2011-27652 Reso RESOLUTION NO. 2011 - 27652
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, ACCEPTING THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY
MANAGER PERTAINING TO THE RANKING OF ARCHITECTURAL AND
ENGINEERING PROPOSALS, PURSUANT TO REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS
(RFQ) NO. 22- 10/11, FOR RESIDENT PROJECT REPRESENTATIVE SERVICES
FOR RIGHT -OF -WAY IMPROVEMENTS TO NEIGHBORHOOD NO. 8 CENTRAL
BAYSHORE (PACKAGE A), LOWER NORTH BAY ROAD (PACKAGE B), AND
LAKE PANCOAST (PACKAGE C); AUTHORIZING THE ADMINISTRATION TO
ENTER INTO NEGOTIATIONS FOR PACKAGES A, B, & C WITH THE TOP -
RANKED PROPOSER, ATKINS (PBS &J); AND SHOULD THE ADMINISTRATION
NOT BE SUCCESSFUL IN NEGOTIATING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE TOP -
RANKED PROPOSER, AUTHORIZING NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE SECOND -
RANKED PROPOSER, CALVIN GIORDANO & ASSOCIATES INC.; AND SHOULD
THE ADMINISTRATION NOT BE SUCCESSFUL IN NEGOTIATING AN
AGREEMENT WITH THE SECOND - RANKED PROPOSER, AUTHORIZING
NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE THIRD - RANKED PROPOSER, A & P CONSULTING
TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS, CORP.
WHEREAS, on April 13, 2011, the Mayor and City Commission retroactively
approved the issuance of Request for Qualifications (RFQ) No. 22- 010/11, for Resident
Project Representative Services for Right -of -Way Improvements to Neighborhood No. 8,
Central Bayshore (Package A), Lower North Bay Road (Package B), and Lake Pancoast
(Package C), (the "RFQ "); and
WHEREAS, the RFQ was issued on March 25, 2011, with an opening date of April
15, 2011; and
WHEREAS, a pre - proposal conference to provide information to the proposers
submitting a response was held on April 1, 2011; and
WHEREAS, BidNet issued bid notices to 371 proposers; BidSync (formerly known as
RFP Depot) issued bid notices to 6,107 prospective proposers, of which 25 viewed the
notice; and more than 100 local proposers were notified via mail /e -mail, which resulted in
the receipt of thirteen (13) proposals ; and
WHEREAS, on April 7, 2011, the City Manager via Letter to Commission (LTC) No.
081 -2011, appointed an Evaluation Committee ( "the Committee ") consisting of the following
individuals:
• Hector Castro, Assistant Director, Public Works;
• Janette Fernandez- Arencibia, Capital Projects Coordinator, CIP;
• Max Berney , Resident and Leadership Academy Graduate;
• Michael Alvarez, Director, Infrastructure Division, Public Works ;
• Muayad Abbas, Resident and Leadership Academy Graduate;
Alternates:
• Carol Housen, Resident and Leadership Academy Graduate:
• Fred Karlton, CIPOC member; and
WHEREAS, resident Max Berney was unable to participate on the Committee, and
resident Carol Housen was appointed to the Committee to replace Mr. Berney; and
WHEREAS, the Committee convened on April 26, 2011, and was provided with
general information on the scope of services, Performance Evaluation Surveys, and
additional pertinent information from all responsive proposers; and
WHEREAS, the Committee members discussed their individual perceptions of the
proposers' qualifications, experience, and competence, and ranked the proposers
accordingly; and
WHEREAS, a motion was unanimously approved to recommend short listing the top
five (5) ranked proposers; and
WHEREAS, the Committee convened again on April 29, 2011, was provided with
presentations from all short - listed proposers; and
WHEREAS, the Committee recommended, for Packages A & C, the following:
1. Atkins (PBS &J);
2. Chen & Associates d /b /a Chen Moore and Associates;
3. Calvin Giordano & Associates, Inc.; and
WHEREAS, the Committee recommended, for Package B, the following:
1. Chen & Associates d /b /a Chen Moore and Associates;
2. Atkins (PBS &J);
3. Calvin Giordano & Associates, Inc.; and
WHEREAS, in order to avoid that the same proposer would be recommended for all
packages, the Committed further recommended that if negotiations with the top- ranked
proposer for one of the packages were unsuccessful, said proposer would not be considered
for award to the other package; and
WHEREAS, a motion was unanimously approved by the Committee to recommend
entering into negotiations with the top two (2) ranked proposers: Atkins (PBS &J) for Package
A & C, and Chen & Associates d /b /a Chen Moore and Associates for Package B; and should
the Administration not be successful in negotiating an agreement with the top- ranked
proposers, authorizing negotiations with the second - ranked proposer: Chen & Associates
d /b /a Chen Moore and Associates for Package A & C, and Atkins (PBS &J) for Package B;
and should the Administration not be successful in negotiating an agreement with the
second - ranked proposers, authorizing negotiations with the third - ranked proposer: Calvin
Giordano & Associates, Inc for Packages A, B, & C; and
WHEREAS, after considering the review and recommendation of the Evaluation
Committee, the City Manager exercised his due diligence and carefully considered the
specifics of this RFQ process;
WHEREAS, as a result, the City Manager recommends that it would be in the best
interest of the City to retain the same proposer for Packages A, B, & C, since the three
packages are located within the same (Bayshore) neighborhood, and further, to ensure the
equitable distribution of the work, he is recommending awarding Packages A, B & C to the
top- ranked proposer, Atkins (PBS &J); and should the Administration not be successful in
negotiating an agreement with the top- ranked proposer; authorizing negotiations with the
second - ranked proposer, Calvin Giordano & Associates Inc.; and should the Administration
r -
not be successful in negotiating an agreement with the second - ranked proposer, authorizing
negotiations with the third - ranked proposer, A & P Consulting Transportation Engineers,
Corp,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that the Mayor and City Commission hereby
accept the recommendation of the City Manager, pursuant to Request for Qualifications
(RFQ) No. 22- 010/11 for Resident Project Representative Services for Right -of -Way
Improvements to Neighborhood No. 8, Central Bayshore (Package A), Lower North Bay
Road (Package B), and Lake Pancoast (Package C).; authorizing the Administration to
negotiate Packages A, B & C with the top- ranked proposer, Atkins (PBS &J); and should the
Administration not be successful in negotiating an agreement with the top- ranked proposer,
authorizing negotiations with the second - ranked proposer, Calvin Giordano & Associates
Inc.; and should the Administration not be successful in negotiating an agreement with the
second - ranked proposer, authorizing negotiations with the third - ranked proposer, A & P
Consulting Transportation Engineers, Corp.
PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS / /it- DAY OF Q 2011.
ATTEST:
L . r 4/141U&
AfArte,yriari
CITY CLERK A i
T: • 1 l �•1�- .'l, 22 -10 -11 - RPR Services - RESO.doc
••,�
•: .
-"` �:•, •
* •
I.INCORP ORATED *
•
(. 26 TM
APPROVED AS TO
FORM & LANGUAGE
& FOR EXECUTION
ttorney T' Date
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
A Resolution Of The Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami Beach, Florida Accepting The Recommendation
Of The City Manager Pertaining To The Ranking Of Proposals Pursuant To Request For Qualifications (RFQ) No. 22-
10/11 For Resident Project Representative Services For Right -of -Way Improvements To Neighborhood No. 8, Central
e A
Bayshore (Package A), Lower North Bay Road (Package B), And Lake Pancoast (Package C).; Authorizing ( 9) Y e B e C ( 9) ( 9) 9 The
Administration To Enter Into Negotiations For Packages A, B, & C With The Top- Ranked Proposer, Atkins (PBS &J);
and Should The Administration Not Be Successful In Negotiating An Agreement With The Top- Ranked Proposer,
Authorizing Negotiations With The Second - Ranked Proposer, Calvin Giordano & Associates Inc, and Should The
Administration Not Be Successful In Negotiating An Agreement With The Second - Ranked Proposer, Authorizing
Ne•otiations With The Third - Ranked Proposer, A & P Consulting Transportation Engineers, Corp.
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Ensure Value and Timely Delivery of Quality Capital Projects. Maintain City's Infrastructure.
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): The 2009 Miami Beach Community Satisfactory
Survey indicates that 100% of the projects were substantially completed within 120 days of construction schedule. The
2007 Miami Beach Community Satisfactory Survey indicates that 84% of residents and 86% of businesses rated the
services as good or excellent for recently completed capital improvement projects.
Issue:
1 Shall the Mayor and City Commission Adopt The Resolution?
Item Summary /Recommendation:
On April 13, 2011, the Mayor and City Commission retroactively approved the issuance of Request for Qualifications
(RFQ) No. 22- 010/11, for Resident Project Representative Services for Right -of -Way Improvements to Neighborhood
No. 8, Central Bayshore (Package A), Lower North Bay Road (Package B), and Lake Pancoast (Package C).
RFQ No. 22- 010/11 was issued on March 25, 2011, with an opening date of April 15, 2011. A pre - proposal conference
to provide information to the proposers submitting a response was held on April 1, 2011. BidNet issued bid notices to
371 proposers, BidSync (formerly known as RFP Depot) issued bid notices to 6,107 prospective proposers of which 25
viewed the notice, and more than 100 local proposers were notified via mail, e-mail, which resulted in the receipt of
thirteen (13) proposals.
On April 7, 2011, the City Manager via Letter to Commission (LTC) No. 081 -2011, appointed an Evaluation Committee
( "the Committee ") which convened on April 26, 2011 to short list the proposers. On April 29, 2011, the Committee
convened and was provided with general information on the scope of services, Performance Evaluation Surveys,
additional pertinent information, and actual presentation from the short listed proposers.
The Committee recommended entering into negotiations with the top two (2) ranked proposers: Atkins (PBS &J) and
Chen & Associates d /b /a Chen Moore and Associates.
After considering the review and recommendation of City staff, the City Manager exercised his due diligence and is
recommending that the Mayor and the City Commission authorize negotiations for packages A, B & C o with the top -
ranked proposer, Atkins (PBS &J), and should the Administration not be successful in negotiating an agreement with the
top- ranked proposer, authorizing negotiations with the second - ranked Proposer, Calvin Giordano & Associates Inc, and
should the Administration not be successful in negotiating an agreement with the second - ranked proposer, authorizing
negotiations with the third - ranked proposer, A & P Consulting Transportation Engineers, Corp.
APPROVE THE RESOLUTION.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
Financial Information:
Source of Amount Account
Funds: 1
2
OBPI Total
Financial Impact Summary:
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking:
Gus Lopez, Ext. 6641
Si • n - Off a
D- pa ment Dir. ctor Assista ity Manager City Manager
ORFAINE DB JMG
T:\AGEND 4011 \5 -11 -11 \RFQ 2310 -11 RPR SeNices- Summary.doc
MI AM I BE A C H AGEND ITEM 7C-
moor DATE S---1/"--1/
-CA, MIAMIBEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager , u/"
DATE: May 11, 2011
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, ACCEPTING THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY
MANAGER PERTAINING TO THE RANKING OF ARCHITECTURAL AND
ENGINEERING PROPOSERS, PURSUANT TO REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS
(RFQ) NO. 22- 10/11, FOR RESIDENT PROJECT REPRESENTATIVE SERVICES
FOR RIGHT -OF -WAY IMPROVEMENTS TO NEIGHBORHOOD NO. 8 CENTRAL
BAYSHORE (PACKAGE A), LOWER NORTH BAY ROAD (PACKAGE B), AND
LAKE PANCOAST (PACKAGE C); AUTHORIZING THE ADMINISTRATION TO
ENTER INTO NEGOTIATIONS FOR PACKAGES A, B, & C WITH THE TOP -
RANKED PROPOSER, ATKINS (PBS &J); AND SHOULD THE ADMINISTRATION
NOT BE SUCCESSFUL IN NEGOTIATING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE TOP -
RANKED PROPOSERS, AUTHORIZING NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE SECOND -
RANKED PROPOSER, CALVIN GIORDANO & ASSOCIATES INC.; AND SHOULD
THE ADMINISTRATION NOT BE SUCCESSFUL IN NEGOTIATING AN
AGREEMENT WITH THE SECOND - RANKED PROPOSER, AUTHORIZING
NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE THIRD - RANKED PROPOSER, A & P CONSULTING
TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS, CORP.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
KEY INTENDED OUTCOME SUPPORTED
Ensure Value and Timely Delivery of Quality Capital Projects.
Maintain City's Infrastructure.
ANALYSIS
In accordance with Section 287.055, Florida Statutes, known as the "Consultants' Competitive
Negotiation Act ", the City may enter into a "continuing contract" for professional architectural
and engineering services for projects in which construction costs do not exceed $2 Million or
for study activities for which the fee does not exceed $200,000.
The City may request, accept, and consider proposals for the compensation to be paid under
the contract only during competitive negotiations, which will take place after the selection of
the proposers deemed to be the most qualified to perform the required services. If the City is
not able to negotiate a mutually satisfactory compensation schedule with the top- ranked
proposers which is determined to be fair, competitive and reasonable, additional proposers in
Commission Memorandum — RFQ# 22 -10 -11 for RPR Services for Right -of -Way Improvements to
Neighborhood No. 8, Central Bayshore (Package A), Lower North Bay Road (Package B), and Lake
Pancoast (Package C).
May 11, 2011
Page 2
the order of their competence and qualifications may be selected, and negotiations may
continue until an agreement is reached.
The City desires to independently contract with an A/E proposer to provide full -time RPR to
observe the construction of the work associated with the Bayshore Neighborhoods Right -of-
Way Improvements Projects for the Central Bayshore (8A), Lower North Bay Road (8B), and
Lake Pancoast (8C) Neighborhoods.
The RPR shall be qualified, meet all the requirements referenced herein, and have adequate
understanding of the Project, and be able to address, process, evaluate, recommend, respond
to, and review construction related correspondence. In general, RPRs will conduct onsite
observations of the Contractor's work to assist the City in determining if the provisions of the
respective Contract Documents and permit conditions are being fulfilled and to reasonably
protect the City against defects and deficiencies in the Work of the Contractor.
The RPR shall review materials and evaluate, on a daily basis, the workmanship of the
Contractor on each of the projects, report as to the progress, and report to City any deviations
from the respective Contract Documents. It is the City's intent for the RPR to be present
onsite to provide general oversight and direction. The means and methods of construction
shall be the responsibility of each Contractor. As such, the RPR will not be expected to advise
on or suggest methods of construction to the Contractor.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
The following outlines the Resident Project Representative's (RPR's) duties and
responsibilities:
General Coordination: The RPR will communicate daily or periodically with the City, the
City's A/E Consultant and Contractor, as needed. They will report on concerns as it relates to
the construction effort and activities. In addition, the RPR shall also coordinate with the
Contractor's Public Information Officer where notifications such as utility outages, road
closures, etc. may be required. The RPR will monitor and verify that the Contractor has made
the required notifications to the utility owners, residents and businesses as may be required.
Value Engineering Meetings: The RPR will be expected to attend, participate, and provide
cost estimating information at VE meetings with between the CITY, the A/E Consultant, and
the Contractor for each of the Projects.
Resident's Information Meetings: The RPR will be expected to attend, address residents
concerns, participate, produce meeting minutes, and take a lead role in Resident Information
Meetings with the CITY for each of the Projects.
Pre - Construction Meetings: The RPR will be expected to attend, participate and take a lead
role in Pre - Construction Meeting with the City, A/E Consultant and Contractor for each of the
Projects. The Pre - construction Meeting shall be scheduled once the first Notice -to- Proceed is
issued to the Contractor
Weekly Construction Progress Meetings: The RPR shall attend, participate and take a lead
role in weekly construction project meetings with the City, A/E Consultant and Contractor on
Commission Memorandum — RFQ# 22 -10 -11 for RPR Services for Right -of -Way Improvements to
Neighborhood No. 8, Central Bayshore (Package A), Lower North Bay Road (Package B), and Lake
Pancoast (Package C).
May 11, 2011
Page 3
each Project. These meetings will serve as forums to review the status of construction
progress, discuss construction issues, discuss schedule and /or cost concerns, discuss
potential changes or conflicts, review the status of shop drawing submittals and contract
document clarifications and interpretations, and to resolve problems before they become
critical. RPR shall prepare weekly meeting minutes and distribute to all meeting attendees,
review the two week look ahead provided by the Contractor and provide comments or
objections to written statements within the specified timeframe. The RPR will prepare detailed
weekly reports that describe the construction activities, progress, incidents and issues that
have occurred on the construction site and distribute to the attendees in advance of the weekly
construction progress meetings.
Field Observations: The RPR shall conduct field observations on a daily basis throughout the
duration of construction. Field observations shall be provided jointly by the City and the RPR.
To supplement those services provided by the RPR, the City will provide two (2), part -time
construction inspectors for the duration of the projects. The role of the City's construction
inspectors shall be limited. The RPR shall be present at the construction site daily during the
construction phase of the project and will be expected to be available, as needed, throughout
the Contractor's work day.
Specialty A/E CONSULTANT Site Visits: The RPR will monitor the number of specialty site
visits requested by the Contractor or City and conducted by the A/E Consultant. When it
becomes evident that a specialty site visit from the design Engineer of Record (EOR) will be
required, the RPR will notify the EOR to discuss and schedule a mutually acceptable time for
meeting at the construction site.
Daily Reports: The RPR will prepare daily reports, on the same date as construction occurs,
to record the daily performance of the Contractor as well as other significant contract related
matters. Daily reports shall be uploaded to the City's E- Builder document management system
by the RPR. At the end of each week, the RPR will forward the original daily reports to the City
for review. The RPR will maintain and file paper copies of the daily reports onsite for
reference. The daily reports shall include records of when the Contractor is on the job -site,
general field observations, weather conditions, change orders, changed conditions, list of job
site visitors, daily drilling and testing activities, testing results, testing observations, and
records of the outcome of tests and inspections. At a minimum the daily reports will contain the
following information:
• Weather and general site conditions
• Contractor's work force counts by category and hours worked
• Description of Work performed including location
• Equipment utilized
• Names of visitors to the jobsite and reason for the visit
• Tests made and results
• Construction difficulties encountered and remedial measures taken
• Significant delays encountered and apparent reasons why
• Description of (potential) disputes between the Contractor and City
• Description of (potential) disputes between the Contractor and residents
• Summary of additional directions that may have been given to the Contractor
Commission Memorandum — RFQ# 22 -10 -11 for RPR Services for Right -of -Way Improvements to
Neighborhood No. 8, Central Bayshore (Package A), Lower North Bay Road (Package B), and Lake
Pancoast (Package C).
May 11, 2011
Page 4
• Detailed record of materials, equipment and labor used in connection with extra work, or
where there is reason to suspect that a claim or request for Change Order may be
submitted by the Contractor
• Summary of any substantive discussions held with the Contractor and /or City
• Summary of nonconforming work referenced to corresponding Non - Compliance Notice
• A log of photographs taken
Photographic Record: RPR shall provide a photographic record of the overall progress of
construction, beginning with preconstruction documentation, following with on -going
construction documentation, and ending with post - construction documentation. Photographs
shall be digital snapshot type taken to define the progress of the project and shall be filed
electronically by month in the City's E- BuilderTM document management system, labeled by
date, time and location. The RPR will upload all photos to the E- BuilderTM document
management system on a weekly basis.
Adherence To Contract Documents: The RPR shall review materials and workmanship of
the projects and report to the City any deviations from the Contract Documents that may come
to the RPR's attention. RPR shall determine the acceptability of the work and materials and, in
concert with the A/E Consultant (as necessary), make recommendations to the City to reject
items not meeting the requirements of the Contract Documents.
Delivery of Unaccepted Materials to Jobsite: As new materials are delivered to the jobsite,
the RPR will check the material's certifications and samples and verify that an approved shop
drawing was submitted for the material in question. If it is determined that a submittal has not
been approved, the RPR shall immediately notify the City and issue a Non - Compliance Notice.
In conjunction with the A/E Consultant (as necessary), the RPR will direct and supervise the
sampling and testing of materials to be performed by the City's independent testing laboratory.
The RPR shall maintain test report logs which shall be submitted to the City for review on a
monthly basis and uploaded to the City's E- BuilderTM document management system on a
weekly basis. RPR shall also review invoices submitted by the independent testing
laboratories and recommend payment by the City.
Shop Drawing Submittals: The RPR shall review shop drawing and product approvals
throughout the duration of the construction period for familiarity prior to delivery of materials.
RPR shall verify that Contractor is maintaining a submittal log, conducting timely submittals,
and uploading approved shop drawings to the City's E- BuilderTM document management
system.
Issuance of Non - compliance Notices: The RPR_ will be responsible for notifying the City
when they become aware of a condition that is believed to be in non - compliance with Contract
Documents. Anytime the RPR notices a potential construction problem or a condition that
could result in non - complying materials, equipment or workmanship, the RPR will need to
determine whether the condition poses an immediate threat to public health or safety. If a
condition does not pose a threat to public health or safety, immediate verbal notification or
"Pre- Noncompliance Notice" of the potential non - compliance should be made to the Contractor
and the City. This verbal notice shall be documented in the RPR's daily report and shall advise
the Contractor of potential construction problems, errors, or deficiencies that can be promptly
resolved and do not warrant a Non - compliance Notice. If the Contractor fails to respond to the
verbal notification within a reasonable timeframe, the RPR will notify the City and the City's
Commission Memorandum — RFQ# 22 -10 -11 for RPR Services for Right -of -Way Improvements to
Neighborhood No. 8, Central Bayshore (Package A), Lower North Bay Road (Package B), and Lake
Pancoast (Package C).
May 11, 2011
Page 5
Senior Capital Projects Coordinator will issue a Non - compliance Notice. If a condition poses
an immediate threat to public health or safety, the RPR will notify the Contractor and City
immediately and the City's Senior Capital Projects Coordinator will issue a Non - compliance
Notice to the Contractor. Non- compliance Notices will include a description of the Work that
does not meet contract requirements, along with a required timetable for corrective work to be
implemented by the Contractor. Other items that should be included in the Notice include a
reference to the provision of the Contract Documents that has been violated.
Damage to Existing Facilities: The RPR will identify any existing facilities damaged by the
Contractor and verify that the Contractor has notified the respective owner(s). Include record
of such occurrences in the daily reports.
Change Orders: RPR shall perform an independent review of any Change Orders submitted
by the Contractor and provide a written statement noting recommendation for approval or
denial of the Change Order to the City. If recommended for approval, the RPR will note if the
requested cost and schedule impacts are fair and reasonable. The RPR will be responsible for
maintaining a Change Order log and uploading approved Change Orders to the City's E-
BuilderTM document management system. The RPR shall also participate in change request
review meetings with City and Contractor to resolve and /or negotiate the equitable resolution
of request.
Requests for Information /Contract Document Clarification (RFIs /CDCs): When RFIs and
CDCs involve design issue interpretations, the RPR will coordinate with the A/E Consultant, as
needed, to resolve the Contractor's Requests for Information, Contract Document
Clarifications, Field Orders, and other related correspondence. The RPR will be also be
responsible for verifying that the NE Consultant is providing a written response to RFIs and
CDCs in a timely manner and for processing, logging, and distributing all RFIs /CDCs. RPR will
upload all RFI and CDC responses to the City's E- BuilderTM document management system.
Schedule: RPR will review and familiarize themselves with the construction schedule, monitor
the progress of construction, and ensure the Contractor's adherence to the schedule. The
Contractor will be required to submit a detailed schedule to the RPR at the pre- construction
meeting. This schedule will be reviewed and approved by the RPR and the City. This schedule
will be updated on a by weekly basis by the Contractor; however, the RPR will be responsible
for reviewing the contactor's schedule to conproposer accuracy of the work activities
completed. Analysis of the Contractor schedule will be on the basis of planned versus actual
costs for the month and contract to date. RPR shall verify that the Contractor is uploading
approved schedule and schedule updates to the City's E- BuilderTM document management
system.
Pay Requisitions: RPR shall verify Contractor's pay requisition quantities and sign -off on all
pay requisition quantities in the field. RPR shall be responsible for reviewing with the
Contractor the monthly payment requisition to conproposer the status of completed and
uncompleted work and stored materials. The RPR shall advise the City of quantities being
approved for subsequent concurrence for payment purposes. Payment Requisitions shall only
be approved by the City.
Commission Memorandum — RFQ# 22 -10 -11 for RPR Services for Right -of -Way Improvements to
Neighborhood No. 8, Central Bayshore (Package A), Lower North Bay Road (Package B), and Lake
Pancoast (Package C).
May 11, 2011
Page 6
Equipment Tests and Systems Start -up: RPR shall be responsible for coordinating various
tests for quality control on the projects; verifying that equipment tests and systems start -up are
conducted in the presence of appropriate personnel; and that the Conractor is maintaining
adequate records thereof. RPR shall observe, record, and report appropriate details relative to
the test procedures and start-up.
Record Drawings: RPR will monitor that record drawing mark -ups are properly maintained
by the Contractor. At a minimum, the RPR will review the record drawing mark -ups on the 20th
working day of every month, or more often, as deemed necessary by the City. Contractor's
failure to maintain the record drawings in up -to -date condition may be deemed grounds for
withholding Contractor's monthly payment requisitions until such time as the record drawings
are brought up -to -date. The RPR will notify the City if it considers the mark -up documents
insufficient. The City will make final determination of payment withholding.
Safety: RPRs will be expected to recognize a hazard that any reasonable non - safety
professional might be expected to recognize. In addition, those safety obligations extend only
to recognizable hazards that the RPR may note while in the normal conduct of onsite
business.
If a situation presents itself, the following procedures should be followed:
• Immediately direct personnel to remove themselves from the apparent danger,
• Notify the Contractor's superintendent of the apparent condition that caused the
concern and that the affected personnel were directed to remove themselves
accordingly,
• Notify the Contractor of the situation that arises concern, both in writing and verbally,
• Issue a written Notice of Noncompliance stating that the Contractor should take
immediate action as it deems necessary to correct the deficiency / condition.
• Write a full report in the Daily Report on the condition found to be unsafe, all actions
taken, and correspondence written, including times and names,
• Take photographs, of the concern,
• If the Contractor does not make corrections, the RPR should notify the City,
• The RPR will review the situation with the City for further direction,
• The condition, as well as all conversations and correspondence, will be recorded in the
RPRs Daily Report.
• In the case of a construction - related accident, RPR will notify the City of the accident.
RPR will direct the Contractor to prepare an accident report with a copy forwarded to
the City.
Quality Control: The RPR will review and monitor the Contractor's adherence to an
acceptable quality control program submitted by the Contractor prior to the issuance of the
second Notice -to- Proceed by the City. This program will describe the Contactor's quality
control, organizational procedures, documentation controls and processes for each phase of
the work. Quality control during construction will be the responsibility of the Contractor;
however, oversight and ensuring the Contractor complies with applicable jurisdictional
construction standards will be enforced on the City's behalf by the RPR.
Commission Memorandum — RFQ# 22 -10 -11 for RPR Services for Right -of -Way Improvements to
Neighborhood No. 8, Central Bayshore (Package A), Lower North Bay Road (Package B), and Lake
Pancoast (Package C).
May 11, 2011
Page 7
Proceeding with Disputed Work: In the event that an agreement cannot be reached on a
Change Order, the Contractor must carry on the work and adhere to the project schedule in
accordance with the contract general conditions. The RPR will log all forced work efforts
related to disputed change order on a Forced Work Daily Log Reports which will be signed
and dated by the RPR and the Contractor's representative at the completion of each workday.
The RPR will forward copies of this form to the City for record purposes.
Maintenance of Traffic (MOT): The Contractor shall provide the RPR, City and A/E
Consultant with approved copies of its MOT at the Pre - Construction Meeting for general
information purposes. It will be the RPR's responsibility to verify compliance with the MOT in
the field.
Contractor Request for Services: When the Contractor requires services from the City for
issues such as water main shutdowns, tie -ins to existing water mains, special regulatory
inspections, etc., a request shall be made in writing by the Contractor, and forwarded by the
RPR to the City, a minimum of three working days prior to when required.
Substantial Completion: When the Contractor considers that the Work has reached
Substantial Completion, the Contractor will notify the RPR who will verify that the work has
progressed to the substantial completion point in accordance the Contract Documents. If the
RPR is in agreement, the RPR will contact the City to agree on a schedule for conducting a
substantial completion "walk- through" inspection of the Work. RPR shall attend and participate
in the substantial completion "walk- through ", perform a substantial completion inspection with
the Contractor, A/E Consultant and the City, and prepare a master punch list that describes
items remaining to be completed. This master punch list will be attached to the certificate of
substantial completion.
Final Completion and Project Closeout: When the Contractor considers that the Work has
reached Final Completion, the Contractor will notify the RPR who will verify that the work has
progressed to the Final Completion point in accordance the Contract Documents. If the RPR is
in agreement, the RPR will contact the City to agree on a schedule for conducting a Final
Completion "walk- through" inspection of the Work. RPR shall attend and participate in the
Final Completion "walk- through" and perform a Final Completion inspection with the
Contractor, NE Consultant and the City. If the work is determined to be incomplete, RPR and
other attendees will each develop a punch list of items requiring completion or correction prior
to consideration of final acceptance of each project which shall be forwarded to the Contractor
by the RPR for each project. RPR will complete all necessary close -out and construction
completion forms and documentation in coordination with the City for the projects. The RPR
will work with the A/E Consultant and the Contractor, as necessary to ascertain materials
required for the closeout binder, as required by the City, and review the Operation and
Maintenance manuals for each project for completeness prior to forwarding documentation to
the City. Once all parties determine the work is complete and the Contractor has delivered all
close -out documentation to the City, the RPR will prepare a Final Certificate for Payment. The
RPR will be responsible for providing final certifications based on the entire scope of work for
each of the projects.
RFQ PROCESS
ROCESS
On April 13, 2011, the Mayor and City Commission retroactively approved the issuance of
Request for Qualifications (RFQ) No. 22- 010/11, for Resident Project Representative Services
Commission Memorandum — RFQ# 22 -10 -11 for RPR Services for Right -of -Way Improvements to
Neighborhood No. 8, Central Bayshore (Package A), Lower North Bay Road (Package B), and Lake
Pancoast (Package C).
May 11,2011
Page 8
for Right -of -Way Improvements to Neighborhood No. 8, Central Bayshore (Package A), Lower
North Bay Road (Package B), and Lake Pancoast (Package C).
RFQ No. 22- 010/11 was issued on March 25, 2011, with an opening date of April 15, 2011. A
pre - proposal conference to provide information to the proposers submitting a response was
held on April 1, 2011.
BidNet issued bid notices to 371 prospective proposers, BidSync (formerly known as RFP
Depot) issued bid notices 6,107 prospective proposers of which 25 viewed the notice, and
more than 100 local proposers were notified via mail, e-mail, which resulted in the receipt of
the following thirteen (13) proposals:
1. Chen and Associates d /b /a Chen -Moore and Associates
2. Corzo Castella Carballo Thompson Salman (C3TS)
3. CIMA Engineering Corp.
4. SRS Engineering, Inc
5. The Corradino Group, Inc
6. Schwebke- Shiskin & Associates, Inc
7. CMTS
8. Wolfberg Alvarez & Partners
9. A &P Consulting Transportation Engineers, Corp.
10. URS Corporation Southern
11. Craven Thompson & Associates, Inc
12. Calvin Giordano & Associates, Inc
13. ATKINS (PBS &J)
On April 7, 2011, the City Manager via Letter to Commission (LTC) No. 081 -2011, appointed
an Evaluation Committee (the "Committee ") consisting of the following individuals:
• Hector Castro, Assistant Director, Public Works
• Janette Fernandez - Arencibia, Capital Projects Coordinator, CIP
• Max Berney , Resident and Leadership Academy Graduate
• Michael Alvarez, Director, Infrastructure Division, Public Works
• Muayad Abbas, Resident and Leadership Academy Graduate
Alternates:
• Carol Housen, Resident and Leadership Academy Graduate
• Fred Karlton, CIPOC member
Resident Max Berney was unable to devote the time to participate on the Committee at this
time and therefore, resident, Carol Housen, was appointed to the Committee to replace Mr.
Berney.
The Committee convened on April 26, 2011, and a quorum was attained. The Committee was
provided with general information on the scope of services, Performance Evaluation Surveys
and additional pertinent information from all responsive proposers.
Commission Memorandum — RFQ# 22 -10 -11 for RPR Services for Right -of -Way Improvements to
Neighborhood No. 8, Central Bayshore (Package A), Lower North Bay Road (Package B), and Lake
Pancoast (Package C).
May 11, 2011
Page 9
The following Evaluation Criteria was used to evaluate and rank the groups or individuals:
Total Criteria
Points
20 The experience, qualifications, and portfolio of the Principal Proposer
The experience, qualifications and portfolio of the Project Manager, as well as
20 his /her familiarity with this project and permitting process and a thorough
understanding of the methodology and design approach to be used in this
assignment.
The experience and qualifications of the professional personnel assigned to the
30 Project Team as well as their familiarity with this project and a thorough
understanding of the methodology and design approach to be used in this
assignment.
5 Willingness to meet time and budget requirements as demonstrated by past
performance
Certified minority business enterprise participation. Either the Prime Consultant or
the sub - Consultant team may qualify for proof of certification for minority business
5 enterprise participation. Accepted minority business enterprise certifications include
the Small Business Administration (SBA), State of Florida, Miami -Dade County and/
or the South Florida Minority Supplier Development Council.
5 Location
5 Recent, current, and projected workload of the proposers
The volume of work previously awarded to each proposer by the City, with the object
5 of effecting an equitable distribution of contracts among qualified proposers,
provided such distribution does not violate the principle of selection of the most
highly qualified proposer.
Past performance based on quality of the Performance Evaluation Surveys and the
5 Administration's due dilligence based upon reference checks performed of the of the
Proposer (s) client.
The Committee discussed their individual perceptions of the proposer's qualifications,
experience, and competence, and further ranked the proposers accordingly. A motion was
presented by Hector Castro, seconded by Janette Fernandez - Arencibia and unanimously
approved by all Committee members to recommend short listing the top five (5) ranked
proposers:
1. A & P Consulting Transportation Engineers, Corp.
2. Calvin Giordano & Associates, Inc.
3. Atkins (PBS &J)
4. Chen & Associates d /b /a Chen Moore and Associates
5. URS Corporation Southern
Commission Memorandum — RFQ# 22 -10 -11 for RPR Services for Right -of -Way Improvements to
Neighborhood No. 8, Central Bayshore (Package A Lower North Bay Road oad Packa e B
9 Y ( 9 ), Y (Package B), and Lake
Pancoast (Package C).
May 11, 2011
Page 10
The Committee recommended inviting the aforementioned proposers to make presentations
with the intent of focusing the discussion on the Scope of Service relative to these projects and
the methodology and approach to be utilized by the proposer in order to represent the City of
Miami Beach on said projects.
The Committee's score and rankings were as follows:
SHORTLISTING RANKINGS
Janette Muayad LOW
RFQ#2240/11 FOR RPR Hector Fernandez- Carol Michael Abbas AGGREGATE
SERVICES Castro Arencibia Housen Alvarez (Mo) TOTALS
A &P CONSULTING
TRANSPORTATION
ENGINEERS, CORP. 1 (87) 4 (84) 3 (87) 1 (85) 1 (96) 10 (1)
CALVIN GIORDANO &
ASSOCIATES, INC 4 (79) 2 (86) 5 (83) 2 (84) 6 (92) 19 (2)
CHEN AND ASSOCIATES d /b /a
CHEN -MOORE AND
ASSOCIATES 3 (81) 3 (85) 2 (88) 6 (77) 8 (80) 22 (3)
.................
.................
..................
.................
.................
..................
.................
ATKINS (PBS &J) 2 (83) 6 (80) 4 (85) 8(70) 2 (95) 22 (3)
URS CORPORATION
SOUTHERN 9 (64) 4 (84) 1 (91) 5 (78) 5 (93) 24 (5)
CORZO CASTELLA CARBALLO
THOMPSON SALMAN (C3TS) 9 (64) 1 (90) 12 (49) 4 (82) 2 (95) 28 (6)
CRAVEN THOMPSON &
ASSOCIATES, INC 5 (75) 8 (72) 12 (49) 3 (83) 4 (94) 32 (7)
SRS ENGINEERING, INC 6 (69) 9 (67) 8 (66) 10 (67) 9 (77) 42 (8)
................:
..................
..................
.................
.................
.................
..................
.................
..................
.................
.................
WOLFBERG ALVAREZ &
PARTNERS 8 (68) 7 (73) 11 (52) 12 (64) 7 (82) 45 (9)
THE CORRADINO GROUP, INC 6 (69) 9 (67) 10 (56) 11 (65) 10 (74) 46 (10)
SCHWEBKE- SHISKIN &
ASSOCIATES, INC 11 (58) 13 (56) 7 (70) 7 (76) 13 (42) 51 (11)
CMTS 13 (48) 11 (62) 9 (61) 9 (68) 11 (56) 53 (12)
CIMA ENGINEERING CORP. 12 (53) 12 (60) 6 (72) 13 (62) 12 (53) 55 (13)
The Committee convened on April 29, 2011, and a quorum was attained. The Committee was
provided with presentations from all shortlisted proposers. The Committee discussed their
individual perceptions of the proposer's qualifications, experience, and competence, and
further ranked the proposers accordingly.
Commission Memorandum — RFQ# 22 -10 -11 for RPR Services for Right -of -Way Improvements to
Neighborhood No. 8, Central Bayshore (Package A), Lower North Bay Road (Package B), and Lake
Pancoast (Package C).
May 11, 2011
Page 11
The Committee was informed that the Administration would prefer not having the same
proposer for all packages (A, B, and C) and therefore, the Committee was requested to
recommend, to the best of their ability, one proposer for packages A & C and one proposer for
package B.
CIP Acting Assistant Director, Charles Fossler, and committee member and Project Manager
for package B, Janette Fernandez - Arencibia, provided an overview for each package and
further described the scope of work, the requirements, and challenges for each package.
The Committee's final rankings are as follows:
FINAL RANKINGS
Janette Muayad ' LOW
RFQ# 2240/11 FOR RPR Hector Fernandez- Carol Michael Abbas AGGREGATE
SERVICES Castro Arencibia Houser' Alvarez (Mo) TOTALS
ATKINS (PBS &J) 2 (87) 1 (92) 2 (98) 1 (90) 1 (95) 7 (1)
CHEN AND ASSOCIATES d/b /a
CHEN -MOORE AND
ASSOCIATES 1 (89) 2 (86) 1 (99) 2 (89) 4 (85) 10 (2)
CALVIN GIORDANO &
ASSOCIATES, INC 3 (83) 3 (82) 5 (62) 3 (88) 2 (92) 16 (3)
A &P CONSULTING
TRANSPORTATION
ENGINEERS, CORP. 4 (76) 4 (80) 3 (90) 4 (87) 3 (88) 18 (4)
URS CORPORATION
SOUTHERN 5 (59) 5 (47) 4 (76) 5 (69) 5 (73) 24 (5)
The Committee recommended for packages A & C, the following rankings:
1. Atkins (PBS &J)
2. Chen & Associates d /b /a Chen Moore and Associates
3. Calving Giordano & Associates, Inc.
The Committee recommended for package B, the following rankings:
1. Chen & Associates d /b /a Chen Moore and Associates
2. Atkins (PBS &J)
3. Calving Giordano & Associates, Inc.
Moreover, in order to avoid that the same proposer would be recommended for all packages,
the committed further recommended that if successful negotiations are reach with the top
ranked proposer for one of the packages, said proposer will not be considered for award in the
order package.
Commission Memorandum — RFQ# 22 -10 -11 for RPR Services for Right -of -Way Improvements to
Neighborhood No. 8, Central Bayshore (Package A), Lower North Bay Road (Package B), and Lake
Pancoast (Package C).
May 11,2011
Page 12
A motion was presented by Janette Fernandez - Arencibia, seconded by Michael Alvarez and
unanimously approved by all Committee members to recommend entering into negotiations
with the top two (2) ranked proposers: Atkins (PBS &J) and Chen & Associates d /b /a Chen
Moore and Associates; and should the Administration not be successful in negotiating an
agreement with the top- ranked proposers, authorizing negotiations with the second - ranked or
third - ranked proposer for each package.
COMPANY'S FROFILES
ATKINS (FORMELY PBS &J)
Atkins, formerly PBS &J, is listed on the London Stock Exchange and is the World's 11 largest
design proposer. Ranked 30 on Engineering News - Record's annual list of the top engineering
design proposers in the nation.
Atkins was founded in 1960, since then, Atkins has expanded its service throughout the
country, and their CEI and Resident Project Representative (RPR) experience ranges from
minor signalizations and intersection upgrade to major roadway and bridge construction.
Teresa Driskell, PE, GPM will be the Project Manager for this effort. She is a results- oriented
leader with over 16 years of substantial engineering, inspection, and construction manager
experience.
Atkins will be joined in this endeavor by RADISE International, LC for geotechnical engineering
and material testing, and Dickey Consulting Services, Inc for public information services.
The following are several similar projects which represent Atkins' qualifications and
experience:
• Kendall Town Center Site Development and Roadway Widening Design and
Construction Phase Services
• SR 60 Corridor CEI, Multiple Florida Counties: Fort Pierce, Vero Beach, Indian River
County, and Osceola County.
• Indian River County Signal Group 4 Construction Engineering and Inspection (CEI)
Services.
• Florida's Turnpike Enterprise Group D Project, multiple Florida Counties: Fort Pierce,
Port St. Lucie, Indian River County, Martin County.
• NW 116 Way Bridge CEI Services, Town of Medley.
• Hendry Project Grouping, CEI Services, Hendry County.
• A1A from Ocean Drive to the Martin County Line Resurfacing and Widening, CEI
Services, Stuart.
• Freedom Park CEI Services, Collier County.
• Estero Parkway CEI Services, Lee County.
• Hurricane Wilma and Katrina Remediation Services, Fort Lauderdale
• City of Doral Intersection Stormwater Improvements Survey, Design, and
Construction.
• Miami -Dade College Plan Review and Inspection Services.
• Immokalee Road Six - Laning CEI Services, Naples.
Commission Memorandum — RFQ# 22 -10 -11 for RPR Services for Right -of -Way Improvements to
Neighborhood No. 8, Central Bayshore (Package A), Lower North Bay Road (Package B), and Lake
Pancoast (Package C).
May 11, 2011
Page 13
• Beach Parking Lots and Miscellaneous Improvements, Clearwater.
• Basin 35 Stormwater Improvement and Site Plan Review, Miami Springs
• City of Miami Work Program Development for Stormwater Improvements.
CALVIN GIORDANO & ASSOCIATES, INC ( "CGA ")
GCA is a multi - disciplinary firm that continues to provide quality construction management
services for South Florida municipalities since 1983. Today, with approximately 200
employees, CGA provides a broad range of services, including construction management and
construction engineering and inspection services, surveying landscape architecture,
geographic information system, transportation engineering, environmental services, planning,
data technology and development, website and multimedia development, indoor air quality,
and emergency management.
The team possesses the expertise to assist with numerous specialized construction services
such as constructability reviews, traffic control plan analysis, environmental services, public
information, survey, utility coordination, schedule and claims analysis, innovative contracting
method recommendations, value engineering proposals, and innovative project- specific
special provision development to address unique technical or administrative aspects of a
project. The project will be handled out of the 1800 Eller Drive, Suite 600, Fort Lauderdale,
Florida office.
The assigned Project Manager, Robert McSweeney, has more than 20 years of civil
engineering /construction management experience in the South Florida area. He is an expert in
the selection, setup, management, and control of all aspects of projects employing resident
project representative services.
CGA will be joined in this endeavor by Palm Engineering Group for infrastructure and land
development, and Electrical Design Associates, Inc for electrical, HVAC and plumbing design.
The following are several similar projects which represent CGA's qualifications and
experience:
• Community Enhancement Project Engineering, Phase I and II, Bay Harbor Islands.
• Community Enhancement Watermain Replacement Phase III, Bay Harbor Islands.
• Town of Surfside Stormwater Master Plan.
• Capital improvement Program, Sunny Isles.
• Collins Avenue to North Bay Road, Sunny Isles.
• Atlantic Boulevard Roadway Reconstruction Project, Pompano Beach.
• Hallandale Beach NE Quadrant Drainage Basin Study & Implementation.
• Surfside Water Main Replacement Phases I -III.
• Joe Dimagio Hospital. Hollywood.
• Broad Causeway toll plaza, Miami -Dade County.
• NE 2nd Street Water Main Replacement, Dania Beach
• 27 Street Water Main Replacement, Miramar.
• S.R. 710 (Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd. Utilities Relocation, Rivera Beach.
• College Avenue Roadway Improvements, Davie.
• Large Scale Force Main Projects, Towns of Davie and Cooper City.
• 30 Avenue Forcemain, City of Hollywood.
Commission Memorandum — RFQ# 22 -10 -11 for RPR Services for Right -of -Way Improvements to
Neighborhood No. 8, Central Bayshore (Package A), Lower North Bay Road (Package B), and Lake
Pancoast (Package C).
May 11, 2011
Page 14
• Hard Rock Casino and Hotel, Hollywood.
• Horizontal Directional Drill Water Main Replacement, Dana Beach.
• 1 -595 Express Lane Project. Fort Lauderdale.
• Interchange Improvements for 1 -75 and Arvida Parkway, Broward County.
P Y� . Y
• Traffic Analysis Weston Roundabouts.
CITY MANAGER'S DUE DILIGENCE
After considering the review and recommendation of City staff, the City Manager exercised his
due diligence and is recommending that the Mayor and the City Commission authorize
negotiations for packages A, B, & C with my top- ranked proposer, Atkins (PBS &J); and should
the Administration not be successful in negotiating an agreement with my top- ranked
proposer, authorizing negotiations with my second - ranked proposer, Calvin Giordano &
Associates Inc, and should the Administration not be successful in negotiating an agreement
with my second - ranked proposer, authorizing negotiations with my third - ranked proposer, A &
P Consulting Transportation Engineers, Corp.
The Administration recommends that it would be in the best interest of the City to retain the
same proposer for packages A, B, & C since the three packages are located within the same
Bayshore neighborhood.
In addition, the CCNA requires that the City considers the volume of work previously awarded
to each firm with the object of effecting an equitable distribution of contracts among qualified
firms.
The first- ranked proposer by the Committee, Atkins (PBS &J), has been awarded by the City
the following projects which represent a total amount of $ 1,422,090: Building Department
Interior Remodel Permit Plans Preparation Services, General Transportation Planning and
Traffic Engineering Services, Hurricane Wilma, 1 -95 Hot Lanes Analysis, Must Park
Renovations Architectural Services, and South Pointe Pier Park.
The second - ranked proposer by the Committee, Chen & Associates, Inc d /b /s Chen Moore
and Associates, has been awarded by the City the following projects which represent a total
amount of $5,904,270: Bayshore Sunset Island 1 & 2, City Center 9A, City Center 9B, City
Center 9C, South Pointe Phases III, IV, IV, and V Row of Way, and Utility Sunset 1 & 2
Outfalls.
The third - ranked proposer by the Committee, Calvin Giordano & Associates, Inc., has only
been awarded the North Shore Right -of -Way Project at a total amount of $1,490,282,
significantly less volume of work than Chen & Associates, Inc d /b /s Chen Moore and
Associates.
The fourth- ranked proposer by the Committee, A & P Consulting Transportation Engineers,
Corp., has been awarded by the City the following projects which represent a total amount of
$ 2, 225,825: Design Build for Neighborhood No.7- Nautilus Infrastructure Improvements, 44
Street Drainage Improvements, Design -Build for Washington Avenue, Improvement Phases 11,
IV, & V, and Design -Build for Lummus Neighborhood Improvement.
Commission Memorandum — RFQ# 22 -10 -11 for RPR Services for Right -of -Way Improvements to
Neighborhood No. 8, Central Bayshore (Package A), Lower North Bay Road (Package B), and Lake
Pancoast (Package C).
May 11,2011
Page 15
Therefore, with the intent of equitably distributing the work awarded by the City, I am
recommending awarding packages A, B & C to my top- ranked proposer, Atkins (PBS &J), and
should the Administration not be successful in negotiating an agreement with my top- ranked
proposer, authorizing negotiations with my second - ranked proposer, Calvin Giordano &
Associates Inc, and should the Administration not be successful in negotiating an agreement
with my second - ranked proposer, authorizing negotiations with my third - ranked proposer, A &
P Consulting Transportation Engineers, Corp.
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends that the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami
Beach, Florida accepts the recommendation of the City Manager pertaining to the ranking of
proposals pursuant to Request for Qualifications (RFQ) No. 22- 010/11 for Resident Project
Representative Services for Right -of -Way Improvements to Neighborhood No. 8, Central
Bayshore (Package A), Lower North Bay Road (Package B), and Lake Pancoast (Package
C).; Authorizing the Administration to negotiate packages A, B & C with the top- ranked
proposer, Atkins (PBS &J), and should the Administration not be successful in negotiating an
agreement with the top- ranked proposer, authorizing negotiation with the second - ranked
proposer, Calvin Giordano & Associates Inc, and should the Administration not be successful
in negotiating an agreement with the second - ranked proposer, authorizing negotiations with
the third - ranked proposer, A & P Consulting Transportation Engineers, Corp.
T:\AGENDA\2011 \5 -11 -11 \RFQ- 22 -10 -11 - RPR Services- Memo.doc