2001-24570 RESO
RESOLUTION NO. 2001-24570
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING
AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OR HIS
DESIGNEE TO NEGOTIATE A CONTRACT WITH THE
FIRST RANKED CONTRACTING FIRM OF REGOSA
ENGINEERING, INC., PURSUANT TO REQUEST FOR
PROPOSAL (RFP) NO. 21-00/01 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION
OF THE NORMANDY PARK AND POOL FACILITY; AND IF
NOT SUCCESSFUL, AUTHORIZING THE
ADMINISTRATION TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE SECOND
RANKED FIRM OF JASCO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY,
INe.; MOREOVER, IF THE NEGOTIATIONS ARE
SUCCESSFUL, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE
MA YOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE THE
AFORESTATED CONTRACT; ADDITIONALLY
APPROPRIATING FUNDS, IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF
$2,553,932, COMPRISED AS FOLLOWS: $35,719(COMPOSED
OF $35,557 FROM THE PARK GENERAL OBLIGATION
BOND FUND NO. 370, AND $162 FROM THE SAFE
NEIGHBORHOOD FUND) TO COVER THE CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS OFFICE MANAGEMENT FEE;
$119,060 (COMPOSED OF $83,530 FROM THE PARK
GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND FUND NO. 370, $34,995
FROM THE GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND FUND NO.374,
AND $535 FROM THE SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS
BOND FUND) FOR PROGRAM MANAGEMENT FEE; $17,947
FROM THE PARK GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND FUND
NO. 370 FOR ART IN PUBLIC PLACES; $2,381,206
(COMPOSED OF $2,129,901 FROM THE PARK GENERAL
OBLIGATION BOND FUND NO.370, $240,591 FROM THE
GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND FUND NO.374, AND $10,714
FROM THE SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD FUND) TO COVER
THE COST OF CONSTRUCTION, FURNITURE, FIXTURES
AND EQUIPMENT, AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION
RELATED EXPENSES FOR THE PROJECT.
WHEREAS, the citizens of Miami Beach voted funds from
the 1994 Parks General Obligation Bond and the $1999 General
Obligation Bond for the improvements of the City's parks. including
Normandy Park and Pool; and
WHEREAS, in July of 1997, the City entered into an
Agreement with the architectural firm of Carr Smith Corradino (The
Corradino Group, Inc.) to develop plans and specifications for the
improvements of three (3) projects included in the Parks Bond Master
Plan, including Normandy Park and Pool; and
WHEREAS, the budget available for the construction phase
ofthe Normandy Park and Pool is $2,381,206, of which $2,175,000
is earmarked for hard construction, and the remaining balance is
scheduled to cover the costs of furniture, fixture and equipment,
playground equipment, signage, special inspector fee, other related
construction expenses; and
WHEREAS, the Project was extensively reviewed by the
community during the programming and design phases; and
subsequently the construction documents were completed by the
City's consultant; and
WHEREAS, on September 1, 2000, the Project was initially
issued for bids; and on December 5, 2000, bids were received and
they significantly exceeded the Project budget; and
WHEREAS, as a result, on January 31, 2001, the Mayor and
City Commission rejected all bids, and subsequent authorization was
given to the Administration to seek new proposals for the
construction of the Project; and
WHEREAS, prior to the issuance of a new Request for
Proposals, City staff and the City's consultant re-packaged the
proposals documents to identify the eight (8) principal components
of the Project, as follows: pool building, multipurpose courts, site
landscaping, soccer field renovation, walkways and entry features,
perimeter fencing, lighting, on-street parking improvements; making
possible a plan for prioritization and phasing of the Project, as
necessary; and
WHEREAS, Request for Proposal (RFP) No. 21-00/01 was
issued on March 16,2001; on May 17, 200, the following four (4)
responsive proposals were received: Regosa Engineering, Inc.; JCI
International, Inc.; Carivon Construction Co.; Jasco Construction Co.
Inc.; as well as one non-responsive proposal; and
WHEREAS, subsequently the Administration established an
Evaluation Committee of seven (7) members, composed of City staff
and private citizens, to review, evaluate and recommend a contractor
to the City Manager; and
WHEREAS, on August 15, 2001, the four (4) responsive
proposers presented their respective proposals to the Evaluation
Committee; and
WHEREAS, the Evaluation Committee evaluated the four
(4) responsive proposers based on their experience and qualification
of the general contractor and sub-contractors; experience and
qualification of the pool sub-contractors; price proposal; references
of general contractor and pool sub-contractor; and methodology and
approach; and
WHEREAS, after the presentations, the Evaluation
Committee deliberated and ranked the firms in the following order:
Regosa Engineering, Inc. was ranked No.1; Jasco Construction Co.
Inc. was ranked No.2; JCI International, Inc. was ranked No.3;
Carivon Construction Co. was ranked No.4; and
WHEREAS, Regosa Engineering, Inc., in addition to
receiving a unanimous vote from the Committee, was also considered
the best experienced firm, with good past performance in City
projects, including the ongoing construction of the Flamingo Pool,
which is a similar project; and
WHEREAS, all proposals exceeded the Project's available
budget for construction of $2,175,000; and
WHEREAS, consequently, the Evaluation Committee
requested City staff and the City's consultant take the necessary steps
to value engineer the Project, with the top ranked contractor; to bring
it within budget; and if not successful, recommended to further
conduct negotiations with the second ranked contracting firm; and
WHEREAS, moreover, during deliberation, the Committee's
members understood that the Administration shall also have the
option, if necessary, to prioritize and phase the construction of the
Project, per components; and the members also concur that the
aquatic center was the most important component in terms of
prioritization; and
WHEREAS, the Committee members understood that, if
after negotiations with the top ranked contractors, it is determined by
the Administration that the funds currently available will not be
sufficient to cover the construction expenses for all the Project's
components, the Administration shall have the flexibility to phase the
construction of the Project until additional funds are identified and
made available to construct the remaining components.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT DULY RESOLVED BY THE
MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that the Mayor and the City
Commission approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee
to negotiate a contract with the first ranked contracting firm of
Regosa Engineering, Inc., pursuant to Request for Proposal (RFP) No.
21-00/01 for the construction of the Normandy Park and Pool facility;
and if not successful, authorizing the administration to negotiate with
the second ranked firm of Jasco Construction Company, Inc.;
moreover, if the negotiations are successful, approve and authorize
the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the aforestated contract;
additionally appropriate funds, in the total amount of $2,553,932,
comprised as follows: $35,719(composed of $35,557 from the Park
General Obligation Bond Fund No. 370, and $162 from the Safe
Neighborhood Fund) to cover the Capital Improvement Projects
Office Management fee; $119,060 (composed of $83,530 from the
Park General Obligation Bond Fund No. 370, $34,995 from the
General Obligation Bond Fund No.374, and $535 from the Safe
Neighborhood Parks Bond Fund) for Program Management fee;
$17,947 from the Park General obligation Bond Fund No. 370 for Art
in Public Places; $2,381,206 (composed of $2,129,901 from the Park
General Obligation Bond Fund No.370, $240,591 from the General
Obligation Bond Fund no.374, and $10,714 from the Safe
Neighborhood Fund) to cover the cost of construction, furniture,
fixtures and equipment, and other construction related expenses for
the Project.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of Sept., 2001.
#t
MAYOR
ATTEST:
~d' ~~
APPROVED AS TO
FORM & LANGUAGE
& FOR EXECUTION
CITY CLERK
gr~(
Cr-- Date
F;\WORINALL\MAGMID.GOBOND\NORFPRES.WPD
>~C-4 r:r "t:I . "t:I . "t:I . "t:I . ::r "t:I . ..
::l:~S::: '-<: 8 .... 8 8 ~ 8 ..
~~O n 0 t"'
<: <: <: <: -. <: _.
()~::<l 0 s.: s.: s.: s.: () -. '"
~ g; go ...
~~n " " " ;J> " ;J>
;J>;J> '" ;J> " S' ~ So
!H~ " (JQ~ [ ~ ;J>~ S'~
.... a >: ~ .o~ o ~ 'O'O~;J>
'" ~ () ;J> ~~ g;~;J>Q.
1i [ -. 7'";J>
60 " - ::s - 0 1f (tl......._c..
- - ~ - " - t;;'"~.......>
gtl:l tI'l " " " x " " " "
0,,-- ::s () 8 8 '" 8 () 8 '" 8 -
aQ i'I" _. ...
" o '" '0 ~ -~ ~ '" '" ..
zt"' .... ::s - :0-. g-"
~~ (JQ <: " n' " '0 " " " =
'-<: " 'lto i'I"'lto 0 'lto a. 'lto _ 'lto 10
!~ [JJ Vl Vl ~.;. 0 w ~N C1Q -;-
-
'0 o' - r:
" (t> :0-. 0 ~
() ::s ::s ::s ::s
~s::: [ ~. () <n' '0 ~
" ::r
_. s- o 1t
'" g; _. 2.-
- ::s
.?' tI'l ~ - ~ "
EB -
- () (;. " i
::s ~ 0 '" ()
r> g 0 i'I"
_.
.... ...., ::s
~ ~ '" - ~
" 0 _. ~
"
'0 ~. '" 0
s.: (;. 0 0
....
q' .... ...., '"
'" 0 () 8-
3 ~ 5- 0
::s
0 '0 tl:I () ~.
a. " ~
.... ::J.
- ~. 5-
0 r;
....
'" :0-. :0-. 0
- r; a. ::s ::;
0 .... _. '"
() '" '"
0 ::r P" S'
0 ....,
~ ~ -
'0 _.
!l ~ _. "
a '"
0
tI'l " ....,
....
"t:I o' '"
0 .... [
'" '"
g; '" ~.
~ S>
::'l ()
"
- 0 8-
"
.... ....,
'" '0
'-<: 0 (JQ
1t -
?'- e;
3 '"
8" g-
o
g: ....
'"
8: 8-
::s ~.
(JQ
::; ::s
~ ~
" ~
"
[JJ '0
'0 ~
"
()
_. ~
:0-.
()
~ ~
_. r:r
0 '-<:
5l (l
'0 3
8 0
<: <:
s.: ~
" -
~ "
+ "t:I ...., "t:I ...., n tl:I t:i
;J>8 sa. .... 0 0 '" ..
0 !il. a '" '"
~'O eo. '0 " to
" 0 0 _. .,
8 '" tl:I '" tl:I ::s "t:I _.
eo. (JQ 8 'Cl
'" eo. '" '" " ...
- '" '" ::s '0 -.
" " " 0
'" () 0
* '-<: '" =
* eo.
"
..
IJQ
0
'"
10
l"'J
=
IJQ
:j'
..
V> V> V> ..
w N N .,
V> -.
'0 00 N V, =
--l Vl Vl \C t!'l
N '" \C --l ...
':...J ':...J ':...J '0 =
0 0 0 0 l"
0 0 0 0
...
n
...
...
=
...
..
.,
=
10
...
-.
0
=
V> V> V> 10
w N V> N ::-
- '-c N ':...J ...
.;. \C --l N =
'" .\C N '" l"
'-c - '" v,
Vl \C Vl .;.
N .;. .;. 0
r"l
10
.,
-.
<:
0
=
r"l
0
=
'"
...
V> V> V> ;;!
W w N to
V> ...
't..> - N '-c -.
0
--l \C \C 0 =
0 \C 0 00
00 00 00 '-c r"l
--l --l \C --l ?
--l --l 00 \C
...
10
'"
to
0
r"l
0
=
'"
...
.,
=
to
...
-.
0
V> =
W V> n
V> ~ W V> f
w 00 - w
':...J \C --l - ...
'" 00 N --l =
w w Vl N l"
't..> .;. --l V,
00 :...., :...., --l
.;. 0 0 --l
l"'J
~
...
I:l:I
...
..,
~
Ii ~
&~
I i
ttN~~G<=~ ;Ui.~
Hn.. In
I J ~ i
l I I I
f
~ : p ~ !>> :""
i I r I
i i ~ i
t f
i
i
i
..................
..... .....
......... ....................
ill 111:1:
:"m,:;::: -;:.:::':'.::::;: :.;.:.:<.:~.:
........ ......
........... .......
.... -....
........ ......
....... .-..-,
".".:.:...;
:.<:-;:~>::
':'.<',':<' .;.....:.,,<
::::w::r.;.:.;.;.'"
li;l;
.,.,,<<-:-:
il
}W~::~
:::';',::;",'
lll1l
lit
::~::~:::;:
WC.,~--.afDe:~:a.
<>> <>>
:..., :...,
'" '"
...
o e CD ~ C>> ~
.. ~
~ ~ CD CD CD ~
~ ,..
~
~ (It ..... c>>
CD CD e ~ ..... i
.. ~
..... ..... ..... ..... ..... .....
:..., (,,) w W w w
..... ..... ..... .....
w :..., :.... :...,
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~
nnn
o j ~ I f i
J r! I
.:<.:.:.;.;."
:.}:,:.
11
:::::':::::'"
e: e (D ., CD fD
~ CD ..... ~ at CIt
:: ~ CD ~
~ ~
w w
0.. ~ ~ <>> co '" ~ ~ ~ ~ <>> CD ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ CD '" '" '" ~ ...
! io ill ... '" ... '" ill '" '" CD ... '"
.%
it
0
~.. .. .. .. <>> <>> ~ '" .. ~ ... ~ .. <>> <>> <>> ~ ... ... ~ ... ~ ... ~ ... <>>
u ... ... ... ill ... ... ... '" '" '"
i
1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
il .. . <>> CD ... CD <>> <>> <>> ~ - CD CD CD ... ... <>> '" <>> <>>
... '" ill '" .. 0 ill ill '" .. .. ... ..
~
~
~.. .. ~ ~ <>> ~ ~ <>> ... ~ ... <>> ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .. ... .. <>> .. ..
u ... ill ... <>> ... ... '" '" '" '" '"
.%
i
I.. ~ CD '" '" '" '" '" '" ... '" '" CD <>> ~ CD <>> <>> <>> <>> <>> <>> <>> CD .. <>>
~ ... ... ... ~ ... ... ... ... ... ... '" ... .. '" '"
(')
o
~
i:
ii'
a
-
m
CD
I>>
n
::T
'.','....................,.....1......:.
1.llil
Ii
z
o
..,
cn3
c S>>
3 =
3CL
1>>'<
-<"lJ
;:uS>>
I>> ..,
ct.~
="lJ
ceo
;:UO
CD -
'8'"
::l~
-.
-
~
II
I
h
l
I
l
I
if
II
f
111=
'J
1.
3. v.. Far ~
3
8
8
8
10
10
10
8
e
e
7
e
~
e.
9. ZIro o...ctIQ
e
8
8
8
8
8
10
10
e
e
7
9
14.
15. OwnerT
T_,.
Comments
IA
7.J ...
BlggooI *-'llIh . EldrwnoIy good II
_ ~ 1"''''_ -'dng_1I1e
~_' ~ of budgIIl Producea
oquIpnorL n.y quoay -. good
_.. ...._ III11e punch ....
~.. pRIjIct on _.,....por1Ioe
__ w...'M'f otll1e_
,-_them_ _.
wI.......lo ...
them.
8
7
8
7
7
8
8
7.'
Gnol.IgII.....
quoayot_
N.__
..__ w.
'- hid..
,-""'"
themrorll1e
.....10~. WII
.........10 wuk
_them.
18. ....conolructio
18. ....conolructio
20.
And Record
7
8
8
9
9
8
9
10
10
10
9
9
10
10
21.
22. ClIlme - RlIIOn_.... And TimeIi....
23. c_ ~ Proceso
Copyright C 2000 ratlngsource.com. Inc. All rights reserved.
I i
f
f
I
;i J~M ~~il:~~;;,
.) ~~~:~: .:.~ ~ '.
:> ....".:.
:c;m~ I{I j~%:~~ ~
"CfD~"""lD~~e:Gt
N.:..~:~jjjj
..~...,......~~~~~~
~
J..i:......GlUI:~~i~
it
o
1..;011'11'
i -......
f
~ '" CD ..
~. ill :." '" ill
CD CD j
e CD j
'" j j f: CD
r>
~
l"i:J~:
I
.... . j ~ .
i
_1I1i!~
~ ~ CD e
C>> CD ...... GI
...... .... ..., ....
w :...., :..., :....,
~ : ::: ....
~ i e GI
j at ~ 0
,.. !!! ,.. II'
W )Ii c.t at
f
I
~ii~'-f
i i I i
~ i I
I f I
'It~1 ;=.'*:,; .. "",
',.. ,'~"-'~< ~ . "
~t~tf i~i~~[~ ~f@~~: i~t ':;~~ <<~ ;~W,:~:.
o e CD ~ at ~
CD CD : ~ ~ ~
~ i;: ~ ~ ;;: ~
j ~ '" j j j
at CII i:: .... ~ ~
J : : j j '"
j j i i i i
fll!P
I ~ f i
trp
~~:'-<1' ..<< ,.
~< ~~
,
.."' '::
~ ;.
,
I!~if ~%f; ~::ii< ~@~ L~ <,
~eGlfDC>>C11
.... C>> ..... ..... CD
u. en u. en '" C>>
......:"'1 ............
;.", .... C>> Co. W W
G e G C>> :::: .....
~ j .... ~
.. l"
..
~ ~ C ., c :
= ..
f: <<>> ~ ~
o
So
~
iii'
:I
-
OJ
CD
.
n
:7
~ ,." ,~
~ .? ::;;
~ ~
,. " ::~
:;' ,~L ~"
II z
0
03
C t>>
!l :I ~
I 2~
~'t
::at>>
. '"
h ='"
:s 't
COo
::a 0
CD -
"8"
l ~p:
f -
-
-
.:<
l
I
If
II
5. Qood NrtJ
0el:l0I0n
10
8
8
8
8
NlA
8
8
7
II
II
8
8
10
10
II
3. ".. F<< DaIIra
4.Cv....A..JI To Do WhrIiIaw . T...
a
lI.z.o
10.-.ct_
11.llldl.d FIIId
- P.........
NlA
NlA
10
10
NlA
NlA
8
8
NlA
NlA
10
10
NlA
NlA
10
10
15. OWnorT
Pr: ~ II
;ftltlflW&
.' ..._-.......
10
8
7
NlA
NlA
8
NlA
NlA
10
8
9
NlA
10
II
NlA
NlA
13.
14.
T..., MIl.......
To~_
18.~ Slle CIMI..-o.__
m!J&11E
........~~*"'~
Rp"-pon"ll)rlify & r,,1,tn,IC)!'TTll'nl Record
17. ~Coot jglj!Ql!@ 5 NlA II 10
wUN.~.'"_,_,,W""N._.
18.~ ConIroI -- mfl!:!ltiffit 8 8 10 NlA
""""."""'"
111.~ "...W.- n........ NlA NlA NlA NlA
.......w.. ....u.......
"UN",U W.W.",
::~:::::;;::,':':,,... :'f.:::::::::;:,:
2O._Coot....~ &}[[.,1\j;[; NlA NlA NlA NlA
""""Ij"""""
21.~ NrtJ R_ ....-.>;.-.....;.' '"'-"'-'-''-' 8 8 10 10
".WN.. - ......."U..
-x~?;:b~..:~..::~d%
22. CloinI- R___And~ ~"t"mN; 5 NlA 10 NlA
23. CIooeOW_ :fiSimfi 8 NlA 10 II
204.p~ ,,,. AJIM I[~;i 7 NlA II 10
TotIIA_ ... 1.1 ... '.1 ...
Comments w. .. Wl'f hippy TIlly.. ..... BilIgoIlIlrlnQlh II BilIgoIlIlrlnQlh II
willi tho_1hIy pIIyIrI-- _ pIl'IOI~ ond l"* plIIIdmIy end
did. TIlly.. Wl'f __ TIlly ~ IocoI end ~g...""'I~
=~ "Wl'f ..-. _. TIlI_ tIaIow up. A light
Rope In tho oIIIco ...... In
ccUI...--. El~II. ~...~....... -....."'....
Wl'fgood ~wIIII r.v- .-r-
-,~.,. ~-....
Copyright C 2000 ratlngsource.com. Inc. All rights reserved.
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
CITY HALL 1700 CONVENTION CENTER DRIVE MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA 33139
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM,
DATE: September 5, 2001
Mayor Neisen O. Kasdin and
Members of the City Commission
Jorge M. Gonzalez \ ~
City Manager Q' 0
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE
CITY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO NEGOTIATE A CONTRACT WITH
THE FIRST RANKED CONTRACTING FIRM OF REGOSA ENGINEERING,
INC., PURSUANT TO REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) NO. 21-00/01 FOR
THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE NORMANDY PARK AND POOL FACILITY;
AND IF NOT SUCCESSFUL, AUTHORIZING THE ADMINISTRATION TO
NEGOTIATE WITH THE SECOND RANKED FIRM OF JASCO
CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC.; MOREOVER, IF THE NEGOTIATIONS
ARE SUCCESSFUL, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND
CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE THE AFORESTATED CONTRACT;
ADDITIONALLY APPROPRIATING FUNDS, IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF
$2,553,932, COMPRISED AS FOLLOWS: $35,719(COMPOSED OF $35,557
FROM THE PARK GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND FUND NO. 370, AND $162
FROM THE SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD FUND) TO COVER THE CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS OFFICE MANAGEMENT FEE; $119,060
(COMPOSED OF $83,530 FROM THE PARK GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND
FUND NO. 370, $34,995 FROM THE GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND FUND
NO.374, AND $535 FROM THE SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS BOND FUND)
FOR PROGRAM MANAGEMENT FEE; $17,947 FROM THE PARK GENERAL
OBLIGATION BOND FUND NO. 370 FOR ART IN PUBLIC PLACES;
$2,381,206 (COMPOSED OF $2,129,901 FROM THE PARK GENERAL
OBLIGATION BOND FUND NO.370, $240,591 FROM THE GENERAL
OBLIGATION BOND FUND NO.374, AND $10,714 FROM THE SAFE
NEIGHBORHOOD FUND) TO COVER THE COST OF CONSTRUCTION,
FURNITURES, FIXTURE AND EQUIPMENT, AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION
RELATED EXPENSES FOR THE PROJECT.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt the Resolution.
AGENDA ITEM Y 1 D
DATE '1-5'-01
FUNDING:
Funding in the total amount of$2,553,932, is available as follows:
. $2,203,348 from the $15 Million Parks General Obligation Bond Fund No. 370
. $63,587 from the $15 Million Parks General Obligation Bond Interest- Fund No. 370
. $275,586 from the $92 Million General Obligation Bond Fund No. 374
. $11,411 from the Miami-Dade County Safe Neighborhood Parks Bond Fund No. 371
ANALYSIS
The Normandy Park and Pool improvements project has been an ongoing and expanded vision of the
community, the Mayor and Members of the City Commission, and the Administration since early 1994
when a referral to a joint meeting of the Finance and Capital Improvements Committee initially
discussed the issuance of a general obligation bonds in the amount of $40 million for the city's park
system improvement. At the time of the referral, the Park Bond Master Plan estimated $1,618,300 to
cover the expenses included in the scope of the Normandy Park and Pool project. The scope of work
included in the Master Plan consisted, among other improvements to the park, of the renovation of the
existing pool facility and locker rooms, the addition of a new recreation center on the first floor and of
additional shade pavilions, a field house with a small restroom, renovation of the fields and courts, new
irrigation, new multi-purpose court.
Pursuant to the approval by the citizens of the $15 Million General Obligation Bond for the
improvements to the City's parks, the City entered into an Agreement with the architectural firm of Carr
Smith Corradino (The Corradino Group, Inc.) to develop plans and specifications for the Normandy
Park and Pool facility improvements and two other projects included in the Parks Bond Master Plan.
The project was extensively reviewed by the community during the programming and design phases.
Based on analysis of projected demographic data of the region and in order to upgrade the quality of
services being offered to the community, the Administration and the city's consultant re-evaluated the
scope highlighted in the Master Plan. As a result, the program was re-defined and a more
comprehensive aquatic facility consisting of an interactive pool, equipped with an aquatic play structure,
and a four (4) lane lap pool was proposed in lieu of the previously proposed renovation of the existing
facility.
The project scope includes the following:
1. An interactive pool with a maximum depth of eighteen (18) inches and a zero depth on one side,
to allow access to prospective users with disabilities.
2. A four (4) lane lap pool, separated from the former by a ten (10) foot wide deck. It has a
maximum depth of seven (7) feet and a minimum of 3"-6". Pool lifts will provide access to
individuals with disabilities, as required by the accessibility codes. The pools have a bathing
load capacity of ninety nine (99) and fifty (50) persons, respectively.
3. The construction of new restrooms and shower facilities, multi-purpose activity building,
outdoor trellis shade areas, and a concession building. A new pedestrian promenade is also
proposed to traverse the length of the park; new landscaping and irrigation including a buffer
between the park and the adjacent residential neighborhood is also included. The existing soccer
field is proposed to be refurbished and new sport lighting will be provided. The existing
basketball and tennis courts will be removed and a new multi purpose courts with sport lighting
is being proposed instead. New entry gate features and decorative perimeter park fencing are
also included in the scope. On-street parking, sidewalk improvements will also be provided.
The total estimated construction budget is $2,381,206, of which $2,175,000 is earmarked for hard
construction and the remaining balance for fixture, furniture and equipment (FF&E), signage,
playground equipment, and special inspection fee.
The following table indicates the funds distribution for the project:
FUNDING DISTRIBUTION TABLE
Description Parks Parks Bond G.O. Bond SNPB Total
Bond Interest
Construction Budget $1,860,108 $63,587 $240,591 $10,714 $2,175,000
CIP Management $35,557 $162 $35,719
Program Management $83,530 $34,995 $535 $119,060
Art in Public Places $17,947 $17,947
Special Inspector Fee $20,458 $20,458
Signage allowance $30,000 $30,000
Liquidated savings $30,000 $30,000
Furniture, fixture, $125,748 $125,748
equipment and
playground equipment
Total $2,203,348 $63,587 $275,586 $11,411 $2,553,932
Initially, the project was put out to bid in late 2000. All the bids significantly exceeded the project
budget, and were then rejected by the City Commission.
Pursuant to the rejection of all bids by the Mayor and City Commission on January 31, 2001,
subsequent authorization was given to the Administration to seek new proposals for the construction
of the Normandy Park and Pool project. Request for Proposal (RFP) # 21-00/01 was issued on March
16,2001. Five hundred ninety eight (598) vendors were notified. Sixteen (l6)requests for plans and
specifications were received. A Pre-proposal Conference was held on March 29, 2001. A Site
Inspection was conducted immediately thereafter. During the RFP phase, the prospective proposers
issued a number of requests for information. As a result, there were three (3) Amendments to the
construction documents. In addition, the proposals opening date was extended to May 17,2001. Four
(4) responsive, and one (I) non-responsive proposals were received by the City. They are as follows:
. Regosa Engineering, Inc.
. JCI International, Inc.
. Carivon Construction Co.
. Jasco Construction Co. Inc.
. Rovel Construction, Inc. (Non responsive)
The proposers' proposals included all labor, materials, equipment and supervision necessary to
complete the Normandy Park and Pool Project in accordance with the specifications and drawings.
The contract document stipulates that substantial completion must be attained within two hundred
seventy (270) calendar days after the issuance ofthe Notice to Proceed. Additionally, the project must
be completed and ready for final payment thirty (30) calendar days following the substantial completion
date.
The Scope of Work is as stated above and encompasses the following eight (8) components:
1. Pool Building
2. Multipurpose courts
3. Site landscaping
4. Soccer field renovation
5. Walkways and entry features
6. Perimeter fencing
7. Lighting
8. On-street parking improvements
The tabulation of the proposals attached, (Exhibit "A"), indicates the proposers' quotes for the
construction of the project.
The Administration and the City's consultant, the Corradino Group have evaluated the proposals and
the proposers' references were also verified by Rating Source. Corn Inc.
On June 15,2001, the Administration established an Evaluation Committee composed of seven (7)
members- City's staff and private citizens alike- to review, evaluate, and make a recommendation
regarding the proposals received. Due to the unavailability of some members to serve in the initial
committee, the Administration created a new committee (Letter to Commission (LTC) # 180-2001
dated July 31, 2001).
The Evaluation Committee's composition was as follows:
. Michel Magloire, Sr. Capital Projects Coordinator, CIP Office, City of Miami Beach
. Roberto Sanchez, G.O. Bond Oversight Committee Member and North Beach Resident
. Julio Magrisso, Resident
. Martin Hyman, G.O. Bond Oversight Committee Member, Architect and Resident
. Kevin Smith, Parks and Recreation Department Director
. Ramiro Inguanzo, Chief of Staff, Office of the City Manager, City of Miami Beach
The Evaluation Committee met on August 15,2001. Unanimously, Mr. Roberto Sanchez was voted
Chairman of the Committee. Subsequently, the Committee heard and evaluated the proposers on the
following criteria:
1. Experience and qualification of the general contractor and sub-contractors
2. Experience and qualification of the pool sub-contractors
3. Price proposal
4. References of general contractor and pool sub-contractor
5. Methodology and approach
After the presentation of all the proposers, the Committee deliberated and ranked the firms as follows:
. Regosa Engineering, Inc. was ranked No.1
. Jasco Construction Co. Inc. was ranked No.2
. JCllnternational, Inc. was ranked No.3
. Carivon Construction Co. was ranked No.4
The following is an highlight of Regosa Engineering, Inc.'s strength as determined by the Committee:
. Lowest proposer
. Good general contractor's reference from the Rating Source.Com Inc.
. Good pool sub-contractor's reference
. Confidence in the methodology and approach to value engineer the project
In addition, Regosa Engineering Inc. good track record with City's projects was also taken into
consideration, including its current performance during the construction of the ongoing Flamingo Pool
project estimated to be completed during the spring of 2002.
Due to the fact that all proposals exceeded the project's available budget for construction of$2, 175, 000
(Exhibit "A"), the Selection Committee requested City staff and the City's consultant to take the
necessary steps to value engineer the project with the top ranked contractor, to bring it within budget.
During the presentation of its Proposal, Regosa Engineering, Inc. indicated alternative materials and
systems that could be explored to considerably reduce its proposal and bring it closer to the City's
available budget. Therefore the negotiations were recommended to be conducted with the Regosa
Engineering, Inc., the first ranked contracting firm; if not successful, the Administration was
recommended to further conduct negotiations with the second ranked firm of Jasco Construction
Company Inc.. Moreover, during deliberation, the Committee's members understood that the
Administration shall also have the option, if necessary, to prioritize the construction of the project per
components. The members also concur that the aquatic center was the most important component in
terms of prioritization. Therefore, if after negotiations with the top ranked contractor, it is determined
by the Administration that the funds currently available will not be sufficient to cover the construction
expenses for all the project's components, the Administration shall have the flexibility to phase the
construction of the project until additional funds are identified and made available to complete the
construction ofthe remaining project.
The Administration concurs with the Normandy Park and Pool Evaluation Committee and recommends
the adoption of the attached Resolution by the Mayor and City Commission.
~