold had
to be removed in order to access and complete the
remedial slab and beam work.
Item 7A:
The piling length specified on the plans was the
average expected length of piling for this area. For
pilings projegts, 2 ft is a minimal ameunt for
additional piling length. Florida soils conditions
can vary in a matter of a few feet and we were
fortunate to be as close as we were to the footage
specified in the bid document.
Item 7B:
The piling could not be installed in one phase as
originally anticipated due to the existing conditions.
Only after selective demolition, was it known where
existing grade beams and pile caps were located.
Several areas of the piling had to be redesigned or
relocated in order to accorrunodate the existing pile
cap and grade beam conditions. In addition, this
project was anticipated to start in the dry season.
Due to earlier delays, the extremely wet conditions
further hampered installing piling in one phase.
Item 9:
It is normal during. plan review of complex projects
such as this for the building department to request
changes or modification to plans. This is a valid
change that the contractor had to make in order to
comply with building departments requirements.
Items 12A-H:
This extension was necessary due to the items listed
in #12 A-H. After reviewing the delay, DMS. and
McCartney Construction agreed to reduce the fee.
McCartney Construction was not obligated to do so, and
could have charged the project the full amount
allotted under the contract for the delays which were
not the fault of the contractor. This is courtesy
discount that we extended to the city.
,
l
638
t,
~
Authorization #2:
Item 1:
The changes to the audio console system were requested
by the owner. For further clarification, this can be
reviewed with the City's technical consultant, Eric
Fliss.
Items 2 & 3:
The structural steel lateral bracing and temporary
parti tion at the stage were budgeted as temporary
structures. During the course of the building
department review, as stated earlier, the building
department decided these items had to be designed and
constructed to accommodate permanent wind load
calculations. This seriously impacted not only the
cost, but the time to construct the lateral bracing
and temporary wall. Due to the lack of original
building drawings, little was known about the capacity
of the existing structure, an enormous amount of
design calculations had to be researched in order to
meet the building department's criteria.
Item 4:
This was at the owner's request. In order to
accommodate the adjacent restaurant, substantial
changes were made to the schedule and scope of the
work in this area.
Authorization #5R:
Item 1A:
Structural steel for the marquee had to be modified
after selective demolition took place. Please note in
the previous authorization that asbestos was found at
this area. Removal of this asbestos required
additional cost as did redesign of the structure. It
was physically --rmpossible to ascertain these
conditions until after selective demolition had been
completed.
Item 1B:
After removing sections of the auditorium ceiling, it
was found that the duct work as designed would not
fit. Until selective demolition was completed, the
engineer could only make his best evaluation of the
amount of room available for the duct work. This
change was made to accommodate the existing field
conditions.
639
~
Item 2:
This relates to item lA. This marquee/signage change
again was due to field conditions not discovered until
after selective demolition was completed.
Item 3:
After cutting holes in the existing ceiling to install
the air conditioning, it was discovered that existing
roof structure would not meet code. The engineer
reviewed this area and determined that the roof would
need additional bracing and straps not included on the
original plan. Once again, this was due to field
conditions that could not ~ve been discovered until
after selective demolition was completed.
Item 4:
Once again is due to existing conditions at the
auditorium ceiling in the space that was needed for
this work. It was only discovered again after
selective demolition that there was not enough room to
install the duct work as designed.
Items SA, SB, & SC:
It was never anticipated that the entire stage house
site and handicapped access ramp would have to be
dewatered. The original. GMP budget anticipated only
partial dewatering of the site during the seasonal dry
period. Had the project not been delayed until the
rainy season was upon us, some of these added costs
may not have been necessary. All items listed were
necessary for the dewatering p'rocess. In order to
accommodate the adjacent neighbors, electrical service
was installed in lieu of a generator for the
dewatering process.. Documentation. from Griffin
Dewatering, . Miami Shores Plumbing, and Mr. Electric
was provided in the authorization packet.
Item 6:
This computer upgrade was requested by the owner.
Proposal was enclosed from Miami Stage Craft.
Item 7:
The amount of footage for piling was stipulated on the
plans. The engineer's estimate of the length of the
pilings was very close to that which was installed.
The difference is a minor amount considering how soil
conditions can vary greatly in South Florida.
640
~
ItemS:
The requirement for an off-duty police officer was not
mandated by the city until we started the project.
This requirement was not included in any
correspondence from the owner to the construction
team. After demolition had been completed, we were
informed by Alex 0 Rolandelli that in the future the
city would like police officers directing traffic when
a crane or other heavy equipment was blocking the
alley or the street. The cost had to be added to the
contract price.
-:rtems 9A, 9B, & 9C:
A breakdown of these items was included in the
package. See the last page of original packet.
Item 10:
During the plan review process, the building
department required additional fire alarm devices that
were not included on the original plans. This cost
was for the additional devices that were not shown on
the 0 original pian and were not in the original
subcontractor's bid and our GMP.
Items llA & lIB:
Structural changes: After selective demolition, we
found there was no tie beam holding the roof at the
mechanical rooms. A review by the structural engineer
determined that it was necessary to form and pour tie
beams and install straps to the roof structure at this
location. This was unforesoeeable.
Item lIe:
During selective demolition we found there were no
columns or tie beams around the exterior double door
on the west elevation. Since we were putting a new
door in the existing opening, a new tie beam and 0
columns were added to meet-code. This was
unforeseeable.
Item 12:
This was substantiated in meetings with the city,
architect, and the rest of the team. Plans were
revised to reflect owner's decision to add the
addi tional piping for a future grease trap. This is
confirmed in meeting minutes 7/29/03.
)
641
Item 13:
Our request for an 8 business day time extension is a
minimal amount of time for the scope of work noted in
Authorization SR. Please see schedule previously
submitted dated 8/1/03 and 8/26/03 for delay of
completion of project.
Authorization #6R:
Items 1-8:
These interior finish items were not designed at the
time we signed the GMP. The city added the auditorium
interior and acoustical work to the ~cope of the
project at a later date. Plans were then issued and
labeled Change Proposal Request No.1, 2, & 3. The
actual cost for the items on the plans has been
included in the packet. Our request of a 7 business
day time extension to complete this amount of work is
extremely modest. This work affects the critical path
of the auditorium. Please see revised plans marked
. Change Proposal 1, 2, & 3 to review changes. See
schedule completion date on schedules dated 8/1/03 and
8/26/03.
j
642
~
.
.
...
"""""'"
^""""
co.....
CAO'"
FUlOI'"
......
JOS.......779t
HEISENBOlllE
.
A k CHI TEe T S
A,.....,...~
MC:001SU
00
00
February 10, 2004
Mr. Richard Arcuri
Project Manager
State of Florida Department ofMimagement Services
1313 N. Tampa Street, Suite 106
Tampa, Fl 33602
Reference:
Colony Theater
Miami Beach, Florida
Additional Service Authorizations
RJHA Project Number 01-3141
Dear Mr. Arcuri:
Per your request please allow 'me to clarify that there are three (3)
outstanding Additional Service Request on the Colony Theatre project,
some of which was out of necessity, some of this work has already been
performed. These Additional Service Proposals fall into three categories
as follows:
1. Additional Threshold Inspection Services
Additional Field Observations
$20,000.00
$20,000.00
2. Unforeseen Conditions
Architectural, Structural and AlC Duct Work
$10,169,98
3. Owner Requested Additional Work
Stage Right Catwalk and Pinrail Assembly
Total Pending Additional Service Request
$ 6.294.00
$56.463.98
I trust that you have copies of the correspondence detailing these requests.
Owing to the delays we have already incurred in receiving these work
authorizations, I must insist that they be processed immediately.
Should you have any questions, please contact me immediately.
Sincerely yours,
SENBOTI'LE ARCHITECTS, P .A.
Juan Ferriol - CIP
t
643
'\
!
~
1
...
=
.;!
.&
j
~
!
~
E
{}.
88888
s;2"omciClli
o~~~1
tnln..,.C"l=
!
o
l!
...
.3
M=
. I
~5
:;'E
.,,=>
D:: 01=;;
I!: gill: =
c( .. l;:I ~
!l:!i3Ht 1\1
1-= ~wi:!1i:ll
>~.f~~!~ti0
z 2.9 ~.:2Q.w
0-; 't:J .,"
..J C!l CD DD~:::
OO~ ....
o ~ ~~~~
..
Ii
..
=
<If
!
Jl
~
~
~
!
,
.Q
!
.2
~
:;
~
=
o
"
888888888
~~~~~~~~~
..,.N U)c:f..,.CO.....N
""
..
Ii
i
8;;
"5 :5 i
~ilill~~!I~!I~~ ~llll
~ .
~
j .......
: ~;~;;;;~
a
a
~
n
..
=
~
ATTACHMENTS
a
a
Q
a
a
~
88888
>igS>ig
oo...~...
o II()U) It)tlI
~ N=
I"
11
1!",
."
I~~i
I~ !!
wF
. U)
III~ -.!!
l; U) w
1! EilB
OC! ~
"'8 I
c" <:
B:>li:8i
8 88 8888 88
a gd ~g~g Lri"':
a ...8 """
N 0""""(\1 "'..
.. <0" ~mNN "ill
"
.. ..
~ '"
= !/l
0 =
I .2
i
o.
~) H
~~
.2 Ip
'"
~ <;>!
~ <0
,; ,;
Z Z
a aa 81;!j~H 8 88 a
a ~q a
Q :!I~ o:i 'otrloro= g
a ~ ti 101~
a N
N ~; OlIN N..........CD ..
~ ~ ~
.. .. .. .. .. ..
~
8
I
o
~
~I.i
0:
...
d
Z
888
t-:U'it'oi
N~a
OO~
CD~=
.. ..
"
C
:8, s ..
]I..,S :;g
!~:e.s
,s ~I~-g
, e15' U)
<i~
~....
"'"
d ci
zz
II
=
o
~1!
~i
,-
<
'" ",c
~ ~ n1i ~~
o tJ8'B8~ :lg
~ti.5Ii'll.28 ~=a
~~i~~HI~P
~:c ~~i~aU)J~
~""'~ou) 0-
~~~~~::i! d,
:a
E
,
0:
a
'"
3
..
N
~
ci ci d ci d d d d
zzzzzzz z
8888
~~~a
;:!"'''';
a
'"
..
n
co
;
; ~
~ !!. E ~
o .~ e!HI 8
'g '!;;H ;;1~1.i1~
l! ~~Ea 'E.fII:!
" -.82' .l!~.o9
B;=~~ tiCl)-g
~~Ut5S H'"
..to :i.:ici::i
8 888 88
t ~U ~!
~ ..,...,.~ ~::
..
I.l!
.q
~B
o C
~j
<..
..
,a,a
H
a
a
'"
a
"
It
88888g
a>a:ici"":Nui
m::5ggs>~
....._..,.C').....1O
_ n
..
..
..
'"
N
'"
!II
~ ~ .
~I, "'S. s
'o.e at:.; ~
:5,S Sl5-O::l
::I ~ :~n:::: CD rI.I
c( 1i~:g:g.E
ca..<<~
lO"m~~
ci ci ci cia
zzzzz
"
C
j
~
~
w
I
,
U)
"IM!MjM
..
"'i m
~i;m
:8g'i.
~- ~'"
lS~:::J:>_
~p~~
< . ,~Ol
_N",
; !1i~
;5 ~.!Ii i!
Ih nil~ ';;
H.~I: hl~ h
ul~ -g~ ~ ~~~
"tl . i.;!-g ~~
~"Ca:::..EQ.sa..
a:i ui....::E 0.:
g 8 8 8 8 8 :5 8 81~J~~Jg g
ggig~~g:2gre 8:8
t")vmNID..,.CO........... 0_
~M;!:~"';:U)ll"ilOrnt;;: ~~
~~~
8888888888
lrir.i"":r.isiC'i"':(""jiNci
~::~C!i~33Si!r::~~
...-CD..-O...,....<DlDNIO
......."..... 11:1:;::
..,.. .. ..1..1..1<-1.. ..
..
B
II: ~ I ~ II ., - I
II "'li1~:l:8 <O"~cl.,.~I:5~ ..
~w8 xl:Ei ~f~~'~~li! :i
~~~a;S~:oS!60~ ~i~ E CO')
~a~ ~~oo~iQ~liI2~ie2~~ ~ l~
5 It) ~:J !II C:.2 Ii:g "C il~ E ~ ~.... 0 ~ :gl ~ .. 0
:i ; " Ii" "'.~ ~... U) ~ 5/! "'.l!" ~I';' 'iiI? ~I& ! I B 1i!
8~...'ll.~~. :i !,!.~B21~.';~I< ~,!!O- C
<ow~~oo_ ~~II~""a~~~CD~~e!
, '" e ~ ~o O~e~"tl=C ~::I.s
~~~~0~~! i ~irl.l~~u~~~~a~~~
~~~~il~~ ~ d~ .~~d~~~~~~~
644
a
a
..
~
..
=
..
a
a
..:
..
..
IX
a
a
..
:?
N
..
alo
a a
~ i
.. ..
~ ~
:SIr!
..
It
C
Ii
<=
Ii
..
a
a
.;
a
..
N
..
..
..
I
gJ
h
U.
s.i
E.!!
0.",
~ci
gZ
",8
i';"
'5i
0",
i~
l~
.~
1l~
i li.8 ~
J ~ "'09 ~
~ i H r
L ii~~ ~
.~~~g~ !
Ii 2:' 0 o.E S I
.z.9 ~ i"fi ~
g~!fiji
:: lfS~ ~j
~S~g..,~
:li 'J " . ~ '5;; ~
j 010 6is 0 Q. !of
:; "",..c "C;J. 'tl ..:
~nH~i
in~i5!$
"l!~e.lD!C
~:!jn: ~
"~&~:l!=&
~.5h~ ~ ~
1i~~~c~",
fj'l:s:ii!;~~..!
l:. U <II -g ... 9l'
l!.9 rtIE.!!I 6 ~ (5
lUi:.;::l~Olf'il
:liHHie
~;J!'5i~!
W Ii Il:'l"'<< ~
j~"111 ~
;-. I s
a
'"
:11
..
5
U)
~
g
Atk(~ L....
MyAorida.com
in;;;?:::.
....7/ t \
\ !
-"->',,/
The Administrative and Operations Ann
of Florida's Government
DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT
SERVICES
JEB BUSH, GOVERNOR
WILLIAM S. SIMON, SECRETARY
March 31, 2004
i.
Tim Hemstreet, Director
Capital Improvement Projects Office
1700 Convention Center Drive
Miami Beach, FL 33139
Re: Colony Theater - Renovations and Restorations
DMS Project No.: COMB-990420oo
Response to COMBtCIP March 24, 2004 Letter
Dear Mr. Hemstreet:
This responds to the City of Miami Beach's (COMB) March 24, 2004 letter issued in response to the March 17,2004
commission meeting regarding the request for Change Order No.3 (CO#3) in support of the Colony Theater.
DMS has been serving as the COMB's construction agent on this project since October of 1999. We are and have been
committed to this project and provided services in accordance with our Client and Agent Agreement (CAA) since project
inception through development and support of CO#3. DMS's project managers at the Jacksonville, Tampa, and Tallahassee
offices supported this project and incurred travel, per diem, wages, and related costs. Over the four-plus years the project has
been underway some disagreements have arisen but we felt this was expected especially on extended projects and where the
staffs changed as they have here when the Capital Improvement Project (CIP) Office took over for the Redevelopment
Agency. Overall, we felt that the team had successfully worked through these past disagreements and was continuing to
work towards completion of the project to the satisfaction of all parties.
We were therefore perplexed when we received the COMB's letter, and in particular, the statement that, "...the City has
taken the position that there have been certain issues regarding the performance of DMS in managing this project." We feel
that we have in fact lived up to and gone beyond our obligations of the CAA and expectations of the City. We were also
troubled by the two options set forth in the letter for OMS's consideration which would involve forfeiture of DMS fees.
There is no justification for forfeiting such fees or for nonpayment of outstanding fees.
OMS feels that the agency has responded to all known issues in a timely and appropriate manner. We have substantiated our
view of the perceived "performance issues" per our letter dated March 16, 2004. We continue to this day to support the
project per our CAA and have done so without payment for services since August of 2002. According to our records, the
COMB is delinquent on payment of the April 2, 2003 invoice in the amount of $60,241 (see enclosure).
Based upon the City's position and inability to reconcile the issues, and to make timely payments, DMS will proceed with
one of the following options: (I) terminate the CAA in accordance with Article 10 or (2) offer reassignment of existing ArE
and CM agreements to COMB/CIP (and discontinuing DMS services).
Please advise us within 10 calendar days which option the COMB/CIP would prefer. Under either option, we expect the City
to honor its obligation to pay the agency for the services it has rendered in accordance with the CAA.
~f1~
LeeAnn Korst, Director
Facilities Management and Building Construction
GMcCampbelltgm
Enclosure
C: Cherri Linn, Sam Morley, Richard Arcuri, Gene McCampbell
Division ofFacilitiu Management and Building Con//ruclion. 4030 Etpk1nade W"", Suite 380. Tallahame, Florida 32399.()950 . Telephone: 850488-2074 . Fax: 850-922.5844