Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2013-28163 Reso
RESOLUTION NO. 2013-28163 A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING A CONTRACT AWARD, PURSUANT TO INVITATION TO BID NO. 49-11/12, FOR THE RIGHT-OF-WAY INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM — VENETIAN ISLANDS BID PACKAGE 13C; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO AWARD A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO LANZO CONSTRUCTION CO. FLORIDA, IN THE AMOUNT OF $9,699,509 BASE BID PLUS $640,028 FOR SELECTED ALTERNATES AND A PROJECT CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,033,954; FOR A TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST OF $11,373,491 FROM PREVIOUSLY APPROPRIATED FUNDING IN THE CAPITAL BUDGET FROM THE FOLLOWING FUNDS: $2,842,713 FROM FUND 384 - 2003 GO BONDS - NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENTS; $2,336,942 FROM FUND 420 - W&S GBL SERIES 2010; $130,484 FROM FUND 423 — GULF BREEZE 2006; $450,275 FROM FUND 425 - WATER & SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND; $1,357,846 FROM FUND 427 - STORMWATER ENTERPRISE FUND; AND $2,254,223 FROM FUND 431 - STORMWATER BOND FUND 2011; AND AN ADDITIONAL $1,003,062 IN WATER & SEWER FUNDS AND $977,946 IN STORMWATER FUNDS SUBJECT TO THE 2ND AMENDMENT TO THE CAPITAL BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2012/13; AND FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE ADMINISTRATION TO ENGAGE IN VALUE ENGINEERING TO FURTHER REDUCE THE COST AND TIME FOR COMPLETION OF SAID PROJECT. WHEREAS, Invitation to Bid (ITB) No. 49-11/12 was issued on June 8, 2012, with an opening date of November 27, 2012; and WHEREAS, Bidnet issued bid notices to 439 prospective bidders, of which 36 downloaded the ITB document. In addition, 146 vendors were notified via e-mail, which resulted in the receipt of the following four (4) bids: Central Florida Equipment Rentals, Inc., Lanzo Construction Co. Florida, Ric-Man Construction Florida, Inc. and Ric-Man International, Inc.; and WHEREAS, through the Procurement Division's review of each bid for responsiveness, Ric-Man Construction Florida, Inc., the third-lowest bidder with a total base bid plus alternates at $10,880,287.61, was deemed unresponsive for failing to submit the correct Unit Price Breakdown Form provided in Addendum 10 of the ITB by submitting the form provided in Addendum 9 instead; and WHEREAS, the Administrative Review Panel consisted of the following individuals and convened on January 17, 2013, to interview the responsive bidders: • Michael Alvarez, Infrastructure Division Director, Public Works • Maria Hernandez, Senior Capital Projects Coordinator, CIP • James Murphy, Senior Planner, Planning • Matilde Reyes, Senior Capital Projects Coordinator, CIP • Jose Rivas, Civil Engineer III, Public Works; and WHEREAS, upon completion of the interviews, the Panel discussed each prospective bidder's qualifications, experience, and competence to score and rank the firms accordingly pursuant to the evaluation criteria noted below, of which, Lanzo Construction Co. Florida received all five first-place votes for contract award: • 50 Points - Base Bid Price • 20 Points - Interview of key personnel • 10 Points - Risk Assessment Plan/Value Added Submittals • 10 Points - Past Performance Evaluation Surveys • 10 Points—Qualifications of Bidder • 5 Points— Local Preference for Miami Beach-Based Vendors • 5 Points— Preference for Florida Small Businesses Owned and Controlled by Veterans and to State-Certified Service-Disabled Veteran Business Enterprises; and WHEREAS, after considering the review and recommendation of the Panel, the Interim City Manager recommended to the Mayor and City Commission to award the contract to Lanzo Construction Co. Florida and further authorize the Administration to engage in value engineering to further reduce the cost and time for completion of said project. 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 approve a contract award, pursuant to Invitation to Bid (ITB) No. 49-11/12, for the Right-of-Way Infrastructure Improvement Program — Venetian Islands Bid Package 13C; authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to award a construction contract to Lanzo Construction Co. Florida, in the amount of $9,699,509 base bid plus $640,028 for selected alternates and a project contingency in the amount of $1,033,954; for a total construction cost of $11,373,491 from previously appropriated funding in the Capital Budget from the following funds: $2,842,713 from Fund 384 - 2003 GO Bonds — Neighborhood Improvements; $2,336,942 from Fund 420 - W&S GBL Series 2010; $130,484 from Fund 423 — Gulf Breeze 2006; $450,275 from Fund 425 - Water & Sewer Enterprise Fund; $1,357,846 from Fund 427 — Stormwater Enterprise Fund; and $2,254,223 from Fund 431 —Stormwater Bond Funds 2011; and an additional $1,003,062 in Water & Sewer funds and $977,946 in Stormwater funds subject to the 2nd Amendment to the Capital Budget for the Fiscal Year 2012/13; and further authorizing the administration to engage in value engineering to further reduce the cost and time for completion of said project. PASSED AND ADOPTED this J�LA day of ,"rCA , 2013. ATTEST: CITY C RK INOORP ORATED ; YO (0 APPROVED AS TO FORM & LANGUAGE TAGENDAMIl March 13\ITB 49-11/12-Venetian Islands ROW-RESO.doc &FOR EXECUTION ,�— 3 _ City Attomev(r Date COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY Condensed Title: A Resolution Of The Mayor And City Commission Of The City Of Miami Beach, Florida, Approving A Contract Award, Pursuant To Invitation To Bid No. 49-11/12, For The Right-Of-Way Infrastructure Improvement Program — Venetian Islands Bid Package 13C; Authorizing The Mayor And City Clerk To Award A Construction Contract To Lanzo Construction Co. Florida, In The Amount Of$9,699,509 Base Bid Plus$640,028 For Selected Alternates And A Project Contingency In The Amount Of $1,033,954; For A Total Construction Cost Of $11,373,491 From Previously Appropriated Funding In The Capital Budget;And An Additional$1,003,062 In Water&Sewer funds And $977,946 In Stormwater funds Subject To The 2nd Amendment To The Capital Budget For The Fiscal Year 2012/13; And Further Authorizing The Administration To Engage In Value Engineering To Further Reduce The Cost And Time For Completion Of Said Project. Key Intended Outcome Supported: Ensure Value and Timely Delivery of Quality Capital Projects, Improve Storm Drainage Citywide, and Maintain City's Infrastructure. Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): The 2012 Customer Satisfaction Survey indicated that over 81% of residents rated recently completed capital improvement projects as "excellent" or "good". Recently completed capital improvement projects 81%), storm drainage(37%),and condition of roads(44%). Issue: Shall the Mayor and City Commission Adopt The Resolution? Item Summary/Recommendation: The Scope of Work shall include, but not be limited to, site preparation; earthwork; demolition; storm drainage; roadway reconstruction; concrete valley gutters; walkway paving and grading; watermain and street lighting on the islands of San Marino, Di Lido, and Rivo Alto. Invitation to Bid (ITB) No.49-11/12 was issued on June 8, 2012,with an opening date of November 27, 2012. Pre- bid conferences were held on June 22, August 13, and October 9, 2012. Bidnet issued bid notices to 439 prospective bidders, of which 36 downloaded the ITB document. In addition, 146 vendors were notified via e-mail, which resulted in the receipt of four(4)bids of which three(3)were responsive. On January 17, 2013, the Administrative Review Panel convened to interview the responsive companies and to score and rank them accordingly pursuant to the evaluation criteria noted in the ITB. The Panel unanimously recommended Lanzo Construction Co. Florida,the lowest bidder,for award. Upon further review by the CIP Office and the engineer of record, Schwebke Shishkin & Associates, CIP recommended to also accept Alternates 1 and 3, however, if the City elects to award the base bid of$ 9,699,509 plus include alternates Al and A3, additional funding shall be required to address the funding shortfall, which shall be addressed through Amendment Two to the Capital Budget. After considering the review and recommendation of City staff, the Interim City Manager exercised her due diligence and carefully considered the specifics of this ITB process. As a result, the Interim City Manager recommends to the Mayor and City Commission to award the construction contract to Lanzo Construction Co. Florida as the lowest and best responsive bidder and authorize the Administration to engage in value engineering to further reduce the cost and time for completion of said project.. Advisory Board Recommendation: N/A Financial Information: Source of Amount Account Funds: 1 2,842,713 384-2127 2003 GO Bonds—Neighborhood Improvements 2 2,336,942 420-2127 W&S GBL Series 2010 3 130,484 423-2127 Gulf Breeze 2006 4 450,275 425-2127 Water&Sewer Enterprise Fund 5 1,357,846 427-2127 Stormwater Enterprise Fund 6 2,254,223 431-2127 Stormwater Bond Fund 2011 7 1,003,062 Water & Sewer funds subject to the 2n° Amendment to the Capital Budget for the Fiscal Year 2012/13 8 997,946 Stormwater funds subject to the 2 n Amendment to the Capital Budget for the Fiscal Year 2012/13 OBPI Total $11,373,491 Financial Impact Summary: N/A City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking: Fernando Vazquez, ext. 6135 Sign-Offs: Interim City Dep ent Dk@09r Assistant City MqrA&r 1 Chief Financial Officer ManaqQ FV AD JGG PDW KGB T:\AGENZTA\2013\ 13\ITB 49-11-12—Venetian lsffildt ROW—Summary.doc 90 &AIAMIBEACH AGENDA STEM DATE �� ® MIAMI BEACH City of Miami Beath, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139,www.miamibeachfl.gov COMMISSION MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Co mission FROM: Kathie G. Brooks, Interim City Manager DATE: March 13, 2013 SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING A CONTRACT AWARD, PURSUANT TO INVITATION TO BID NO. 49-11/12, FOR THE RIGHT-OF-WAY INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM — VENETIAN ISLANDS BID PACKAGE 13C; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO AWARD A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO LANZO CONSTRUCTION CO. FLORIDA, IN THE AMOUNT OF $9,699,509 BASE BID PLUS $640,028 FOR SELECTED ALTERNATES AND A PROJECT CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,033,954; FOR A TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST OF $11,373,491 FROM PREVIOUSLY APPROPRIATED FUNDING IN THE CAPITAL BUDGET FROM THE FOLLOWING FUNDS: $2,842,713 FROM FUND 384 - 2003 GO BONDS - NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENTS; $2,336,942 FROM FUND 420 - W&S GBL SERIES 2010; $130,484 FROM FUND 423 — GULF BREEZE 2006; $450,275 FROM FUND 425 - WATER & SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND; $1,357,846 FROM FUND 427 - STORMWATER ENTERPRISE FUND; AND $2,254,223 FROM FUND 431 - STORMWATER BOND FUND 2011; AND AN ADDITIONAL $1,003,062 IN WATER & SEWER FUNDS AND $977,946 IN STORMWATER FUNDS SUBJECT TO THE 2ND AMENDMENT TO THE CAPITAL BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2012/13; AND FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE ADMINISTRATION TO ENGAGE IN VALUE ENGINEERING TO FURTHER REDUCE THE COST AND TIME FOR COMPLETION OF SAID PROJECT. ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION Adopt the Resolution. KEY INTENDED OUTCOME SUPPORTED Ensure well-maintained infrastructure. FUNDING $2,842,713 384-2127 2003 GO Bonds — Neighborhood Improvements $2,336,942 420-2127 W&S GBL Series 2010 $130,484 423-2127 Gulf Breeze 2006 $450,275 425-2127 Water& Sewer Enterprise Fund $1,357,846 427-2127 Stormwater Enterprise Fund $2,254,223 431-2127 Stormwater Bond Fund 2011 $1,003,062 Water & Sewer funds subject to the 2nd Amendment to the Capital Budget for the Fiscal Year 2012/13 $997,946 Stormwater funds subject to the 2nd Amendment to the Capital Budget for the Fiscal Year 2012/13 $11,373,491 Total Commission Memorandum-ITB 49-11112-ROW Infrastructure Improvement Program- Venetian Islands Bid Package 13C March 13, 2013 Page 2 BACKGROUND On October 15, 2003, the City Commission approved the Basis of Design Report (BODR), completed and submitted by the City's consultant, Edwards and Kelsey, Inc., for the Venetian Islands Bid Package 13C Neighborhood Right-of-Way (ROW) Improvement Project (San Marino, Dilido and Rivo Alto Islands). This BODR was the culmination of a comprehensive planning effort that included input from the residents, various City Departments, and Hazen & Sawyer, the City's former Program Manager. On April 21, 2009, residents expressed concerns with the design provided by the City's consultant and overseen by the Program Manager Hazen & Sawyer, particularly the additional needs to meet Stormwater level of service and additional upgrading of aged and tuberculated water systems as well as enhancements to the streetscape/hardscape improvements. Up to this point, the City expended a total of $1,848,958 from the project budget to fund the design consultant ($ 1,087,050) and program management ($ 761,908)fees. On May 28, 2009, the City issued RFQ No. 42-08/09 for a newly revised Design, Bid and Award, and Construction Management Services for the re-design of the Venetian Islands project to reinstate an adequate and functional level of service. These included additional Stormwater, Potable Water, and Streetscape/Hard spa pe Improvements. On July 15, 2009, the City Commission approved Resolution 2009-27128, for Professional Architecture and Engineering (A/E) Services to Schwebke-Shiskin & Associates, Inc., (SS&A) to provide re-design, bid and award services, as well as construction administration services. On July 12, 2011, an Invitation to Bid (ITB) No. 39-10/11 was issued for Venetian Islands and bids were received on August 18, 2011. The lowest responsive base bid exceeded the available project budget by 17.5% and the Consultant's cost estimate by 12.9%. As a result of the budget shortfall and delays with the completion of the County's Venetian Causeway project, the City Manager recommended to the Mayor and City Commission to reject all bids received, pursue all value engineering opportunities and re-issue the ITB to allow the County to complete the Causeway project thereby reducing further impacts to the residents. After the Commission rejected all the bids, SS&A, was directed to explore value engineering options in order to explore opportunities for additional cost reduction while allowing the Miami Dade County to proceed and finalize the Venetian Causeway Streetscape project and mitigate potential conflicts with the City contract. On April 19, 2012, out of various value engineering opportunities the Public Works Department approved the following: • Re-design the electrical street lighting plans to meet 0.6 foot-candle average that meets the City of Miami Beach requirements, therefore removing twelve (12) street lights adjacent to the causeway, as well as eliminating redundancies currently being lit by the new causeway lighting improvements. • Include a detail in the contract documents which would allow the contractor to install the street lighting conduits within the same trench as the water main, thereby streamlining installation and improving production. • Re-design the approved stormwater drainage system to maintain the outfalls in their present condition (without connection to new design) and without any restoration thereby generating a credit to the project cost. • Abandon existing water services in-place, thereby reducing potential damage to existing infrastructure due the additional excavation. Commission Memorandum—ITB 49-11112- ROW Infrastructure Improvement Program— Venetian Islands Bid Package 13C March 13, 2013 Page 3 On June 8, 2012, the Procurement Division issued ITB No. 49-11/12 for Venetian Islands. On July 9, 2012, the Administration submitted a FY 2012/13 budget request to the Finance and Citywide Projects Committee. Additional funding was requested in anticipation of increased construction costs as indicated by the Consultant's revised Opinion of Probable Cost which include additional funding requests for water & sewer construction needs in the amount of $450,275, and for stormwater construction needs in the amount of $1,357,846. The project construction budget was therefore increased by $1,808,121 for FY 2012-2013 (see Attachment A- July 9, 2012, Finance and Citywide Projects Committee Memorandum). During the bid process for ITB No. 49-11/12, the Procurement Division received numerous questions that requested clarification or additional information as it pertained to underground utility facilities. Even though that contractors are expected to identify and coordinate all underground and above ground utility lines prior to excavation, the CIP Department felt it would be prudent to allow the engineer to further research potential unforeseen utility conflicts within the Venetian Islands, so as to minimize delays during construction. On August 28, 2012, the Administration requested additional services from SS&A to perform subsurface investigation and identify potential utility conflicts throughout the project site. The final report on the utility conflicts was included in the bid documents and transmitted to all the franchised utility companies in order to address these potential conflicts prior to the start of construction. On October 5, 2012, as part of Addenda # 9, the final subsurface investigation report and revised construction documents were transmitted to all bidders in an effort to mitigate potential utility conflicts. This effort was provided to all bidders to mitigate the assumed risk that was presented during the bid question period. On November 27, 2012, the Procurement Division received bids for Venetian Islands ITB 49- 11/12 and identified Lanzo Construction as the lowest bidder with a base bid amount of $9,699,509 and an amount of $10,640,993 that included the base bid plus alternates. The alternates listed on the bid documents are; full road reconstruction, maintaining existing outfalls in their present condition, trenchless sanitary sewer rehabilitation, installation of Geo- Synthetic Grid, and furnishing and installing trees and palms. COST ANALYSIS The base bid amount submitted by Lanzo Construction was 12.53% over the A/E estimate of probable construction cost of $8,619,337. Staff found that the bid result and the A/E estimate of probable construction cost were within the -5% to +15% tolerance identified in SS&A's professional service agreement with the City (see Attachment B). In addition, the Association for the Advancement of Cost Estimating (AACE), formerly the American Association of Cost Engineers and the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), typical percentage variation from actual cost to estimated cost of construction for this type of project is between -3% to +15%. On December 26, 2012, after responsiveness was determined by the Procurement Division, CIP staff contracted Craven Thompson and Associates (CTA) to provide bid analysis services and bid evaluation report (see Attachment C), which SS&A responds to with a memorandum addressing CTA comments while providing their assessment of the bid (see Attachment D). CTA analyzed the bid documents, addenda and bid responses that were issued during the bidding period. CTA concluded that although the lowest base bid was 12% higher than the A/E estimate of probable construction cost, the overall bid price had increased as a result of overall cost increase in materials and labor in excess of 10% as identified in the V Quarter 2011 to Commission Memorandum—ITB 49-11112-ROW Infrastructure Improvement Program— Venetian Islands Bid Package 13C March 13, 2013 Page 4 4`h Quarter 2012 (see Attachment E), provided by Florida Department of Transportation Quarterly Price Trends) in addition to local factors and site constraints. When the cost escalation is taken into account, the low bid only varied approximately 2% from the A/E estimate of probable construction cost. CTA identified local conditions, site constraints and contractor's assumed risks, as factors which impact the bid results. CTA identified the items listed below: • The site constraints affecting the overall bid price consist of limited staging area and bridge loading restrictions that would require additional resources to haul material and equipment off the site. In addition, the limitations affecting site access through the Venetian Causeway and internal circulation through the islands would require additional maintenance of traffic coordination. If the contractor's access is affected in any way, the operations would be slowed or stopped due to the inability of the contractor to deliver materials to the site or haul unsuitable materials and construction debris offsite. The limited work zone and limited work day hours would require the contractor to use additional manpower and equipment to comply with the contract requirements. • CTA also concluded their bid analysis by comparing this project's bid tabulations against similar residential infrastructure improvement projects with new water, sewer, drainage, roadways, swales, landscape, and/or sidewalks being constructed. within densely developed communities and with infrastructure improvements in areas immediately adjacent to the Inter Coastal Waterway, similarly with poor soil conditions. Additionally, this project would require coordination with the residents and a significant amount of notifications to maintain the residents informed and to assist with the daily disruptions to the homes located within the work zones. • As per CTA, these are key factors that affect the price of the project, as opposed to a simple roadway project further west in different soil conditions. Work within the City's residential neighborhoods requires phasing and scheduling to accommodate access to the neighborhood and to each residence. It also requires the contractor to fill in excavations quickly, restore private property impacts immediately, and keep affected homeowners and the City aware of any impacts to the community. Work in areas adjacent to Biscayne Bay and the Inter Coastal Waterway, and the soil conditions commonly found in these areas, require additional equipment, time, permitting, and planning in order to install the underground pipes under dry conditions as per PWD requirements, which require constant dewatering. • Obtaining a dewatering permit will also be an issue affecting the price of this contract. The contractor would be required to make special provisions to have dewatering permits, which would dictate the methods used to dewater. Low laying areas close to a large water bodies subject to tidal influence, such as Biscayne Bay, would have high water volumes to contend with during any construction dewatering operation. The contractor would include additional time and equipment to dewater the site, as needed, making the proper arrangements for dewatering in compliance with the actual environmental requirements for construction areas, adjacent and/or discharging, and/or impacting an outstanding water body. • Impacts associated with Utility Coordination with the utility companies in the neighborhood (GAS, ATT, ABB and FPL) and the assumed risk due to similar Commission Memorandum-ITB 49-11112-ROW Infrastructure Improvement Program- Venetian Islands Bid Package 13C March 13, 2013 Page 5 experiences in Sunset- 1 & 2, highlighted during the process, will add an additional premium to the project cost. The island of Rivo Alto will be specifically impacted due to the possibility of underground utility relocations. Also, FPL coordination on the project for the existing street lighting pole removal (after new pole installation) could result in time extensions if there are any delays on FPL's part. Thus there is a higher premium to commit the resources necessary to complete the project within the contract time frame. SCOPE OF SERVICES The Scope of.Work shall include, but not be limited to, site preparation; earthwork; demolition; storm drainage; roadway reconstruction; concrete valley gutters; walkway paving and grading; watermain and street lighting on the islands of San Marino, Di Lido, and Rivo Alto. The work generally includes the following items: • Installation of a new 8" diameter potable watermain system from a recently installed watermain system along the Venetian Causeway including new fire hydrants and reconnection to all existing residential water services. • Installation of a new positive drainage system consisting of french drains, inlets, manholes, and control structures discharging into Biscayne Bay. The drainage outfall system will consist of 7 (seven) new outfalls as well as connection to the existing outfalls to increase and improve capacity. • Abandonment, in place, of the existing potable water system and removal and disposal of the existing storm drainage system. • Reconstruction of the existing roadway which includes the installation of new eight (8) inch limerock base, installation of new two (2) inch asphalt surface and construction of new valley gutters throughout all roadways. • Limited sidewalk and ramp reconstruction throughout Di Lido and Rivo Alto Islands. • Landscaping, including tree pruning, selective encroachment removal and sodding of the swales. • Street lighting, including all of its electrical components. ITB PROCESS Invitation to Bid (ITB) No. 49-11/12 was issued on June 8, 2012. 439 prospective bidders were notified through Bidnet, of which 36 downloaded the ITB document. In addition, 146 vendors were notified via e-mail by the Procurement Division. Subsequent to the release of the ITB, a pre-bid conference was held and several addendums were issued responding to prospective bidder questions. On November 27, 2012, proposals were received from the following firms: • Central Florida Equipment Rentals, Inc. • Lanzo Construction Co. Florida • Ric-Man Construction Florida, Inc. • Ric-Man International, Inc. Through the Procurement Division's review of each bid for responsiveness, Ric-Man Construction Florida, Inc., the third-lowest bidder, with a total base bid plus alternates at $10,880,287.61, was deemed nonresponsive for failing to submit the correct Unit Price Breakdown Form provided in Addendum 10 of the ITB by submitting the form provided in Addendum 9 instead. Commission Memorandum—ITB 49-11112- ROW Infrastructure Improvement Program— Venetian Islands Bid Package 13C March 13, 2013 Page 6 As a result, the following table provides the proposed total base bid prices, with and without alternates, of the three (3) responsive bids: Total Base Total Base Bid w/ Bid Alternates Lanzo Construction Co. Florida $9,699,509.00 $10,640,993.00 Central Florida Equipment $9,788,774.76 $10,725,896.06 Ric-Man International, Inc. $10,022,183.70 $11,466,385.30 The Administrative Review Panel consisted of the following individuals and convened on January 17, 2013, to interview the responsive bidders: • Michael Alvarez, Infrastructure Division Director, Public Works Maria Hernandez, Senior Capital Projects Coordinator, CIP • James Murphy, Senior Planner, Planning • Matilde Reyes, Senior Capital Projects Coordinator, CIP • Jose Rivas, Civil Engineer III, Public Works The Panel evaluated each bid based on the following criteria: • 50 Points - Base Bid Price • 20 Points - Interview of key personnel • 10 Points - Risk Assessment Plan/Value Added Submittals • 10 Points - Past Performance Evaluation Surveys • 10 Points-Qualifications of Bidder • 5 Points- Local Preference for Miami Beach-Based Vendors • 5 Points- Preference for Florida Small Businesses Owned and Controlled by Veterans and to State-Certified Service-Disabled Veteran Business Enterprises Upon completion of the interviews, the Panel discussed each prospective bidder's qualifications, experience, and competence to score and rank the firms accordingly pursuant to the evaluation criteria noted in the ITB. Lanzo Construction Co. Florida received all five first-place votes for contract award as noted below: ITB 49-11112 Panel Scoring and Ranking Alvarez Hernandez Murphy Reyes Rivas Total Lanzo Construction Co. Florida 97 (l) 102 (l) 98 (l) 91 (1) 97.48 (l) 485.48 (5) Ric-Man International, Inc. 67 (2) 73(2) 95 (2) 86(2) 76.14 (3) 397.14(11) Central Florida Equipment 47 (3) 65 (3) 80 (3) 63(3) 77.98 (2) 332.98(14) ANALYSIS Pursuant to the Procurement Division's review and acceptance for responsiveness of the bids submitted, the bid price information from the lowest responsive bidder is tabulated to show the percentage over the estimate prepared by SS&A, as follows: Commission Memorandum—ITB 49-11112-ROW Infrastructure Improvement Program— Venetian Islands Bid Package 13C March 13, 2013 Page 7 Percent Percent Percent Craven, Bid SS&A over over over Thompson Proposal Estimate Bid#1 SS&A Bid#2 SS&A Bid#3 SS&A Bid Estimate Estimate Estimate Analysis Estimate Base Bid $8,619,337 $9,699,509 12.53% $9,788,774 13.57% $10,022,183 16.28% $10,060,925 Base Bid Plus All Alternates $9,499,750 $10,640,993 12.01% $10,725,896 12.91% $11,466,385 20.70% $10,904,510 The ITB identified various alternates that would be beneficial to the neighborhood project as outlined below: Alternate Al - Full road reconstruction in the amount of $329,228, this alternate increases the existing scope of work from reworking the existing base to a full reconstruction of the roadway. Contractor will remove existing base and replace with a new eight (8) inch limerock base. Reconstructing the roadway will increase the lifespan of the roadway at least twenty (20) years versus five (5) to seven (7) years for reworking the existing base. The existing condition of the roadways and the proposed extensive utility excavation merits the total roadway reconstruction to assure the full integrity of the roadway. Engineer of Record (EOR) recommends electing this alternate. Alternate A2 - Separating seven (7) existing outFalls from the proposed stormwater drainage system for the credit amount of $82,252. This alternate was originally proposed as a value engineering option to assist in decreasing the base bid. According to the EOR, Schwebke Shishkin and Associates, the proposed stormwater improvements calculations did not take into account the use of the existing outFalls and currently meet the level of service requirement of a five (5) year and one (1) day storm event. Staff recommends against electing this alternate (credit) and allowing the work to be completed as included in the base bid to allow for additional stormwater relief. Alternate A3 - Rehabilitation of existing eight (8) inch gravity sanitary sewer main in the amount of $300,800. The implementation of lining the existing sanitary mains will improve the existing sanitary sewer flow and strengthen the existing aged old sewer pipes and mitigate the potential breakage during construction activities. Staff recommends electing this alternate. Alternate A4 - Installation of Geosynthetic Geogrid for the amount of $182,520 which would generally be required as a means to stabilize organic, unsuitable soil. FOR recommends against electing this alternate because the geotechnical reports did not identify conditions as requiring additional substrate improvement in which a filter fabric would be beneficial to stabilize soil strata. Alternate A5 - Includes furnishing and installation of trees and palms in the amount of $201,188, as required by the BODR. This alternate will be executed by Parks Department. Base bid includes restoration of swales and removal of landscape encroachments only. Staff recommends not electing this alternate under this contract and executing the installation with Parks Department to allow for appropriate installation. Commission Memorandum—ITB 49-11112-ROW Infrastructure Improvement Program— Venetian Islands Bid Package 13C March 13, 2013 Page 8 Staffs recommend the following alternates to be included in the project scope and are described as follows: SELECTED DESCRIPTION COST ALTERNATES Al Full road reconstruction $339,228.00 A3 Trenchless sanitary sewer rehabilitation $300,800.00 TOTAL $640,028.00 If the City elects to award the base bid of $ 9,699,509 plus include alternates Al and A3 additional funding shall be required to address the funding shortfall in the following accounts. The table below summarizes the selected alternates as well as the additional funding requirements. Lowest Bid Lowest Bid Funding Available Available Total Including Required Including Construction Contingency Available Alternates 10% Selected Shortfall Sources Funds Funds Contingency Alternates& Al and A3 Contingency Water/Sewer $3,564,330.00 $356,433.00 $3,920,763.00 Fund $2,595,817.00 $321,884.00 $2,917,701.00 -$1,003,062 Stormwater $4,190,923.00 $419,092.00 $4,610,015.00 Fund $3,130,287.00 $481,782.00 $3,612,069.00 -$997,946 Above Ground $2,584,284.00 $258,429.00 $2,842,713.00 Fund $2,932,766.00 $340,188.00 $3,272,954.00 Total $8,658,870.00 $1,143,854.00 $9,802,724.00 $10,339,537.00 $1,033,954.00 $11,373,491.00 -$2,001,008 COMPANY PROFILE Founded in 1967, Lanzo Construction Co. Florida Foundation Co. has been providing general construction services to South Florida since 1980. Lanzo has extensive experience in stormwater drainage, underground utility, and roadway construction serving Miami-Dade, Broward, and Monroe Counties, along with several local municipalities. Jorge A. Valdes, Project Manager, and Ronald Mezza, Superintendent, have over 15 and 40 years of construction experience respectively managing projects of similar size and scope to this ITB. The following are similar ongoing and recently completed projects: • Broward County North County Neighborhood Improvement Project Broadview Estates Bid Package 2 - $9,909,466 • Broward County North County Neighborhood Improvement Project Bid Package 10 - $10,558.209 • City of Miami Beach ITB 18-09/10 - Central Bayshore Package A/Lake Pancoast Package C - $14,490,740 • F376 City of Marathon Service Area 5 Vacuum Sewage Collection System and Stormwater Collection System - $20,625,568 CITY MANAGER'S DUE DILIGENCE After considering the review and recommendation of City staff, the Interim City Manager exercised her due diligence and carefully considered the specifics of this ITB process. As a result, the Interim City Manager recommends to the Mayor and City Commission to award the construction contract to Lanzo Construction Co. Florida as the lowest and best responsive bidder and authorize the Administration .to engage in value engineering to further reduce the cost and time for completion of said project. Commission Memorandum—ITB 49-11112-ROW Infrastructure Improvement Program— Venetian Islands Bid Package 13C March 13, 2013 Page 9 CONCLUSION The Administration recommends that the Mayor and City Commission adopt the attached resolution, which awards a construction contract to Lanzo Construction Co. Florida as the lowest and best responsive bidder, pursuant to Invitation to Bid 49-11/12, for the Right-of-Way Infrastructure Improvement Program - Venetian Islands Bid Package 13C, in the amount of $9,699,509 base bid plus $640,028 for selected alternates and a project contingency in the amount of $1,033,954; for a total construction cost of $11,373,491; and further authorizing the Administration to engage in value engineering to further reduce the cost and time for completion of said project. Attachment A- July 9, 2012, Finance and Citywide Projects Committee Memorandum Attachment B - Schwebke Shishkin &Associates, Inc. (SS&A) A/E Agreement Attachment C - Craven Thompson & Associates (CTA) Bid Evaluation Report Attachment D - Schwebke Shishkin & Associates, Inc. (SS&A) Bid Qualification Report Attachment E - Florida Department of Transportation Quarter Price Trends Report KGB/JGG/ /AD T:WGENDA\2013\March 13\VENETIAN ISLANDS\ITB 49-11-12-Venetian Islands ROW-Memo.doc MIAMI BEACH' T0: Finance and Citywide Projects Committee FROM: Kathie Brooks, Interim City Manager DATE: July 9, 2012 SUBJECT: Overview of Citywide Neighborhood Right-of-Way Improvement Projects The purpose of this memorandum is to provide an overview of the Neighborhood Right- i of-Way Improvement projects, their current status and additional funding requests for Fiscal Year 2012-2013. As neighborhood construction activities escalate throughout the City, certain existing i field conditions are manifesting on a more frequent basis which are prompting a re- evaluation to the previously established scope and control budget programmed under each project. Field conditions encountered during construction are revealing the actual state of existing infrastructure. Unforeseen conflicts have developed with franchise utility installations and street lighting conduits. Additionally, unanticipated work I generated to replace existing water lines was not originally programmed in the projects, repairs to sewer pipes collapsing during construction, added asphalt milling and resurfacing, as well as placement of additional storm-water systems to address stormwater mitigation not contemplated in the original scope of work are also components which are impacting the cost of construction. These unforeseen conditions are becoming more frequent, impacting construction already underway, and must, therefore, be addressed in order for construction to continue uninterrupted without the incurrence of unforeseen delays and extension of construction timelines. In addition, resident turnover and fresh visions from the community are resulting in additional requests not originally considered in the Basis of Design Reports (BODR), the most significant being, traffic calming requests and revisions to the Atlantic Greenway Network-Bike Master Plan. Staff is pursuing a proactive plan to help mitigate these impacts prior to the bidding of future neighborhood projects. Design plans developed.in the past are being subject to a thorough and rigorous re-evaluation by the Engineering Division of the Public Works Department (PWD) where revisions to meet current regulatory requirements as well as enforcement of engineering criteria originally not contemplated in the BODR's are being applied in a systematic approach for all future neighborhood improvement projects. The Design Criteria for all projects is being reviewed and modified accordingly. In tandem, all respective budgets are being re-evaluated and projects are being priced out accordingly, prior to the Capital Improvements Office (C(P) initiating the construction administration phase. Amendments to original BODR's for the neighborhoods are also being updated to address current residents' requests and needs, 'I Attachment A- July 9, 2012, Finance and Citywide Projects Committee Memorandum Letter to Commission j July 9,2012 Finance&Citywide Committee The following pages provide the detailed information for each neighborhood project requiring additional funding during Fiscal Year 2012/2013 as a result of the aforementioned issues: I 1. Bayshore Neighborhood Central Bayshore - Bid Pack A Original Scope of work: The area includes 40th Street, Flamingo Drive, the Sheridan Avenue Multi-Family Neighborhood, and the Central Bayshore Community. This project includes a stormwater system with five (5) pump stations, (5) injection wells, street asphalt overlay, sidewalk repair, swale/planting strip restoration, installation of curb and gutter, enhanced landscaping, drainage upgrades, traffic calming, water main replacement, and improved on-street parking. Current Status: Notice to Proceed was issued October 31, 2011. The project is currently in construction. Overall project is 30% complete and on schedule for j completion by October,2013. Additional Funding,Requests $4,546,882 . Additional water & sewer and above ground funding is being requested for milling and resurfacing where it is warranted in lieu of the specified roadway asphalt overlay. Water&sewer funding in the amount of$346,807 is required for the proportional above ground milling and resurfacing i associated to the restoration and finishing of the road following the installation water distribution systems in addition to above ground funding in the amount of $246,006 for the remainder of milling and resurfacing needs. Stormwater funding in the amount of$3,954,069 is being requested for: a) the installation of valley gutters where needed; b) the relocation of a pump station and the installation of a new gravity well; additional Stormwater collection systems; and c)the installation of a new Stormwater collection system along the perimeter of the golf course and Meridian Ave as well as all proportional milling and resurfacing pertaining to roadway restoration and finishing following stormwater construction.. Included in all funding requests are hard costs, contingency,soft costs and CIP Fees. i Above Ground Funding Request $ 246,006 Construction Cost $ 197,357 Contingency $ 19,846 Consulting/Engineering/Field Services $ 15,000 CIP Fees 8 13.803 Total $ 246,006 Water& Sewer Funding Request $ 346,807 Construction Cost $ 296,037 Contingency $ 29,604 CIP Fees(new scope and adjust to 6.5%) 21.166 Total $ 346,807 I i Letter to Commission July 9,2012 Finance&Citywide Committee Stormwater Funding Request $3,954,069 I Construction Cost $3,425,306 Contingency $ 342,531 CIP Fees 186,232 Total $3,954,069 i 2 Ba shore Neighborhood- Lower North Bay Road - Bid Pack BB Y 9 Y Original Scope of work: This project includes the installation of valley gutters and a stormwater system with two stormwater pump stations, injection wells, street resurfacing, water main replacement and decorative stamped asphalt crossings. Current Status: Notice to Proceed 1 (NTP-1)was issued on August 18, 2011. A i Pre-Construction Meeting was held on December 5, 2011. CIP submitted plans for PWD review on December 28, 2011 and received design comments from PWD on the construction set of plans on February 2, 2012. On April 16, 2012 i CIP received confirmation from CH2MHILL and PWD stating that tide flex valves will be installed at the outfalls and that other revisions could be made via the record drawings witncut additional changes to be done to the plans. Phase 1 encroachment letters were sent out on April 24, 2012. The Right of Way permit was issued by PWD on May 22, 2012. The contractor submit`ted a revised and increased cost estimate for the project on May 30, 2012 which is currently under review by CIP. An approved construction schedule is pending. Issuance of Notice to Proceed 2 is pending approval of cost increases and project schedule. It should be noted that the contractor did not provide all the required submittals after NTP-1 was issued on August 1 B, 2011. Additional Funding Requests $ 828,643 In addition to the aforementioned revisions, funding is also being requested to I address a contractor's proposal for increase in materials and labor prices resulting from Contractor claim of a delayed start of construction. Staff is currently evaluating and negotiating these suggested increases and anticipates that these proposed figures will be reduced through negotiation. . The Additional funding being requested is as follows: Above Ground Funding Request $ 140,144 Water& Sewer Funding Request $ 326,394 Construction Cost $ 304,223 I CIP Fees $ 22.171 Total $ 326,394 Stormwater Funding Request $ 362,105 Construction Cost $ 294,651 i I I Letter to Commission July 9,2012 Finance&Citywide Committee CIP Fees (new scope and adjust to 6.5%) 67 454 Total $ 362,105 3. Bayshore Neighborhood Lake Pancoast- Bid Pack C Original Scope of work: The area includes Flamingo Drive, Flamingo Place, West 24th Street to Pine Tree Drive, and Lake Pancoast Drive. This project includes street asphalt overlay, sidewalk repair, planting strip restoration, curb and gutter upgrades, enhanced landscaping, entryway features, enhanced street i signage, streetlight upgrades, water main rehabilitation on Flamingo Drive, and improved on-street parking. Current Status: Notice to Proceed 2 was issued on October 31, 2011, Construction mobilization commenced on March 2012 with projected twelve (12) month duration_ This project is being constructed in tandem with the Central Bayshore A project. Additional Funding Requests $ 389,725 Above ground funding in the amount of$14,000 and water &sewer funding in the amount of $28,216 is being requested for additional milling and resurfacing j required in lieu of the overlay and more appropriately allocating the proper distribution of above ground funding between water, stormwater and above ground efforts. Stormwater funding in the amount of $347,509 is being requested for the potential installation of addijonal valley gutters, swale reclamation and storage. Included in all funding requests are hard costs, i contingency, soft costs and CIP Fees. Above Ground Funding Request $ 14,000 Water & Sewer Funding Request $ 28,216 Construction Cost $ 23,628 CIP Fees $ 4.588 l Total $ 28,216 Stormwater Funding Request $ 347,500 Construction Cost $ 239,380 j Contingency . $ 20,000 Consulting/Engineering/Field Services $ 25,000 f- CIP Fees(new scope and adjust to 6.5%) 63.129 Total 347;509 4. Bayshore Neighborhood Bid Pack E- Sunset Islands 1&2 Original Scope of work: This project includes roadway reconstruction, planting strip restoration, water line replacement and upgrade, valley gutter installation, stormwater upgrades and the replacement of the subaqueous water main crossing between Sunset Islands 2 & 3. I i Current Status: Notice to Proceed 2 was issued on December 12, 2011 with construction mobilization scheduled for January 11, 2012. The contractor mobilized on January 12, 2012. Overall project is 40% complete and on schedule for completion by March, 2013. I I 3 Letter to Commission July 9,2012 ! Finance&Cltywide Committee Additional Funding Requests $1,261,337 I Above ground funding is being requested in the amount of $98,781 for the replacement and relocation of shallow street lights circuits in conflict with on- going construction. Water& Sewer funding in the amount of$876,656 is being requested for the installation of sub-aqueous water main crossing (50% of cost), and a bridge water main replacement. Included in all funding requests are hard costs, contingency, soft costs and CIP Fees. Above Ground Funding Request $ 98,781 Construction Cost $ 77,292 Contingency $ 7,730 Consulting/Engineering/Field Services $ 7,730 CIP Fees S 6,029 i Total $ 98,781 Water & Sewer Funding Request $ 876,656 Construction Cost S •525,940 Contingency $ 70,ODO ; Consulting/Engineering/Field Services $ 50,000 CIP Fees (new scope and adjust to 6.5%) $ 230,716 l Total $ 876,656 i i Stormwater Funding Request 8 285,900 i Construction Cost $ 212,555 Consulting/Engineering/Field Services $ 50,000 i CIP Fees `b 23,345 j Total $ 285,900 5. Bayshore Neighborhood Sunset Islands 3 & 4- Bid Pack D Original Scope of work: This project includes roadway reconstruction, planting strip restoration, water line replacement and upgrade, valley gutter installation and stormwater upgrades and coordination with FPL utility for burying overhead utility lines. The replacement of two existing water main sections mounted'on the Sunset Islands 3 & 4 bridges, as well as a 50% share of the cost to replace the sub-aqueous water main crossing between Sunset Island 2 and 3. Current Status: The Design Criteria Package is being prepared. It is scheduled for completion this fail, at which time it will be advertised for a design-build firm to complete. I i • I I , i ! Letter to commission | ~ *nonce&oitywldsCommittee ^� Additional Funding Requests $1.171,500 Above ground funding in the amount of $745,500 is being requested for the nelocoUonofshaUmmstn*et |kJhtcincuitohnconfliotwithfutnaoonstruutonin | the amount of$31Q.5OO. |n addition, the Sunset 3&4HOA has also requested ' the construction of traffic circle and sidewalks on Sunset Drive, which staff has estimated to be in the amount of $426.000. Should the Commission choose to incorporate these requests the B[)DR would need to be amended. i Water& Sewer funding in -the amount of$426.UOOis also being requested for � water mains and oppurtenanuao, as we|| as additional fine hydrants. i Included in all funding requests are hard uosio. contingency and C|pFees. Above Ground Funding Request $ 745,500 Construction Cost ' $ 300,000 Contingency $ 400.000 C|PFeea 8L—_£5,5{0 Total $ 745.500 i VVator& Sewer Funding RnquesT $ 426'000 Construction Cost $ 400.000 C|PFeea 8L---ab2o Total $ 426.000 6 Palm� � ,x | Original Scope of work: The Palm and Hibiscus Neighborhood improvement '- project includes landscaping / irrigation, street Ughting, replacement of existing ) water main infnaotructura, improved storm water drainage collection and disposal | infrastructure including o\wa|e restonation, curb and gutter and other facilities, � stre6t resurfacing/pavement markings, sewer lining and repair, repair and/or extension pf existing sidewalks to comply with ADA requirements, )ncorponation of traffic calming featunes, and the coordination of the undergmunding of utilities including FPL' ABB and AT&T. | Additional Funding Requests $ 449,272 | i Stormwoterfunding in the amount of $44Q.272 is being requested to install / additional catch baoina, pipes and outfa||o in order to comply with the new | Stonnwobar k4oshsr Plan requirements related to changes in tail water criteria ! elevations. Included oontingency, en� conto i ' ' ' and C!PFees. Stormwator Funding Request $ 449,272 Construction Cost $ 371.000 \ C|P Fees (new scope and adjust to 6.5%) $ 78,272 � Total $ 449.272 ` ' 7. Venetian Naighborhood-Vanadon Islands . , ! ' ( / , i Letter to Commission July 9,2012 Finance&Citywide Committee I i Original Scope of work: This project includes streetscape, landscaping, lighting, above ground improvements and water line replacements in the following Islands: San Marino, DiLido and Rivo Alto Islands. Current Status: On April 13, 2012, PWD Engineering Division completed the I review of the 100% submittal package for Venetian Islands Neighborhood I Improvement project. On May 21, 2012, the Parks and Recreation Department approved the 100% submittal package. On June 8, 2012, the Procurement Division issued an Invitation to Bid. Anticipated receipt of bids is July 13, 2012. Additional Funding Requests $2,128,424 I Additional funding is being requested for increased construction costs as indicated by latest estimate from Consultant's Opinion of Probable Cost (Items not included in BODR). The additional funding requested is for water & sewer in the amount of $526,715 and for stormwater in the amount of $1,601,709. Included in all funding requests are hard costs, soft costs and CIP Fees. Water & Sewer Funding Request $ 526,715 Construction Cost $ 450,275 CIP Fees (new scope and adjust to 6.5%) $ 76.440 Total $ 526,715 Stormwater Funding Request $1,601,709 Construction Cost $1,357,846 Consulting/Engineering/Field Services $ 122,000 CIP Fees (new scope and adjust to 6.5%) $ 121.863 Total $1,601,709 I 8. La Gorce Neighborhood Improvements I j Scope of work: The scope consists of area-wide street Improvements including street resurfacing, swale restoration; repair of sidewalks, targeted street lighting upgrades to correct deficiencies; enhanced landscaping within I the street ROW, water main replacement, and targeted storm water improvements. Current Status: PWD is completing the La Gorce Design Criteria Packageand will transfer the Administration of the construction to the CIP office who anticipates to request Commission approval to advertise for a design build firm at the September 12th, 2012 meeting. Additional Funding Requests $4,579,500 I �1 Above ground funding in the amount of $319,500 is being requested for i additional street milling and resurfacing needs. Stormwater funding in the amount of $4,260,000 is being requested for additional infrastructure required to comply with the new Stormwater Master Plan requirements. Included in all funding I I ' Letterto Commission July 9,2012 Finance&Citywide Committee requests are hard costs and CIP Fees. Above Ground Funding Request $ 319,500 i Construction Cost $ 300,000 CIP Fees $ 19,500 Total $ 319,500 Stormwater Funding Request $4,260,000 ! Construction Cost $ 4,000,000 ( CIP Fees 260,000 Total $4,260,000 f 9. Flamingo Neighborhood-Bid Pack 10A Scope of work: This project includes include water, storm water drainage including wells, lighting, landscaping, and pavement resurfacing within the neighborhood. I Current Status: Staff will request Commission approval to advertise a Design Criteria Package for the next phase of the Flamingo Neighborhood — Bid Pack 10A including 6" St at the September 12`h, 2012Commission Meeting. The remainder of Flamingo Bid Pack 10A will be coordinated with FDOT Alton Road Project. Additional Funding Requests $4,600,800 Above ground funding in the amount of $1,917,000 is being requested for the replacement and relocation of shallow street light circuits in conflict with future construction. Water & Sewer Funding in the amount of $2,683,800 is being requested for total replacement of all 6" cast iron pipe and galvanized services. Included in all funding requests are hard costs, and CIP Fees. I ! Above Ground Funding Request $1,917,000 Construction Cost $1,800,000 ( CIP Fees 8 117.000 I Total $1,917,000 Water & Sewer Funding Request $2,683,800 Construction Cost $2,520,000 CIP Fees 163,800 Total $2,683,800 ! 10. Flamingo Neighborhood-Bid Pack 10C i Scope of work: This project includes water, storm water drainage including i . i ' r I 1 Letter to Commission July 9,2072 { Finance&Citywide Committee wells, lighting, landscaping, pavement resurfacing within the neighborhood. Current Status: Staff is meeting with the Flamingo Park Neighborhood Association to discuss 16th St. improvements. Upon.completion of this effort, the City will undertake the design. t Additional Funding Requests $4,899,852 Above ground funding in the amount of $2,041,605 is being requested for the relocation of shallow street light circuits in conflict with future construction. Water& Sewer funding in the amount of$2,658,247 is being requested for the replacement of all 6" inch cast iron pipe and galvanized services. Included in all funding requests are hard cost, and CIP Fees. I I Above Ground Funding Request $2,041,605 Construction Cost $ 1,917;000 CIP Fees $ 124,605 Total $ 2,041,605 Water & Sewer Funding Request $2,858,247 i Construction Cost $2,683,800 i CIP Fees $ 1.74,447 Total $2,858,247 11. West Avenue/ Bay Road Improvements Scope of work: This project includes street resurfacing, swale restoration, repair of sidewalks, street lighting upgrades to correct deficiencies and provide pedestrian lighting, enhanced landscaping within the street ROW, and entryway features. j Current Status: West Avenue will be the detour route while FDOT is rebuilding Alton Road. The FDOT work is scheduled for completion in April, 2015. At that time, the City intends to begin the West Avenue Project. Additional Funding Requests $3,688,500 Above ground funding in the amount of $1,919,109 is being requested for the replacement and relocation of shallow street lights circuits in conflict with future construction. Water & Sewer funding in the amount of $1,769,391 is being requested for the replacement of all 6° inch cast iron pipe and galvanized services. Included in all funding requests are hard costs, and CIP Fees. I Above Ground Funding Request $1,919,109 , Construction Cost $1,801,980 CIP Fees 117,129 Total $1,919,109 1 i Letter to Commission July 9,2012 Finance&Citywide Committee i Water & Sewer Funding Request $1,769,391 Construction Cost $1,661,400 CIP Fees $ 107,991 Total $1,769,391 i 12. Sunset Harbor Neighborhood Pump Station Upgrades j Scope of work: This project includes construction of four injection wells, rehabilitation of two pump stations, and the replacement of a third pump station. Current Status: The Notice To Proceed for the itrst construction phase has been issued. The NTP for the second phase will be issued upon receipt of funding. Additional Funding Requests $1,917,000 i i Stormwater Funding in the amount of $1,917,000 is being requested to replace Sunset Harbor Pump Station No.3, which is scheduled for rehabilitation. Upsizing in order to provide a 5 yr level of service under the new storm criteria Included in all funding requests are hard costs, and CIP Fees. I Stormwater Funding Request $1,917,000 Construction Cost $1,800,000 CIP Fees $ 117.000 I Total $1,917,000 i FISCAL YEAR 2012/2013 CA°ITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUNDING REQASTS Total Additional Above Ground Funding Request $ 7,441,645 f Total Additional Water & Sewer Funding Request $ 9,842,226 1 +� Total Additional Stormwater Funding Request $13,177,564 I j In addition La Gorce Island has requested above ground milling and resurfacing, water and stormwater improvements in the amount of $3,594,375 with 1,078,300 for above roadway work, $175,375 for stormwater work and $2,340,700 for water work respectively. Improvements for this neighborhood are programmed (but not appropriated) in the currently adopted in the Capital Improvement Plan under "Future Years" in the amount of $350,000 for milling and resurfacing. The potential for utilizing i i� i Letter to Commission July 9, 2092 Finance&Citywide Committee future PTP appropriations to offset the impacts to the above ground funding can be discussed during the Finance and Citywide Projects Committee (FCWCP) on July 9 , 2012, as part of the capital prioritization discussion. ' FUNDING Consideration of above ground funding needs for all projects discussed in this memorandum will be part of the capital prioritization discussion at the July 9, 2012 FCWPC meeting. Water and sewer funding needs as well as stormwater funding needs will also be presented to the FCWCP later this summer in concert with discussions on bonding requirements and rate impacts. KGB/JGG49HB F;IWORKI$ALLI(1)EMPLOYEE FOLDERSIFIORELLA SARMIENTOIOverview of Right of Way Projects-FCWPC-July 2012 fav fhb.docx i I i i r I i I i I I 3, s v I -mw/ A I� i I i i I i I _ MIAMI BEACH City of Miami Beach,1700 Convention Center Drive,Miami Beach,Florida 33139,www.miam16eachfl.90v COMMITTEE MEMORANDUM TO: Finance and Citywide Projects Committee ROM: Kathie G. Brooks, Interim City Manager DATE: July 9, 2012 SUBJECT: DISCUSSION ON AMENDING THE BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT FOR CENTRAL BAYSHORE NEIGHBORHOOD NO. 8A AND LAKE PANCOAST NEIGHBORHOOD NO. 8C TO INCLUDE HOA REQUESTS, ADDITIONAL STORMWATER IMPROVEMENTS, AND ADDITIONAL MILLING AND RESURFACING. I The purpose of this informational memorandum is to provide general background for a discussion on amending the current Basis of Design Review Report (BODR) and associated funding impacts for the Central Bayshore neighborhood in order to incorporate the implementation of several Homeowner Association (HOA) requests; provide additional i stormwater upgrades; and to provide milling and resurfacing of the roadway in lieu of asphalt ' overlay. BACKGROUND—ENGINEERING On May 16, 2001, the City of Miami Beach (City) adopted Resolution No. 2001-24387; approving and authorizing the execution of an agreement with CH2M Hill, Inc. (CH2M Hill) for professional services for the Right-of-Way (ROW) Infrastructure Improvements Program for Neighborhood No. 8 — Bayshore and Sunset Islands project pursuant to Request for Qualifications (RFQ) No. 134-99/00. The agreement was for planning, design, and construction administration services for the collective Bayshore Neighborhoods which was originally one (1) project and was subsequently separated into five (5) individual projects via amendments to the original agreement. These five projects included Central Bayshore Neighborhood 8A (Package 8A), Lower North Bay Road Neighborhood 8B (Package 8B), Lake Pancoast Neighborhood 8C (Package 8C), and the Sunset Islands (Packages 8D and 8E). BACKGROUND -BODR On April 9, 2003, the City Commission approved the Basis of Design Report (BODR), completed and submitted by CH2M Hill for the Neighborhood No. 8 Bayshore/Sunset Islands Project. This BODR was the culmination of a comprehensive planning effort that included input from and reviews by residents, various City Departments, and the Design Review Board (DRB). The first i workshops occurred in 2001, A complete chronological summary of the history of the planning and design effort is attached as Exhibit A. f I ' 1 I ; FCWPC Meeting-July 9, 2012 Page 2 of 9 ANALYSIS The Bayshore Neighborhood No. 8 Right-of-Way Improvements Project was one of thirteen neighborhood improvement projects included in a program developed by the City of Miami Beach to improve the quality of life of its residents. The program included citywide water, i wastewater and stormwater improvements; as well as a variety of streetscape enhancement projects. This Finance Committee Memorandum addresses two (2) of the Bayshore sub- neighborhoods; Central Bayshore Neighborhood No. 8 (Bid Package A) and the Lake Pancoast Neighborhood No. 8 (Bid Package C) Other neighborhoods such as Biscayne.Point, Sunset Islands 1 &2 & Venetian Islands have received additional unplanned improvements particularly for water and stormwater improvements and milling and resurfacing based on technical needs. After the planning and design phases, Invitation to Bid (ITB) No. 18-09110 was issued for Packages 8A/8C on December 31, 2009. Bids were received by the Technical Review Panel (TRP), as part of the City's standard Best Value Procurement process for the recommendation to award the construction contract. Pursuant to the Technical Review Panel's and City Manager's recommendation, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No. 2010- 27587 on December 8, 2010 authorizing the award of Packages 8A and 8C to Lanzo Construction Co. of Florida (LCC) in the amount of$18,414,814.55 including contingency. The first Notice to Proceed (NTP-1) was issued to LCC on August 19, 2011. The Pre- Construction conference took place on October 26, 2011 and the second Notice to Proceed (NTP-2)was issued on October 31,2011. Construction mobilization took place on November 7, 2011. The project has a 24 month schedule and is currently at 25%completion (refer to Exhibit E, LTC291-2011, dated 11-14-11). HOA REQUESTS 1 REVISIONS—11 POINTS In earl 2010 following completion of design and permitting services for the Central Bayshore ' Y � 9 P 9 P 9 Y project area, the neighborhood association (HOA) requested that the City consider changing the width of some streets in the project area as well as some aspects of the completed design. Several meetings highlighting this request took place as follows: Y February 5, 2010—LTC advising commission of the design activity that has taken place for the project. 9 February 16, 2010-The Neighborhoods and Community Affairs Committee Meeting. • March 8, 2010 - Capital Improvement Projects Oversight Committee Meeting. Report is sent via Commission Memorandum on May 12, 2010. a April, 2010 - The Bayshore HOA forwarded a letter to the CIP Department highlighting eleven (11) key issues/concerns (Refer to Exhibit B attached). A presentation board graphically depicting the 11 items was also submitted to the City by the HOA for consideration.These eleven issues/concerns were referenced and discussed at other publicly-noticed meetings, including: o May 25, 2010-The Neighborhoods and Community Affairs Committee Meeting, i o June 28, 2010 — LTC advising Commission of the current project activity. Package includes the CIPOC, March 8, 2010 Meeting Minutes, April 12, 2010 HOA list of"11 i Points", and May 25, 2010 Neighborhoods Committee Memorandum. o September 22, 2010 - The Mayor's Blue Ribbon Bikeways Advisory Committee I Meeting. On August 25, 2011, and prior to commencement of construction, members of the Bayshore HOA met with CIP to, again, request that the eleven (11) items be considered for incorporation into the project design. CIP approached the Public Works Department (PWD) in several I I i I FCWPC Meeting -July 9, 2012 Page 3 of 9 instances to discuss possible options on behalf of the residents. Subsequent meetings and correspondence took place between CIP, PWD, Planning and the Parks Department, and a compromise was reached for the majority of the items. The final, agreed to, eleven (11) Points were presented to the residents during the publicly advertised Community Pre-Construction Meeting of August 31, 2011. The requested changes were either not part of the BODR, upon which the project design was developed, or were modifications to the BODR. Some of the requested changes require modifications to the City's current Atlantic Greenway Network (AGN - Bike Route Master Plan), which will need to be updated should these recommendations be approved by the City Commission. Some of the currently designed roadways were increased in width to accommodate bike lanes. It is important to underline that the Commission, in the past, has requested to not impact the landscaping by increasing the pavement width to accommodate for j bike lanes. The plans will require this revision should the Commission decide to accept the modification to the BODR and the AGN. The plans will require a revision by the Engineer of Record to the currently permitted plans. Permits obtained to date are also based on the current design and will also need to be updated. The approved HOA requested items are listed below. For a complete summary and location plan of the eleven (11) points refer to Exhibits C-1, C-2, and C-3: 1. Narrow Sheridan Avenue from 30th Street to 40th Street from +/-32 feet to 24 feet and provide for a bike route (sharrow) and bus bays. The plans currently call for the street to remain the same width at +/- 32 feet. There will be a credit for asphalt paving from the current budget and an increase for additional swales which should balance out. 2. Narrow North Meridian Avenue from Dade Boulevard to 28th Street and eliminate the proposed bike lanes and replace with a bike path within the right-of-way adjacent to the golf course. Reduce the road width to 22 feet. Twenty two feet is the minimum width allowed on collector streets. The plans currently indicate an increased road width of 28 feet from existing 23 feet. There will be a credit for five feet of new roadway and elimination of the Bike Lanes from the current budget and an increase for additional swales. 3. Remove Prairie Avenue from 281h Street to Dade Boulevard from the Central Bayshore scope of work since this project was already completed by Public Works in 2011. This is a full credit to the project. 4. The HOA has also requested the removal of the Bike Lanes along Prairie Avenue from 28`h to 40"'Streets and a reduction in the roadway from 28 feet to 20 feet. PWD strongly recommended against this since the bike lanes already exist and are part of the adopted AGN and Prairie Avenue is a collector street No change is recommended to be made to the plans and there would be no change to the current budget. 4a. Alternative Request — In addition to the removal of the Bike Lanes on Prairie Avenue, the residents have subsequently requested that Priarie Avenue be reduced to a minimum allowable roadway width for local roads and that an altemate bike facility be placed on Royal Palm Avenue. The residents have requested a Bike Boulevard, however unless Royal Palm is widened, which has not been the desire of the community, the only feasible bicycle facility which could incorporated in this roadway would be sharrows. In addition, added costs would be have to be incurred for the reduction of Prairie Avenue. This alternative would require a change to the current I I i FCWPC Meeting -July 9, 2012 Page 4 of 9 Plans and the currently adopted AGN, as well as generate an increase in the currently projected construction cost estimate being presented herein. The added cost is due to a reduction of the roadway width from 28 feet to 22 feet which is not currently budgeted. 5. Maintain 28th Street from Sheridan to Prairie Avenues at 24 feet in width with the addition of sharrows in lieu of bike lanes. The plans currently indicate roadway widening to 28 feet with bike lanes. Redefine the current 10 foot wide multi-use sidewalk from the south side of 28th Street to maintain pedestrian connectivity with Sheridan Avenue. Establish connectivity to Prairie and North Meridian Road for safety. There will be a credit for four feet of new roadway and the concrete sidewalk from the current budget and an'increase for additional swales which should balance out. 6. Narrow 34`h Street from Chase Avenue to Pine Tree Drive to 22 feet in width with sharrows. The plans currently indicate a road width of 28 feet with bike lanes. There will be a credit for the asphalt and road-widening since the existing roadway width is approximately 23 feet. 7. Fairgreen Drive to remain within its existing width of 16 feet. This can be accomplished by removing the scope of work from the ROW project and resurfacing the street as a 1 separate maintenance project. The plans currently indicate a road widening to 20 feet. There would be a credit for the asphalt and road widening if the roadway remains at the current width. 8. The current plans increase 31St Street from Sheridan Avenue to Pine Tree Drive from an existing width of 15 feet to 20 feet in order to remain continuous with the remaining street width. The HOA is willing to accept this as a compromise, therefore no change in the current plans is expected and no additional cost is anticipated. 9. Eliminate all proposed mid-block stamped asphalt decorative treatments and replace with concrete paver treatments. It is anticipated that the County will not approve mid block pedestrian crossings due to traffic safety concerns. Moreover, the BODR would need to be modified to eliminate the previously requested "traffic tables" and instead allow the Public Works department to conduct a traffic calming analysis along this corridor to determine if traffic calming is indeed warranted and what type of traffic calming facility would need to be incorporated to mitigate traffic concerns. Under this scenario the City would be in a better position to a) determine the type of traffic calming facility and b) allocate the adequate proper funding source for implementation 10. Eliminate all proposed stamped asphalt- decorative crosswalks at intersections and replace with concrete paver treatments. With the exception of 40th Street, current plans call for stamped asphalt. No changes to the current design plans will be made since a idifferent type of treatment outside of the adopted stamped asphalt could result in other neighborhoods generating similar requests throughout the City and funding requests to I be evaluated in concert with all neighborhoods. Additional funds would be required for this change which is not currently programmed. 11. Eliminate the proposed Royal Palm species on the south side of 40t,� Street as they are sporadically spaced and -replace with Mahogany species. Add more canopy trees wherever possible as per the recently completed plan submitted by the HOA. (Refer to Exhibit C-3). Current permitted plans include up-lighting and shrubs which could be removed from the scope. Landscape plans will need to be modified to reflect these changes at minimal or no cost. i FCWPC Meeting -July 9, 2012 Page 5 of 9 f Pursuant to the aforementioned requests by the.HOA, the City is bringing forth these changes as part of the current project construction work. The engineer of record would need to revise the existing plans and submit applications for revised permits to the applicable governmental agencies. The HOA requested items are not expected to require a significant increase in construction cost, based upon preliminary estimates. A detailed estimate of probable cost will be submitted by the consultant once revised construction documents are completed. ADDITIONAL STORMWATER UPGRADES The Bayshore neighborhood is bounded by the environmentally sensitive Biscayne Bay Aquatic i Preserve, which is also an Outstanding Florida Water (OFW) and intracoastal waterway. The area has relatively low-lying and flat to that experiences high intensity rainfall, significant tidal influence, limited soil storage for infiltration, and very limited swale storage capacity due to a high distribution of impervious area. The Central Bayshore Neighborhood's current stormwater management system consists primarily of outfalls served by swales, inlets, storm drains, and culverts. The existing design is based upon the recommendations of the City's 1997 Stormwater Master Plan and the subsequent Bayshore neighborhood BODR. The City's stormwater master plan consultant, CDM Smith, undertook an extensive stormwater analysis of the Bayshore Neighborhood. The current analysis makes use of modeling from the Draft Stormwater Master Plan, which is more sophisticated than the previous 1997 Stormwater Master Plan. The stormwater master plan determined that Pump Station No. 2 located between Pine Tree Dr. and Flamingo Dr., can be replaced with a system based on gravity wells and upsized outfalls. Pump Station No. 2 could then be relocated in a more needed location to the area of 28`h St. and Fairgreen Drive and be used to provide additional stormwater infrastructure within Zone 4 and the North Meridian collection system indicated in Exhibit D-2. After a major storm event that occurred on October 30, 2011, which flooded a substantial area of the Central Bayshore neighborhood, the PWD and CIP were approached by concerned residents. The residents requested for the City to expedite revisions to the design of the i stormwater facilities to provide additional relief from potential flooding conditions within the timeline of the current construction contract. (refer to Exhibit D-1). The Central Bayshore neighborhood's current stormwater management system consists primarily of outfalls served by swales, inlets, storm drains, and culverts which currently do not meet the 5 year level of service. The Engineer of Record is proposing changes outlined below. For a complete summary of the changes and location plan of the area refer to Exhibits D-1 and D-2: 1, Provide design for a stormwater collection system to serve the southwest portion of the Central Bayshore area with boundaries roughly defined by W. 28"' Street to the south, Prairie Avenue to the west, Sheridan Avenue to the east and W. 34th Street to the north. The estimated construction cost for this item is $1,142,134 and is detailed in Exhibit F-1 attached. 2. Provide a design for the replacement of the existing collection system on North Meridian Avenue, between W. 28`h Street and Dade Boulevard and tie into the recently constructed 36-inch diameter outfall on Dade Boulevard, The estimated construction cost for this item is $341,400 and is detailed.in Exhibit F-1 attached. i 1 FCWPC Meeting -July 9, 2012 Page 6 of 9 3. In conjunction with the roadway revisions, valley gutters shall also be provided as appropriate to direct flow to the collection system throughout the project area, as the limited capacity of the swales within the right of way does not allow for adequate conveyance and storage. The estimated construction cost for this item is $1,250,665 and is detailed in Exhibit F-2 attached. i 4. To reduce costs and allow for the addition of Item 1 above, relocate the pump station and pressure injection wells in the basin currently known as Pump Station No. 2 between Pine Tree and Flamingo Drives in the northeast portion of the Central Bayshore i area. The collection and disposal system along Flamingo Drive will be redesigned to incorporate gravity disposal wells and an upgrade to the existing outfall. The estimated I construction cost for this item is$197,712 and is detailed in Exhibit F-3 attached. 5. In associated with construction of stormwater improvements, roadway restoration finishing is estimated to cost$493,395. ! For the Lake Pancoast Neighborhood,stormwater funding in the amount of$235,800 is being requested for the potential installation of additional valley gutters, swale, reclamation and storage. Included in all funding requests are hard costs, contingency, soft costs and CIP Fees. ADDITIONAL WATER AND SEWER FUNDING For the Central Bayshore Neighborhood, water & sewer funding in the amount of $296,037 is needed for construction more appropriately allocating the proper distribution of above ground funding between water, stormwater and above ground efforts. For the Lake Pancoast Neighborhood, water & sewer funding in the amount of $21,480 is needed for construction more appropriately allocating the proper distribution of above ground funding between water, stormwater and above ground efforts. iMILLING AND RESURFACING OF ROADWAYS The existing project plans call for a pavement overlay on all the neighborhood streets. Field investigations during construction have identified the existing pavement to be in worse condition than what may have been originally anticipated, as a result of pavement deterioration and distress through the years.. The Engineer of Record ('OR) has stated that the condition of the roadway is not sustainable for the long term. Both the resident project representative .(RPR) and the FOR have recommended milling and resurfacing where required to provide a more durable pavement. The original BODR recommended that all roads within the Central Bayshore neighborhood be resurfaced with a one (1) inch overlay of asphalt and that milling of the roadway be limited to I areas where there is excessive scarring or where the,grade (slope) of the road needs to be modified to support stormwater drainage. Milling is a process that grinds the existing asphalt surface to change the slope of the surface and to assist bonding between the existing and new asphalt courses. Only 20% of the existing road surface was projected to require milling prior to i resurfacing to address scarring and grading issues. The estimated construction cost for the milling and resurfacing of the roadways within the Central Bayshore project is $986,789 and is detailed in Exhibit F-4 attached. However, the amount of above ground funding net of the portions funded by stormwater and water and sewer is $197,357. A credit for the deletion of Prairie Avenue in the amount of$93,211 is also included. i i i i FCWPC Meeting -July 9, 2012 Page 6 of 9 I 3. In conjunction with the roadway revisions, valley gutters shall also be provided as appropriate to direct flow to the collection system throughout the project area, as the limited capacity of the swales within the right of way does not allow for adequate conveyance and storage. The estimated construction cost for this item is $1,250,665 and is detailed in Exhibit F-2 attached. 4. To reduce costs and allow for the addition of Item 1 above, relocate the pump station and pressure injection wells in the basin currently known as Pump Station No. 2 between Pine Tree and Flamingo Drives in the northeast portion of the Central Bayshore I area. The collection and disposal system along Flamingo Drive will be redesigned to incorporate gravity disposal wells and an upgrade to the existing outfall. The estimated construction cost for this item is $197,712 and is detailed in Exhibit F-3 attached. 5. In associated with construction of stormwater improvements, roadway restoration finishing is estimated to cost$542,735. For the Lake Pancoast Neighborhood, stormwater funding in the amount of$235,800 is being requested for the potential installation of additional valley gutters, swale reclamation and storage. Included in all funding requests are hard costs, contingency, soft costs and CIP Fees. ADDITIONAL WATER AND SEWER FUNDING For the Central Bayshore Neighborhood, water & sewer funding in the amount of $296,037 is needed for construction more appropriately allocating the proper distribution of above ground funding between water, stormwater and above ground efforts. jFor the Lake Pancoast Neighborhood, water & sewer funding in the amount of $21,480 is needed for construction more appropriately allocating the proper distribution of above ground funding between water, stormwater and above ground efforts. MILLING AND RESURFACING OF ROADWAYS The existing project plans call for a pavement overlay on all the neighborhood streets. Field investigations during construction have identified the existing pavement to be in worse condition than what may have been originally anticipated, as a result of pavement deterioration and distress through the years.. The Engineer of Record (EOR) has stated that the condition of the roadway is not sustainable for the long term. Both the resident project representative (RPR) and the FOR have recommended milling and resurfacing where required to provide a more durable pavement. The original BODR recommended that all roads within the Central Bayshore neighborhood be resurfaced with a one (1) inch overlay of asphalt and that milling of the roadway be limited to areas where there is excessive scarring or where the grade (slope) of the road needs to be r modified to support stormwater drainage. Milling is a process that grinds the existing asphalt j surface to change the slope of the surface and to assist bonding between the existing and new i asphalt courses. Only 20% of the existing road surface was projected to require milling prior to resurfacing to address scarring and grading issues. The estimated construction cost for the milling and resurfacing of the roadways within the Central Bayshore and Lake Pancoast projects is $1,058,389 and is detailed in Exhibit F-4 attached. However, the amount of above ground funding net of the portions funded by stormwater and water and sewer is $197,357. A credit for the deletion of Prairie Avenue in the amount of$93,211 is also considered. i i I I i FCWPC Meeting -July 9, 2012 Page 7 of 9 In addition,the estimated construction cost for the milling and resurfacing of the roadways within the Lake Pancoast project is $71,500 as also detailed in Exhibit F-4 attached. However, the amount of above ground funding net of the portions funded by stormwater and water and sewer is$14,D00. I The City desires to include the requested changes as part of the current project construction work. The ECR would revise the existing plans and submit applications for revised permits to the applicable governmental agencies. The additional cost required for stormwater and pavement upgrades is being requested as part of the capital budget process pursuant to a budget level estimate of probable cost submitted by the EOR, CH2M Hill. SCOPE OF SERVICES -ENGINEERING If the City Commission desires to move forward with the HOA requested revisions and additional storm water improvements, it will be necessary for the City to contract additional engineering services to CH2M Hill to provide design services to revise the construction documents, as well as permitting services to update all necessary permits affected by the proposed design changes. In an effort to execute the additional work in a seamless and expeditious manner, it is anticipated that all project design changes will be incorporated into iLanzo's construction contract by change order, using the current unit pricing provided for in the contract. Many of the changes are simply modifications to existing contract items with incorporation into the contract being a straightforward process. However, some of the items will involve new construction not included in the original contract schedule when this project was issued to bid. It merits underlining that the current budgetary figure being presented will need to be fine tuned and negotiated with the contractor at the time the FOR has finalized the design and has prepared a detailed opinion of cost. Pursuant to a recommendation by the Finance Committee, the fee being requested by CH2M Hill to implement the design and develop a detailed opinion of cost for this project will be presented at the July 18'" commission meeting and is estimated at $207,841.00, including reimbursable expenses. The funding to exercise this amendment is already included in the current budget for this project;therefore no additional funding is required. ADDITIONAL FUNDING The current budget level construction cost estimate is attached herein in Exhibits F-1 thru F-4. I In order to proceed with construction of the items requested, the following additional funding is j being requested in the 2013 capital budget: Bayshore A(Central Bayshore) Funding: Additional Above Ground Funding Request: $ 246,006 The additional scope includes hard cost, contingency, soft cost and CIP fees for additional milling and resurfacing. Additional funding request is as follows: Construction Cost $197,357 Contingency $ 19,846 Consulting/Engineering/Field Services $ 15,000 CIP Fees 1$ 3,803 Total $246,006 i I i I FCWPC Meeting -July 9, 2012 Page 8 of 9 Additional Water & Sewer Funding Request: $ 346,807 The additional scope includes hard cost, contingency and CIP fees to offset the additional cost for milling and resurfacing (pavement restoration) required by the installation of water mains, appurtenances and fire hydrants. Additional funding request is as follows: Construction Cost $296,037 Contingency $ 29,604 CIP Fees (new scope and adjust to 6.5%) 2$ 1,166 Total $346,807 Additional Stormwater Funding Request: $3,954,069 The additional scope includes hard cost, contingency and CIP fees for the installation i of 24" valley gutters; relocating pump station #4 and replacing with gravity wells; additional Stormwater collection (phase II); and Meridian Ave. Stormwater collection, and the portion of milling and resurfacing (pavement restoration) required for the installation of drainage structures. Additional funding request is as follows: I Construction Cost $3,425,306 Contingency $ 342,531 CIP Fees $ 186,232 Total $3,954,069 Bayshore C (Lake Pancoast) Funding: Additional Above Ground Funding Request: $ 14,000 The additional scope includes hard cost (construction) for additional milling and resurfacing (pavement restoration). Additional Water & Sewer Funding Request: $ 28,216 i The additional scope includes hard cost, contingency and CIP fees to offset the additional cost for milling and resurfacing (pavement restoration) required by the installation of water mains, appurtenances and fire hydrants. Additional funding request is as follows: Construction Cost $21,480 Contingency $ 2,148 CIP Fees (new scope and adjust to 6.5%) $ 4.588 I Total $28,216 j Additional Stormwater Funding Request: $347,509 The additional scope includes hard cost, contingency and CIP fees for the installation i of 24" valley gutters, and the portion of milling and resurfacing (pavement restoration) required for the installation of drainage structures. Additional funding request is as follows: i I Construction Cost $235,800 Contingency $ 23,580 CIP Fees (new scope and adjust to 6.5%) $ 63,129 Total $347,509 j j I I i I FCWPC Meeting-July 9, 2012 Page 9 of 9 CONCLUSION: The above information is provided to facilitate the discussion of whether or not to proceed with the revision to the plans for the requested improvements which are outside of the current BODR for the Central Bayshore neighborhood. Attachments: Exhibit A: Chronological History and Process Summary Exhibit B: HOA Original Request Exhibit C-1: HOA Compromise-Summary Exhibit C-2: HOA Compromise-Map Exhibit C-3: HOA Requested Landscaping Exhibit D-1: Additional Stormwater Upgrades- Summary Exhibit D-2: Additional Stormwater Upgrades-Map Exhibit E: LTC 291-2011 dated 11-14-11 Exhibits F-1 thru F-4: Budget Level Cost Estimates KGBIJMG/FBIfV FACAPASaInCOMMISSION COMMITTEE MEET INGS1Finance&CitftAda Conwktas\Baysnore Memo_FCwPC_7-9-12.docx i - I i s I I i I I i I i i I I i I i I Exhibit A CHRONOLOGICAL HISTORY AND PROCESS FOR THE CENTRAL BAYSHORE NEIGHBORHOOD Projects in the Capital Improvement Program move through three stages—planning, design and construction.The City of Miami Beach reaches out to the community during this process in order to assure that during the final development of the construction plans the majority of the desires and concerns raised by residents and stakeholders are considered.This includes the development of a Basis of Design Report(BODR),as well ' as publicly-noticed milestone meetings. The City involves the homeowner associations(HOAs)of the various impacted neighborhoods, and attempts to empower the HOAs by encouraging their involvement in the process.The City has also established a communications protocol to reach out to i residents via community organizations/HOAs and Neighborhood leaders.Additionally, when meetings are held, they ara publicly noticed and the community is provided notification via the newspaper,a flyer that is distributed door-to-door, and the calendar on the City's website. Although the BODR becomes the,basis by which to initially document the community's desires, there are regulating agencies that have ultimate jurisdiction over the project specifications.These include the City's Public Works Department, Parks Department, Planning Department, k1lami-Dade County Traffic, Nliami-Dade County Environmental ' Resources Management,South Florida Water Management,among others. Depending on the scope of the project and the infrastructure and environmental impacts,agencies on the federal level can also oet involved. Since the inception of the Bayshore Neighborhood project, the City has conducted the i appropriate due-diligence and met with residents at various phases of the project. The i following community meetings have been held since the beginning of the Bayshore Neighborhood Improvement Project: Planning Phase: c Dec. 4, 2001 Community Design Workshop#1 ` o Feb. 14, 2002 Community Design Workshop 92 o June 11, 2002 Community Design Workshop#3 BODR: f The BODR was presented at the G.O. Bond Oversight Committee, which was an advertised public meeting that was also broadcasted and rebroadcasted on IvIBTV 77 c April 7, 2003 -BODR Presentation to G.O. Bond Oversight Committee The BODR, including Addendum No. 1, was then presented at a City Commission meeting for approval. City Commission meetings are also advertised public meeting and also broadcasted live and rebroadcasted on MBTV 77 o April 9, 2003- BODR Presentation to the City Commission j Design Phase: o Feb. 15, 2007- Community Design Review Meeting Page 1 of 3 I i j I i HOA Meetings: o Feb. 5, 2010—LTC advising commission of the design activity that has taken place for the project. Complaints regarding the BODR are listed. o Feb. 16, 2010-The Neighborhoods and Community Affairs Committee Meeting o March 8, 2010-Capital Improvement Projects Oversight Committee Meeting. Report is sent via Commission(Memorandum on May 12,2010. o April, 2010-The Bayshore HOA forwarded a letter to the CIP Department highlighting eleven(11)key issues/concerns.A presentation board graphically depicting the 11 items was also submitted to the City by the HOA for consideration.These eleven issueslconcerns were referenced and discussed at other publicly-noticed meetings,including: o May 25, 2010-The Neighborhoods and Community Affairs Committee Meeting I o June 28, 2010—LTC advising Commission of the current project activity. Package includes the CIPOC March 8, 2010 Meeting Minutes, April 12, 2010 HOA list of"11 Points", and May 25, 2010 Neighborhoods Committee Memorandum. o Sept. 22, 2010-The Mayof's Blue Ribbon Bikeways Advisory Committee Meeting All of the above requests from the HOA were submitted after construction documents were completed and permits processed. Bike Ways: In the City's Bikeways Master Plan, several roads within the Bayshore neighborhood were identified as designated bicycle lanes. These include 28"Street,North Meridian Ave.,and 34h Street.However,these existing roads would have to be widened in order to incorporate bicycle lanes.The Mayor and Commission have expressed that any ! increase in the width of a roadway be approved; many within the Central Bayshore j neighborhood also stated that increasing roadways in Bayshore would be against their iwishes. In an effort to keep bikeways within these areas,and satisfy the concerns of both the Commission and residents, CIP took into account the needs of these various interests and integrated"sharrows"—shared roadways that accommodate both vehicles and bicycles—to achieve the cohesive design of both roads. The administration has found that sharrows provide the best alternative to a) introduce a safe environment that allows vehicles to share the road with cyclists, b)introduces a proven traffic calming effect, and ! c)allow the integrity of the greenspace to remain. I ! The above compromises were discussed and accepted by the HOA and presented during the Preconstruction community meeting which took place on August 31, 2011. Pre-Construction Phase: Publicly advertised meetings continued to be held for selection of the General Contractor for construction of the Central Bayshore and Lake Pancoast Neighborhoods. o Dec. 31, 2009—General Contractor ITB is Advertised I Page 2 of 3 i t i I I I I I I ' I Io Nov. 19, 20'10-Technical Review Panel selects Lanzo Construction as the GC o Dec. 8, 2010— Commission Awards the Contract c Aug. 19, 2011 —Issuance of NTP-1 o Aug. 31, 2011 -Pre-Construction Community Meeting Construction Phase: After the pre-construction phase and community outreach was completed, CIP prepared to commence construction as per the requirements of the contract: o Oct. 26, 2011 —Pre-Construction Meeting Held. i o Oct. 31, 2011 — Issuance of NTP-2 c Nov. 7, 20'11 —Construction Commenced. c Oct. 31, 2013— Projected Construction completion. I i I f I - I ti I I i i i I Page 3 of 3 i i I I 1 i Exhibit B i 8ayshore Homeowners Association iGtiaml3cach, =londa I i To: e Lp u=ice From: John .oTny— of Bay-h=--:10- . Date:?p=: ta,20'.0 ey�iio..:iom_u.-tea.��oc:a`o�, i Cl?R�wuests-A-i it?010 1. L.Marrow SneJdan A c.to 2)0=ec,To-30t?:to 40!:.Scee[s. !lit aim-,n2^vSODOSedBlc..'.Lanes or.M!:icia:ve-,=row LBC_Bo'il°va- t0 2-S'St:ee:,Ell^.C:?'[C 20 iee:and liStall Bu{-.Rou?Ei. . a-ov:Prairie EmrCJade ro 23'$�:_�[to try i.._.• t•='.lbliq 1'�'OriS[G^.0^_. 1Ce..Aith- lt.^.5:: 00: ' iancscapi:.g; i 4.-Remove::!e ex:sting 3:xe Lan_:o-� to 40rt 5�:__s a:,,-'-a-.7ocv to 20 , _sm1*1 B-S_ Roues dlstead. i LliTililaa[Ze D=OpOSC'1 I0 fo ot'xici'c.T=_l--use Side;lala 1=0% Sl:].°C:—18[r.Si'eC:yOfC Sheridan t0 n=airle, 20 i_c:ard irs:al?a Dike Route. I ! ! 6.Na:roR'_mot^S=ct to 20 i..et. -.Sec:a;.excep:ior,to^ai-I the�oilo4i^.'n�s,:eers at the awrenr aidrhs; • rairgTeen at its curren:=oadwav widtn o`approximaiel; 16 Fee:and Sir:::octHCCr.Pine Tree Dr vc and Sheadun at its cur:en,road xev_ tvidr o-° aDero;.imatel`1 I: L. S.-Fimina[e al'.pronosed miC-bloc::stamper-,ispaa':`decorative[rea:t^ems`a*ociznou;trio prole'":. 9.Ei:m_aatc ail preposcc 1:il",-2r:Ve..rDSSwalt zca ,_..ts a.ir:[Zrsec❑onz:witG*hc cx.eDao:o:,O;a 5is.. iIC'.Eli mina-z'll-la propose,.Royal Pai^s s0e:ies on tne souk sid_o:4.1' Szee:and;spia.e hia canopy I Tees:Mahogany sppe.cies. i .:. ti6d Core zanopy sacr. ° g-Xi===S.:neeL 0L. species. i i I Exhibit C-1 o D L D u 3 ° o E a E `c E a E o E ° a c o v a•� N H o � � 3 fl u � � �m z E � v u = 'c a I °m °o m z °o m e a a - °o u = ,C `O L ° % t °% V Cl L 9 m E •J L 'O d = L m L V � u u Y m n d C d Cm m C m � v m ` l 0 01 Y m a d u E a m c m n o 0 Z c N E = N E '" E Z m Z ¢ c C C D E N 3 E z_ m E D m _E � _ -• v Y zo m m o -_ o °m v a ° ❑ u ° j c c m c c c n ='E m ° E o m ^ u o c n E o c c c a ° E o r a E c E a E E_ _° c m o° ❑ ° m c o " M p c ❑ c i o 3 - m m O N v C 3 ° " _ ❑ C y L (� 3 e ti 0 y N C = r d rn i � a3 � i � rLL Z lr- I d 9 .°, o °a I° W o` m u` r o 3 3 I- o I� v C c v o W U z I t9 a E3 v v o o N N C _ c° E � < _ U � 1 m ? m i � i• v ° � E i .7 '-` a c E^ d o o - a d L a 3 -n Z 'o ° 2 c m ¢° I•e- s ma 3 Z _ c a r s n a 3 a 3 d 3 3 m - � E c v u > > 3 n y e o c w rJ° ; u N v = m m g Q * s E N 9 c o b E o w. c d C m D m V m y m u °"'^ u n a' ¢ d. a 3 o M = cu o u ,„ ` + F + F c+ c + 2 e E D E r E ` E o u E N t ' z N 3 a 3 u= i u ° u u' u` ti r v C u E 5 u-3 a 9 J - n c � m e o w vsi N E 3 E c •• °c < m E m o I N U p 0 ❑ ` ❑ � � D y 2 I a` ¢ h 1 ¢ _ ° m ILL ❑ _ i i Exhibit C-2 H0A REQUESTS/REVISIONS II POINTS Enl-g 10 Ifj 4a it j I raj �1 I ! �/ I ij asor or ir cc LOCATION MAP oRIcirrv,xaA REQUEST " ALTERHATERL•QUL•SC I I I EXt�'+bit C-3 gEVISED LANDSCAPE ITEN111- PLAN q ' , ' •.1 � I IfT.1 - a 1 � L it r• . II rte^ 1 - 7 I 1 i ! 1' 7 1 I J✓ r I{ I I Exhibit D-1 Ifi m o •,-°�m I z @ mom ' c ? as m o N m E c y Y a cEi v, a u° cos n� E I� ENC gym ° a II � v 5 N ° � O O G o ° a = v 3 .a c T m c Cl E a s a o fn - t L c O 6 a0 W C E V 't" u u c v E n I y a _ ms I(amNsvmv � � C Z m U � ° i � o Cc I � a m u° Z Z I2 Z Z I j a m v - ° c u v � t v c m10 c —"D ° �•a �av a u o m uj i v m IS U � 4 I L O C m CL = Y S .� ry m v •+ I : I I Exhibit D-2 i VE7GRBORPIf)OD Na_8.CLVTRAL SA3SPOR£"A" I i Pn()rn5r•nA^nt warMr:vr1ANn1llS�L1.1�-ES5�L�1 -Tr-•, d F E I rc�irPS.rrrnv,cocarro�� N.MERIDL41Y ... ` --;Q- COLLECTION 1.. SYSTE131 I t J•` I I i l • i Exhibit E MIAMI BEACH nor -1VED OFFICE OF rriE CITY MANAGER LETTEFRR T� COMMISSION zUl I M y 6 AN 11: 0.1 LTC 9 291.2011 Cl i Y CLER}i,'S OFFICE I To: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission FROM: Jorge M-Gonzafez,City Manager care November 14, 2011 SUBIECT: Construction Commencement for CBn al bSaVshore and Lake Pancoast Right of Way Improvement-Projects The purpose.of this Letter to Commission(LTC)is to inform you that on October 28,2011,the i second Notice to Proceed(NTP 2)was issued to Lanzo Construction of Florida (Lanzo) the contractor hired to complete the'Central Bayshore and Lake Pancoast Right of Way Improvement Projects. Construction commenced on October 31, 2011, The project is expected to be completed In t approximately 24 months for Central Bayshore and 12 months for Late Pancoast, however both projects will be constructed simultaneously. -Central Bayshore The scope of work for this area is as follows: Storm Drainage Improvements-injection wells,pump stations and roadway collection systems • Water Main Improvements • Landscaping Improvements . ADA Upgrades Roadway Improvements Lake Pancoast The scope of work for this area is as follows: Storm Drainage Improvements . Water Main Improvements j Lighting Improvements-decorative lighting . Landscaping Improvements • ADA Upgrades I • Roadway Improvements-addition of a traffic circle and decorative crosswalks The preliminary schedule submitted by Lanzo indicates that the contractor will first install all underground infrastructures and then proceed with streetscape improvements. Construction. i will be conducted in phases in order to minimize the effects of construction to the i neighborhood. Lanzo plans to execute the project in six phases. These six phases are ' representative of six geographic areas where the contractor will first install water main, upgrade drainage and restore aboveground elements. i I I i 1 I i I Letter to Cominission—Central Sayshore and Lake Pancoast Construction Comntacement November 10,2011 Page 2 of 2 Currently, the contractor proceeded with the installation of water main lines at the following locations: . Flamingo Drive,from West 28 Street to West 40 Street j e Chase Avenue, from West 34 Street to West 40 Street i Currently, CIP Staff is coordinating a staging area,for the project, as the final site is not fully defined.The original site was the Par 3 Golf Course, but residents of Central Bayshore raised concerns about using this space as a'staging area. In accordance with requests from the community, CIP is determining what staging areas are available and, once a site is selected, will advise stakeholders of the final determination. CIP Staff continues to maintain contact with the Homeowners Association and Neighborhood Association leadership in both neighborhoods. Prior to work commencing, the contractor's 'Public' Information Officer (PIC) distributed information door to door throughout the project limits that detailed the scope of work and schedules. Additionally, the PIC coordinates ali aspects of communication with CIP's Public Information staff, including weekly updates arid' i construction alerts throuahout the course of the project. The PIC has a constant presence in the neighborhood and is the point of contact for all resident concerns and input. The Lake Pancoast Neighborhood project is anticipated to commence in early March 2012, and both projects are scheduled to be completed simultaneously by October 201'3. I If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. • JNIG! 8/ /Dtvl/M1'i� I I . i i i I I i I I I I � :._:.- .. .. -- - -- _ . I i Exhibit F-1 i Budget Level Cost Estimate C}ty of Miaml Beach Neighborhood 8-Bayshore/Sunsat Islands Central Bayshore-Package A i i Additional Stormwater Collection-SW Bayshore(Phase fl)and Meridian(Phase III) Item Unit Quantlty UP Extended Cost SW Bayshore(Phase 19 i catch basin EA 76 2900 220400 Storm Manhole EA 48 2200 105600 1V RCP LF 20 45 900 18"RCP LF 613 54 33102 24"RCP LF 2299 58 133342 36"RCP LF 3860 79 304940 48"RCP LF 2645 130 343850 i $ 1,142,134.D0 Meridian(Phase III) catch basin EA 14 2900 40600 Storm Manhole EA 14 2200 30600 15"RCP LF 700 45 31500 18''RCP LF 500 54 27000 24"RCP LF 1500 58 87000 36"RCP LF 500 79 39500 48"RCP LF 500 130 63000 connectlan at Mardian EA 1 20000 20000 i $ 341,400.00 Total Budget Estimate $1,483,534.00 i i I i I I I 1 I i Exhibit F-2 Budget Level Cost Estimate City of Miami Beach Neighborhood 8-Sayshoref 5unset Islands Central Bayshore-Package A Provide Valley Gutters-entire Central Bayshore area Street Estimated Length Meridian 2968 1889 23rd 85 109 28th 368 1749 Royal Pafm 80 2880 Priari= 84 3606 Salidor 78 17 1 Flamingo 906 2994 35th 360 j 33rd 400 29th 74 845 30th 74 1_26 31st 1286 34th 1548 i Sheridan 3341 37th 140"8 657 40th 1494 427 Chase 1280 500 1540 i Garden 1148 39th 682 36063 LF j Total Estimated Length(both sides of street-LF)= 72126 Unit Price for 24"Valley Gutter(Lanzo) _ $ 17.34 Total Budget Estimate = $ 1,250,664.84 i I Exhibit F-3 I _ Budget Level Cost Estimate I City of M1ami Beach Neighborhood 8-Bayshore/Sunsat Islands Central Bayshore-Package A/Lake Pancodst-Package C Relocate PS#4 and Replace With Gravity Wells;Replace Outfall I Item Unit Quantity UP Extended Cost ' Central Bayshore I Gravity Drinage Wells EA 6 32000.00 192000 Replace Outail @ 28th St 36'Drain Pipe LF 23 79.00 2212 Headwall Penetration EA 1 900.00 900 Connection atDMH EA 1 900.00 900 Manatee Grate EA 1 1700.00 1700 Total 6udg2t Estimate $ 197,712.00 Not_s: 1.PW requested changes due to change In design rzquirernents I I I1 f I f i 1 i I j i Exhibit F-4 i i Budget Level Cost Estimate City of Miami Beach Neighborhood 8-Bayshore/Sunset Islands Central Bayshore-Package A/Lake Pancoast-Package C MIII and Rework Base Prior to Paving;Delete Prairie Ave, Item Unit Quantity UP Extended Cost Central Bayshore j Add 4.17.a Mill Pavement 5F 135000 2.00 270000.00 rework base SF 135000 6.00 810000.00 $ 1,080,000.00 Delete 4.09•a sidewalk 5F 1296 5.50 7128.00 4.10a trafccalming EA 2 3000.00 6000.00 4.12.b stop bars LF 55 3.00 1E100 4.12.c crosswalks LF 402 1.50 603.00 4.12.4 double wipes LF 405 1.50 60750 4.32.e single sCipes LF 288 1.00 28S.00 4.12.f turn arrows E4 4 50.00 200.00 4.16.b asphalt SF 9126 5.00 45630.00 4.18.a Swale 5F 61919 0.50 30959.50 18"single thermoplastic markings LF 230 3.OD 690.00 8"single thermoples5c markings LF 125 2.00 252.00 i 81-Directlonal white/red rpm EA 22 4.00 88.00 No parking signs EA 3 200.00 600.00 $ (93,211.00) i Lake Pancoast Add 4.17.2 Mill Pavement 5F 8950 2.00 17900 i t rework base 5F 8950 6.00 53700 $ 71,600.00 I I i Total Budget Estimate $1,05B,309.00 Notes 1.Based on existing pavement quantities 2.New unit price required for base rework 3.Prairie Ave.south of 28th deleted i i • I i i I I i i _ with the 60 percent completion stage shall be +30% to—15% (i.e. 30% over/ 15% under the actual amount) "Budget" Level as defined by the American Association-of Cost Engineers. The accuracy of the cost estimate associated with the 90 and 100 percent completion stage submittals shall be a +15% to —5% (i.e. 15% over/ 5% under the actual amount) "Definitive" Level Estimates as defined by the American Association of Cost Engineers. All estimates shall be submitted in Microsoft "Excel" format in accordance with the template supplied by the CITY. All estimates shall be fumished bound in 8-1/2-inch by 11-inch size. Based upon the CONSULTANT's cost estimate or bids, the CITY will advise the CONSULTANT if portions of the project need to be deleted, phased and/or bid as alternate bid items to satisfy existing fiscal constraints (based upon CONSULTANT's analysis and recommendations). In this effort, the CONSULTANT may be required to attend a series of meetings and develop alternative cost savings options for CITY consideration, if the estimates show that the projected project cost will exceed the target budget. The CONSULTANT shall revise the contract documents to reflect necessary revisions to meet budget parameters at no additional cost accordingly. Deliverables: - Furnish six (6) sets of 60, 90 and 100 percent completion stage cost estimates to CITY, in MS-Excel electronic disc format, concurrently with the design submittals noted in Task 2.3. - Attend meetings with the CITY to review and discuss cost estimates. This Task includes development of any required cost savings alternatives, and implementation / revision of documents to address such items, as necessary to meet established budget parameters. Schedule: -Complete concurrently with Design Phase schedule. Task 2.5— Community Deslan Review Meeting The CONSULTANT shall attend and participate in one (1) Community Design Review Meeting (CDRM) to review the design progress and concept during the design. The CITY will schedule, find location for, and notify residents of the meeting. The CONSULTANT shall prepare for, attend and present its documents at one (1) CDRM. Meeting shall be scheduled at the 60% design completion stage. Note that presentation format shall consist of a brief Power Point presentation to review Project status, highlights, funding, schedules, plus review of full size plans for the project. The CONSULTANT shall prepare draft meeting minutes and Page 10 of 25 Attachment B — Schwebke Shishkin & Associates, Inc. (SS&A) A/E Agreement I February 22,2013 Mr. Roberto Rodriguez Capital Projects Coordinator City of Miami Beach CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS OFFICE 1700 Convention Center Drive Miami Beach, Florida 33139 RE: ROW INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM VENETIAN ISLANDS BID PACKAGE 13C CRNNEN 1HOAQSCN BID EVALUATION CT&A PROJECT NO.12-0092 Dear Roberto, At the City's request, Craven Thompson (CTA) has reviewed the bid documents OFT for the bid results for the Right of Way Infrastructure Improvement Program Venetian Islands — Neighborhood 13, Bid Package C; San Marino, Di Lido, and &ASSOOKES INC— Rivo Alto. As part of our scope,CTA evaluated the bids for the following: Engineers • Unit prices and overall bid using recent projects of similar scope and the Planners Surveyors FDOT Statewide Averages Landscape Architects . Plans and specifications for any issues/scope that were not clearly defined in the bid package. • Bid items that might result in an unbalanced bid or could result in future change orders that would increase the cost of the contract_ during construction. • Major issues that would affect the constructability, and for items that might result in change orders or might result in unit prices being higher or lower than standard averages. • Bid items that might substantially increase the project costs if the quantities increased due to field conditions. • Bid items that do not have correlating Measurement and Payment (M&P) descriptions, which could make enforcement of those contract items more difficult. Following is a summary of our findings addressing the increase in cost over the project budget, possible Value Engineering, and suggested questions for the contractors during the presentation. 3563 N.W.53rd Street Fort Lauderdale,FL33309-6311 (954)739-6400 Fax(954)739-6409 Attachment C—Craven Thompson &Associates.(CTA) Bid Evaluation Report i Mr. Roberto Rodriguez CT&A Project No. 12-0092 January 28,2013 Page 2 INCREASED COST OVER PROJECT BUDGET A) RECENT BID COMPARISONS CTA has prepared an evaluation of bid tabulation with respect to the Opinion of Probable Costs in ; _comparison to "recently bid projects" and FDOT Statewide averages. See attached spreadsheet with additional recent bid information. It Is noted that the project costs are as high as 12.6%over the project budget (Base Bid) and A/E estimated cost. The FDOT specifications office Quarterly Price Trends (http://www,dot.state.fl.us/specificationsoffice/estimates/trends/Files/Qua rter[yPriceTrends.pdf) shows increases in construction cost trends from 2011,and from the second and third quarters of 2012 into the fourth quarter of 2012. Another cause of higher construction costs is short term saturation of a local market with multiple similar scope projects which results in a limited number of contractors having to pay overtime and premium rates due to temporary construction peaks. Their resources are limited and/or tied up on other projects. The project has an aggressive contract period of 456 days. This Is desirable to minimize the inconvenience to the homeowners, but comes at a higher cost to the project. A comparison of the amount of work required by contract per calendar day on other residential rehabilitation projects with more favorable project conditions is as follows: Project Construction Bid Total Cost of Scope Contract Period Construction per (calendar days) Contract Day ($/day) NCNIP BP 9 820 $ 14,982,390.99 $ 18,271.21 W/S, Drainage, (Pompano Beach, FL) Roadwork NCNIP BP 10 750 $ 10,558,209.50 $ 14,077.61 W/S,Drainage, (Pompano Beach, FL) Roadwork NCNIP BP 11 1,000 $ 17,611,455.50 $ 17,611.46 W/S,Drainage, (Pompano Beach,FL) Roadwork 5istrunk Blvd 690 $ 13,981,785.97 $ 20,263.46 W/5,Drainage, (Ft Lauderdale) Roadwork McIntosh Rd 540 $ $ 12,993.31 Water, (Port Everglades) 7,016,385.00 Roadwork Venetian Islands 456 $ 10,638,193.00 $23,329.37 As illustrated by the amount of work to be completed per calendar day in this project (production rate of $23,329.37 per day) compared to other projects of similar nature (average production rate of $16,643.41 per day),the Construction Contract Period is aggressive,especially in light of the dewatering, soil conditions, and shorter workdays. There is also concern that the FPL interaction on the project for pole removal(after new pole installation)could result in time extensions if there are any delays on FPL's i i I • I Mr. Roberto Rodriguez CT&A Project No. 12-0092 February 22,2013 Page 3 part. Thus there is a higher premium to commit the resources necessary to complete the project within the contract time frame. B) COMPLEX SITE CONDITIONS Additionally,the unique and complex aspects of the site result in higher unit prices for many of the bid items. Following are examples of extraordinary site conditions • The high water table on the island results in water in every trench that will be excavated throughout the project. The contract requires that all pipes be installed in dry conditions,so the contractor will now need to dewater the excavation area by bringing in pumps and system of pipes to pump the water out of the excavation and pumping the water to a discharge point. The discharge of this water is complicated due to the constant high volume of water involved, and the fact that it needs to be cleaned up to eliminate turbidity prior to discharge. Regulatory agencies limit the volume and types of discharge, so the contractor will need to obtain a dewatering permitting that addresses their discharge methodology in an acceptable manner • Soil conditions in the project limits will require more careful trenching operations to avoid trench collapse • Limited workday hours,as illustrated above,will require increased manpower to accomplish the work required within the 9:00—4:30 workday allowed by contract. Contractors normally work from around 7:00 to 4:30.-The contractor will have a two hour shorter work period each day. This is compounded by the fact that the contractor will be trucking in the materials from offsite, due to restriction of onsite stored materials. • Since staging and storing of materials will be offsite, and there is limited access to the area with only one corridor into the site,the contractor's production will be affected. If the access to the site is affected in any way,much of the operation may be slowed or stopped due to the fact that the contractor may not be able to get materials to the site,or take discharge water or unsuitable soil off of the site. • Although there is always the need to coordinate with homeowners on residential infrastructure project,the need to interact with involved homeowners via the PIO on this project is even more crucial,due to the limited access to the homes,and dense working conditions. Many of these issues were raised and clarified in addendums after the original cost estimate was prepared,and may have resulted in even more conservative bid prices. C) BID VARIATION WITH RESPECT TO MEANS AND METHODS,AND AVAILABLE SERVICE IN-HOUSE i Comparatively, there were variations within the bids and some contractors had lower prices for certain types of work such as drainage or water installation, but that is partially due to the individual contractor's in-house specialty work. There are some issues of concern that should be addressed prior to award to be sure that all parties are in agreement with regard to scope and prices bid. Some examples are as follows: 1 i Mr.Roberto Rodriguez ' CT&A Project No. 12-0092 February 22,2013 Page 4 • Some unit prices such as MOT(Lanzo bid of$6,000.00), Erosion/Sediment Control (Lanzo bid of $3,500.00), Remove and Reconstruct Specialty Driveway (Lanzo is significantly low), Construct new%" driveway (RicMan bid of$20), etc. The contractors should confirm in writing that the scope can be accomplished for the bid price,and that they will honor that price. • The status of any FPL, ATT, etc,work by others that could delay the contract should be clarified prior to signing the contract. The City should verify with the contractor that delays associated with work by others will not result in Compensable Delays. • Method of measurement of unsuitable material should be clarified during the preconstruction period to be sure all parties are assuming the same type of measurement(plan measurement, bank cubic yards, truckload, etc.). Plan Measurement is the preferred method since it minimized field measurements via truck counts, or surveying trenches. This also minimizes interpretation. • Each contractor has their specialty type of work that they can accomplish for lower prices. For instance, Lanzo does sliplining in-house and can do the work for significantly lower cost than contractors who subcontract. • Items with particularly high comparative unit prices should be further analyzed because they could have a significant impact on the final construction cost. • If the Unsuitable Fill quantities increase due to field conditions, Lanzo's unit prices are noticeably higher. • If the number of irrigation repairs are significantly higher than 20 lots (which it would seem is likely, since most swales seem to be irrigated), then the CFE's overall contract price could increase by a substantial amount(if the number of lots increased by 50,the contract amount would increase by over$140,000.00). The intent of the scope should be better defined. Was it the City's intent to have any existing irrigation in the ROW removed and capped at the property line? If so, where is that cost covered? It is not specified on the Clear and Grade ROW M&P description. Is it the intent to apply this pay item only when an irrigation main vital to the operation of the private system needs to be relocated onto private property? If so, It should be discussed in detail with the contractor prior to start of construction to ensure proper documentation of quantities as work proceeds. COST REDUCTION EVALUATION We suggest possible options to reduce bid costs to more closely align with the project budget. After review with the City, many of the items have been considered and addressed by the City and the EOR. They are as follows: o Bid Items 57— 62: 24" A2000 Pipe culvert is $55.00 LF and 36" A2000 Pipe culvert is $70.00 LF. Ask contractor for alternate RCP drainage culvert prices. Lanzo commonly installs pipe by diving rather than complete dewatering. Since this is drainage pipe and drainfield, discuss the assumptions made by Lanzo and determine if a cost savings could be achieved if diving were allowed. The A2000 drainage pipe might be considered for accepting a substitute material such as RCP or HDPE, if the contractors were asked to I i I ; I Mr. Roberto Rodriguez CT&A Project No.12-0092 February 22,2013 Page 5 submit unit prices for consideration. However,the City has informed us that the Public Works Dept. requires the A2000,and will not allow an alternate. • Bid Item 80, Water Service replacement, totals in the range of$800,000.00. The unit prices are reasonable based on the scope of work but there are a high number of units. Have the condition of the meter boxes and meters been verified to ensure that the replacement is required? Could the service just be replaced up to the existing meter box? The City had discussed this with Public Works and fond that Public Works has a new standard that requires 2" water meter boxes. Thus all meter boxes would be required to be replaced regardless of condition or age. (The City also stated that the meter box was not part of the original bid/estimate from 2011,which increased the cost of the project by as much as several hundred thousand dollars) • Bid Item 100 for Type S-111 Asphalt requires two 1" lifts. Could two%" lifts be considered instead? This is common for residential neighborhoods that do not have high truck traffic. If so the overall cost might reduce by around $148,000.00. However, the City has informed us that the Public Works Dept. requires two 1" lifts, and will not allow an alternate. o Bid Item 112 is for Valley Gutter and totals about$500,000.00. Could this be eliminated and replaced with a small roadside swale? Valley inlets could be shifted behind the edge of pavement by 2'. This had been considered however,the City is concerned that homeowners would tend to encroach on the swale area with new planting that would inhibit flow in the Swale,resulting in poor drainage conditions. o Bid item 130 for conduits includes hand excavating. Prices vary from $100,000.00 to $400,000.00,with Lanzo at$277,000.00. Normal unit prices are closer to$4.00/LF than the $10.50 quoted by Lanzo. A savings might be realized using limited areas of Ground Penetrating Radar and Vacuum Test Holes to more clearly define possible conflict in conduit paths. Given results from this type of testing, the unit prices for conduit installation not needing hand excavation could be reduced by half for a savings of around$130,000 or more, which might offset initial costs of additional exploration. The City clarified that they have specified that the conduits are to be installed in the same trench as the water main,thus minimizing the need for hand excavation. SUGGESTED QUESTIONS FOR CONTRACTORS AT THE PRESENTATION (ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL REVIEW OF BIDDERS). Generally, we have no issue with the low bidder Lanzo's overall bid. We understand that no communication can take place with a bidder as mandated by the Cone of Silence, until Commission awards a contract. However, we would suggest that the Administrative Panel confirm the following information prior to award to ensure that all parties are comfortable with the bid results. General questions: I I I I i I 1 Mr. Roberto Rodriguez I CT&A Project No.12-0092 February 22,2013 Page 6 • Staging Conditions should be addressed by each contractor. Contactors may have assumed use of empty lots in the neighborhood,which is not likely to be acceptable. • MOT is of vital concern since the contractor will need to ensure that homeowners and emergency services have access at all times. Contractors should outline how they plan to keep roads accessible during construction. • Phasing/Schedule is critical to the project,because the contract period is very tight. The contractor should have thought out how work will proceed from island to island, while taking into account the dewatering process, offsite staging, limited workday, etc. If the contractor has not considered this thoroughly,prices will be affected. • The bidders do not detail their approach or construction methods, but some bid items may be subject to further discussion regarding how to accomplish the stated objective. In particular, density requirements in high water table conditions for road base and trench backfill are problematic. The contractor would need to dewater the affected area, keep it dewatered while importing dry material, keeping it dewatered during the compaction process, and then remove dewatering equipment. The difference in interpretation/approach to this seems to be reflected in the difference of unit prices ($20,000.00 to $61,800.00) for pay item 15 — Sheeting and Dewatering. Contractors should discuss their assumptions. • Handling of dewatering discharge needs clarification. The addendum states that sanitary sewer mains might be available for dewatering under exceptional circumstances; however each bidder may implement different dewatering processes to comply with approved permit conditions. Contractors should discuss their assumptions. Specific Questions for the low Bidder(Lanzo)due to pricing variations: • Bid Item 6: Maintenance of Traffic—Lanzo should confirm that$6,000.00 is adequate to cover the MOT for the duration of the project. The low unit price appears to be offset by higher General Conditions, but they need to confirm the$6,000.00 price in their bid form. • Bid Items 13 and 14: Unsuitable Material—Lanzo should confirm in writing that their method of measurement matches that assumed by the FOR when the bid quantities were calculated. The Lanzo unit prices are double the other bidders,and field measurement of quantities could result in a higher contract total cost. • Bid Item 18: Abandon Grout pipe—Lanzo should confirm that they will hold the unit price even if quantities are higher than the 200 LF in the bid. However the General Conditions include the following: 38.7. Where the quantity of any item of the Work that is covered by a unit price is increased or decreased by more than twenty percent(20%)from the quantity of such work indicated in the Contract Documents, an appropriate Change Order shall be issued to adjust the unit price, if warranted. I i I I i I i Mr. Roberto Rodriguez CT&A Project No. 12-0092 February 22,2013 Page 7 • Bid Item 67: Sewer Lateral Conflict/Repairs—There is no Measurement and Payment (M&P) item in the specifications for this pay item, but the Lanzo and CFE prices are in line. Scope should be clarified. • Bid Item 68: Sewer Main Repairs - Lanzo's unit price is almost double that of the other bids. Lanzo's unit price could result in large increase in cost if the quantity significantly increases in the field. The need for repairs should be closely monitored during construction to ensure that due care is taken to avoid any breaks that would require repair, and also to limit the extent of the repair work undertaken. • Bid Item 75-77. DIP w/Fittings — Lanzo's unit prices are lower than other bidders and FDOT State Averages. Lanzo should confirm in writing that the unit prices cover the scope of the work. • Bid Item 91: Erosion and Sediment Control- Prices vary greatly on this pay item between the three contractors and there is no M&P to define the scope. Lanzo may have been incorporated into other pay items under General Conditions but should confirm in writing that the scope is covered. • Bid items 96,97,98, 101, 104, 105, and 106: Lanzo should confirm during negotiation and prior to contract award that the work will be done at the unit prices in the bid for. Unit prices bid are significantly lower than FDOT State Averages and below other bidders. • Bid Item 65 and Alternate Storm Sewer A2: Restore and Slipline Existing 15" Pipe- Base Bid unit price is $72.00 and the credit unit price is $56.00. Lanzo should clarify the reason for the difference in price for the same work. Items to be Confirmed During Negotiation and Prior to Contract Award We have included sample Measurement and Payment items for some of the following items which were missing from the original bid documents, but recommend review by the FOR to ensure that they are inclusive of all scope envisioned in the design and cost estimating process. 18 Abandon in Place existing drainage pipe/grout 63-66 Restore and slipline/pipe burst pipe 67 Sanitary lateral conflict or repair 68 Sanitary sewer main repairs 90 Furnish and Install excavatable flowable fill 91 Erosion and sedimentation Control 107 Remove/Dispose and/or add material to construct 3/4" asphalt drive with subgrade and base 110 ADA ramp 121 Remove and Dispose fences and gates 122 Remove and Dispose rock greater than 100 pounds or 12" diameter 127 Tree trimming/pruning 129 Soil to back fill tree removal voids i I i i Mr. Roberto Rodriguez CT&A Project No. 12-0092 February 22,2013 Page 8 130-135 Electrical A3 Trenchless sewer rehab These bid items should be discussed with the selected contractor in detail prior to award of contract to ensure that all parties agree on method of payment and scope for each pay item. __. BID ANALYSIS CONCLUSION As part of this evaluation we have compared the prices bid to multiple projects of similar nature. The referenced projects are all residential infrastructure improvement projects with. new water, sewer, drainage, roadways, swales, landscape, and/or sidewalks being constructed within densely developed communities, or are infrastructure improvements in areas immediately adjacent to the IntraCoastal Waterway with poor soil conditions. These are both key factors that affect the price of the projects, as opposed to a simple roadway project further west in different soil conditions. Work within residential neighborhoods requires phasing and scheduling to accommodate residential access and convenience. It also requires the contractor to keep the site safe, fill in excavations quickly, restore private property impacts immediately, and to keep affected homeowners and the City aware of any impacts to the community. Work in areas adjacent to Biscayne Bay and the Intracoastal Waterway, and the soil conditions commonly found in these areas, require additional equipment, time, permitting, and planning in order to install the underground pipes. Per the contract,the pipes and culverts need to be installed in dry conditions. The contractor will be required to make special provisions to have dewatering permits, which will dictate the methods used to dewater. Areas close to large water bodies such as Biscayne Bay will have high water volumes to contend with during this discharge operation . The contractor must include additional time in the schedule to dewater the site, and make arrangements to dispose of the discharge. We have attached spreadsheet backup for our analysis of the bids. The first sheet is the summary of issues of concern or comments about the bids/specs. The second sheet outlines issues that we identified,and later verified were addressed by addendums. We have also attached a spreadsheet with prices bid on similar work. In summary, we find Lanzo's overall bid to be acceptable. However, some items as listed above should be further verified and confirmed to ensure that the contractor has included the full scope of work anticipated by the Engineer of Record,and to ensure that the construction methods will conform to City requirements. This may also require additional input from the FOR to confirm that this coincides with how the quantities for bid were calculated. There is concern that the FPL interaction on.the project for pole removal (after new pole installation) could result in time extensions if there are any delays on FPL's part. Thus there is a higher premium to commit the resources necessary to complete the project within the contract time frame. Although the price is 12%higher than original estimates, we feel that the bid is acceptable based on the extraordinary site conditions including: ® Dewatering that will require special permitting, additional equipment, planning for discharge disposal, and extra time in the schedule to accommodate the dewatering operation. ' I � I i Mr. Roberto Rodriguez j CT&.A Project No. 12-0092 February 22,2013 Page 9 • Staging that will require the contractor to haul material and equipment to the site on a daily basis rather than utilizing a site close to hand with no haul time. • Site access that is limited to one way in and one way out. Any closures will require the contractor to either slow down/shut down operations, or to reroute through the City which is impractical. • Time constraints that will shorten the productive workday for the contractor and require additional manpower in order to meet contract requirements. The schedule will need to be closely evaluated and coordinated. Additionally the general recent FDOT Quarterly Trend report indicates increases in construction costs that have caused the bids to exceed the project budget. This is demonstrated in the following table generated by FDOTto follow quarterly trends in constructions costs. Quarter Price Trends Report M Ce4 010--Ilemt 750.0 �- I f 200.0 Te 9.10/ 1.—ITB49-11112._— i I I I ' oa gg gggg gg ggggggggga gggg gg 66gggggg gg gg I The constraints noted throughout this report, in addition to the cost increases noted in the FDOT Quarter Trends Report above are the qualifiers for increases in the bid price from the Engineer of Record's Estimated Cost and the 2011 Bids. I , I ' 1 i I � 1 I Mr. Roberto Rodriguez CT&A Project No.12-0092 February 22,2013 Page 10 Feel free to contact us with any questions. Respectfully, CRAVEN THOMPSON&ASSOCIATES,INC. PAULA H.HOLLIHAN,P.E. Senior Supervising Engineer PHHffdp Enclosures cc: Bob Cole I G'9ChL8;E�hE-�127.4f21n ! � O'7-S:LOL'LQ�Ei, JnC. Made S.Johnson,P S.M. Land Surveyors-Engineers-Land Planners Aifonao C.Tello.PE,P.G.M. Ronald.A F6.1z,P.S.M. Hernando 1 Navas P E Mark G.Rob'bina,P.S.M 3240 Corporate Way^Miramar,Florida 33025 Luis F.Leon,P.E. Nlichael J.Allay,RS M. Phone'(954)435-7010-Fac:(954)438-3,209 Alberto A.Mora,P.E. John C.Tello.P.E. February 4,2013. Vitt: 1natildereVesrlmiarrlibeackt. ow Mrs. Matilde Reyes,Senior Capital Projects Coordinator City of Nliami Beach Capital Improvement Projects Office 1700 Convention Center Drive Miami Beach.Florida 33139 Phone: 305-673-7000 Ext. 688-1 Re: Venetian Islands Dear Mrs. Reyes: Aftenthe review of the bids and the comments by Craven;Thompson&Associates,it is our opinion that Lanzo Construction is the best candidate for the right-of-way infrastructure improvement of the Venetian Islands. Our opinion is based on how their overall bid amounts were distributed through the various construction tasks and the fact that their bid was the lowest. It is also our opinion that they appear to have a better understanding of site conditions as reflected by the individual bid amounts. In regards to the overall bid amount increase as compared to Schwebke-Shiskin& Associates, Inc.,Opinion of Probable Cost, it is our opinion that it is due in part to a higher than average rise iJZ the overall cost of materials and labor,during the calendar year of 2012. The increases shown on D.O.T.'s"Cost Treads Graph"for District 6,from the first and second quarters, to the fourth quarter of 2012,were in excess of 10%for certain construction material and labor. During our value engineering and cost reduction analysis,Schwebke-Shiskin& Associates,Inc, also identified certain project conditions and requirements that in our opinion have influenced the overall increase in cost of the project. Attachment D-Schwebke Shishkin & Associates, Inc. (SS&A) Bid Qualification Report i i � • /Irs. Madide Reyes February 4,2013 Page Two 1) Dewatering for the installation of utilities-The Contractor has to assume a large risk, in our opinion,when he does not have a well defined procedure on how to handle groundwater during construction. The Contractor has to assign risk to the dewatering effort, based on the uncertainty of the ability to use a construction drainage well or the type of treatment needed to deal with contaminated groundwater and/or the permitting agency's requirements it is our experience that the Contractor is not provided with the option of installing the utilities in the wet, when all of the alternatives for dewatering Saxe exhausted,or the cost and time to implement a solution becomes excessive. 2) Uncertainty of the location and depth of the existing utilities,considering the unpredictable schedule for the relocation of utilities-From our experience with the installation of the water and drainage facilities of Sunset Island I and II,we found that there were numerous utilities that had been buried at shallow depth and at locations not properly shown on As-Built Drawings. The Contractor has experienced substantial delays in the installation of the water and drainage facilities due to these issues. The delays were,to a large degree,due to a combination of the contractor not aggressively coordinating with the utility companies at the start of the project,the utility company's relocation scheduling issues,their lack of roan power and/or utility company's relocation priorities. '17te Contractor's concerns over the uncertainty of the existing utilities during the Venetian Islands bidding process were reflected in the number of RFI's related to this matter. Ili order to address the contractors' concerns the City performed additional field investigations to identify the vertical and horizontal location of most of the existing utilities. The Contractors were also informed that the City would take an active roll in working with the various utility companies in the relocation of the utilities prior to the installation of the proposed improvements. 3) Lack of staging areas-The staging areas for projects of this type can affect the overall price. The Contractors have to make assumptions as to what areas they presently have available and if these areas are going to be available over the course of the project. Upon several meetings with the City of Miami Beach to determine possible staging area locations,it was determined that an adequate staging area might not be available for this project. More particularly,please find enclosed our responses to comments regarding Craven, Thompson's Bid Evaluation, cSe�ure�irxe-e�lzC<_�z1n � c.�ssoeLate<_,�rze. � � I i Mrs. Matiide Reyes February 4, 2013 Page Three It is difficult to assign specific percentages to each of the factors stated above. Each contractors assigns risk to each of the factors stated above,proportional to their areas of construction strength and expertise, However, in our opinion,this combination of factors may account for the 12.6%increase from the Opinion of Probable Cost Estimate prepared by this firm in the first quarter of 2012. It is also worthwhile to note that Atkins North Arnerica, Inc.did not anticipate such large pricing increases in the third quarter of 2012 when they did a peer review of our opinion of Probable Cost. Respectfully submitted, SCHWEBKE-SHISKLN, & ASSOCIATES,INC. Alfonso C.Tello,P.E.,P.L.S. President ACT/]d Enclosures cc: Roberto Rodriguez,City of Miami Beach CIP T.A NVDAILETTERS/CITFOFMIA,1.11 BEAWAVA TILDE RE}ES 02-04-2013 CJCYLGTELT�E-�i2L.7.lG Lit G�' [�TSIOCLQL'E3,!/i2C. i i 1 Per Craven Thompson &Associates, Inc.: At the City's request, Craven Thompson (CTA) has reviewed the bid documents for the bid results for the Right of Way Infrastructure Improvement Program Venetian Islands- Neighborhood 13, Bid Package C; San Marino, Di Lido, and Rivo Alto. As part of our scope, CTA evaluated the bids for the following: • . Unit prices and overall bid using recent projects of similar scope and the FDOT Statewide Averages. • Plans and specifications for any issues/scope that were not clearly defined in the bid package. • Bid items that might result in an unbalanced bid or could result in future change orders that would increase the cost of the contract during construction. • Major issues that would affect the constructability, and for items that might result in change orders or might result in unit prices being higher or lower than standard averages. Bid items that might substantially increase the project costs if the quantities increased due to field conditions. • Bid items that do not have correlating Measurement and Payment (M&P) _ descriptions, which could make enforcement of those contract items more difficult. Specifically we have also considered the following aspects of the bid. • Feasibility of construction methods • The bidders do not detail their approach or construction methods, but some bid items may be subject to further discussion regarding how to accomplish the stated objective. In particular, density requirements in high water table conditions for road base and trench backfill are problematic. The contractor would need to dewater the affected area, keep it dewatered while importing dry material, keeping it dewatered during the compaction process, and then remove dewatering equipment. The difference in interpretation/approach to this seems to be reflected in the difference of unit prices ($20,000.00 to $61,800.00) for pay item 15- Sheeting and Dewatering. • Handling of dewatering discharge needs clarification. The addendum states that sanitary sewer mains might be available for dewatering under I I ' I� I i ' i i exceptional circumstances. The unknown aspect of this could result in higher bids. • Availability of materials and labor and alternative designs or materials • The materials specified are generally available. • The A2000 drainage pipe might be considered for accepting a substitute material such as RCP or HDPE, if the contractors were asked to submit unit prices for consideration. SS&A Response: Alternative materials were considered during the design phase. However, HDPE was not accepted by the City and in our opinion RCP could pose a significant cost increase to the project, • Time requirements for installation • Site Conditions will slow construction/installation rates down and will result in higher unit prices. Specifically, the high water table, poor soil conditions for trenching, 9:00-4:30 workday requirement, and dense development will lessen the productivity of the contractor. • There is also concern that the FPL interaction on the project for pole removal (after new pole installation) could result in time extensions if there are any delays on FPL's part. • A comparison of work accomplished on other residential rehabilitation projects with slightly more favorable working conditions is as follows: As illustrated by the amount of work to be completed per calendar day compared to other projects of similar nature,the Construction Contract Period is aggressive, especially in light of the dewatering, soil conditions, and shorter workdays. SSBA Response: We agree that the project schedule is aggressive. It is our opinion that increasing the project duration may help to reduce the project cost. • Possible options to consider to reduce bid costs to more closely align with the bid are as follows: o Bid Items 57 -62: 24"A2000 Pipe culvert is$55.00 LF and 36"A2000 Pipe culvert is $70.00 LF. Ask contractor for alternate RCP drainage culvert prices. Lanzo commonly installs pipe by diving rather than complete dewatering. Since this is drainage pipe and drainfield, discuss i f I ! I i I I I I I , I I I the assumptions made by Lanzo and determine if a cost savings could be achieved if diving were allowed. SS&A Response: Currently, the City allows installing utility pipes under water when conditions of contaminated soils are encountered. We currently have no records of contaminated soils within the project area. o Bid Item 80, Water Service replacement, totals in the range of $800,000.00. The unit prices are reasonable based on the scope of work but there are a high number of units. Has the condition of the meter boxes and meters been verified to ensure that the replacement is required? Could the service just be replaced up to the existing meter box? SS&A Response: Based on our investigations of the existing meter boxes it Is our opinion that many of them can be salvaged. However, replacement of the boxes was a requirement of the Public Works Dept.so that all boxes will be in compliance with current City standards. o Bid Item 100 for Type S-III Asphalt requires two 1" lifts. Could two'/a' lifts be considered instead?This is common for residential neighborhoods that do not have high truck traffic. If so the overall cost might reduce by around $148,000.00. SS&A Response: Two 3/4" lifts of asphalt were considered, however, the Public Works Dept. would not accept anything less than 2"of asphalt. o Bid Item 112 is for Valley Gutter and totals about$500,000.00. Could this be eliminated and replaced with a small roadside swale?Valley inlets could be shifted behind the e.o.p, by 2'. SS&A Response: We do not suggest exclusion of the property valley gutters in consideration of existing encroachments,trees, built-up swales and existing utilities. It Is our opinion that the valley gutters provide a cost effective means of conveying stormwater runoff to the proposed inlets. o Bid item 130 for conduits includes hand excavating. Prices vary from $100,000.00 to$400,000.00, with Lanzo at$277,000.00. Normal unit prices are closer to $4.00/LF than the $10.50 quoted by Lanzo. A savings might be realized using limited areas of Ground Penetrating Radar and Vacuum Test Holes to more clearly define possible conflict in conduit paths. Given results from this type of testing, the unit prices for conduit installation not needing hand excavation could be reduced by half for a savings of around $130,000 or more,which might offset initial costs of additional exploration. ' I i t i I SS&A Response: Addendum 10 provides for acceptance of machine excavation for a large portion of the project and for areas defined appropriate, however, it is possible that the contractor(s)may have perceived that hand excavation would be required throughout the project due to the amount of underground utilities investigated. • CTA has prepared an evaluation of bid tabulation with respect to the Opinion of Probable Costs in comparison to"recently bid projects" and FDOT Statewide averages. See attached spreadsheet with additional recent bid information. It is noted that the project costs are as high as 12.6% over the project budget(Base Bid) and A/E estimated cost. We have not found that material or installation costs have risen noticeably over the past 12 months. Nor have we found that materials are unavailable, which might also affect cost. Another cause of higher construction costs is short term flooding of a local market with multiple similar scope projects which results in a limited number of contractors having to pay overtime and premium rates due to temporary construction peaks. However, this doesn't seem to be the case either. Thus, based on a review of some of the unit prices bid, it appears that site conditions such as high water table, poor soil conditions requiring more careful trenching operations to avoid trench collapse, limited workday hours, restrictions on onsite stored materials, and the need to interact with involved homeowners via the PIO may have driven prices up. Many of these issues were raised and clarified in addendums after the original cost estimate was prepared, and may have resulted in more conservative bid prices. We have included sample Measurement and Payment items for some of the following items which were missing from the original bid documents, but recommend review by the FOR to ensure that they are inclusive of all scope envisioned in the design and cost estimating process. Comparatively, there were variations within the bids and some contractors had lower prices for certain types of work such as drainage or water installation, but that is partially due to the individual contractor's in-house specialty work. There are some issues of concern that should be addressed prior to award to be sure that all parties are in agreement with regard to scope and prices bid. Some examples are as follows: • Some unit prices such as MOT(Lanzo bid of$6,000.00), Erosion/Sediment Control (Lanzo bid of$3,500.00), Remove and Reconstruct Specialty Driveway(Lanzo is significantly low), Construct new%" driveway (RicMan bid of$20), etc.The contractors should confirm in writing that the scope can be accomplished for the bid price, and that they will honor that price. • The status of any FPL, An, etc. work by others that could delay the contract should be clarified prior to signing the contract. The City should verify with the i i I I contractor that delays associated with work by others will not result in Compensable Delays. • Method of measurement of unsuitable material should be clarified to be sure all parties are assuming the same type of measurement(plan measurement, bank cubic yards, truckload, etc). Plan Measurement is the preferred method since it minimized field measurements via truck counts, or surveying trenches. This also minimizes interpretation. • Some bid items for specific work are high but balance out with other associated work that is low. The concern is that the higher priced bid item occurs early in contract and the contractor will be paid more upfront, so the payment timing is skewed. An example of this is Pay Item 130 for conduits. Conduits are installed before conductors. The CFE price for the conduits (bid item 130) is substantially higher than the Lanzo price for conduits. CFE would be paid a higher percentage of the electrical work initially. However the CFE conductor price (bid item 132) is substantially lower than Lanzo's, so the overall electrical cost balances out. The difference is timing of payment, • Each contractor has their specialty type of work that they can accomplish for lower prices. For instance, Lanzo does sliplining in-house and can do the work for significantly lower cost than contractors who subcontract. • Items with particularly high comparative unit prices should be further analyzed because they could have a significant impact on the final construction cost. o If the Unsuitable Fill quantities increase due to field conditions, Lanzo's unit prices are noticeably higher. o If the number of irrigation repairs are significantly higher than 20 lots (which it would seem is likely, since most swales seem to be irrigated), then the CFE's overall contract price could increase by a substantial amount (if the number of lots increased by 50, the contract amount would increase by over $140,000.00). The intent of the scope should be better defined.Was it the City's intent to have any existing irrigation in the ROW removed and capped at the property line? If so, where is that cost covered? It is not specified on the Clear and Grade ROW M&P description. Is it the intent to apply this pay item only when an irrigation main vital to the operation of the private system needs to be relocated onto private property? If so, it should be discussed in detail with the contractor prior to start of construction to ensure proper documentation of quantities as work proceeds. • Generally,we have no issue with the low bidder Lanzo's overall bid. We understand that no communication can take place with a bidder until i I i i commission reviews the Administrative Panel's recommendation and awards a contract and the project is currently under the cone of silence. However, we would suggest that the Administrative panel assigned to the selection committee confirm the following information prior to award to Lanzo to ensure that all parties are comfortable with the bid. • Bid Item 6: Maintenance of Traffic- Lanzo should confirm that$6,000.00 is adequate to cover the MOT for the duration of the project. The low unit price appears to be offset by higher General Conditions, but they need to confirm the one$6,000.00 price. • Bid Items 13 and 14: Unsuitable Material- Lanzo should confirm in writing that their method of measurement matches that assumed by the FOR when the bid quantities were calculated. The Lanzo unit prices are double the other bidders, and field measurement of quantities could result in a higher contract total cost. • Bid Item 18; Abandon Grout pipe- Lanzo should confirm that they will hold the unit price even if quantities are higher than the 200 LF in the bid. However the General Conditions include the following: 38.7. Where the quantity of any item of the Work that is covered by a unit price is increased or decreased by more than twenty percent(20%) from the quantity of such work indicated in the Contract Documents, an appropriate Change Order shall be issued to adjust the unit price, if warranted. • Bid Item 67: Sewer Lateral Conflict/Repairs-There is no Measurement and Payment(M&P) item in the specifications for this pay item, but the Lanzo and CFE prices are in line. Scope should be clarified. • Bid Item 68: Sewer Main Repairs. Lanzo's unit price is almost double that of the other bids. Lanzo's unit price could result in large increase in cost if the quantity significantly increases in the field. The need for repairs should be closely monitored during construction to ensure that due care is taken to avoid any breaks that would require repair, and then the limits of the repair work undertaken. • Bid Item 75-77: DIP w/ Fittings -Lanzo's unit prices are lower than other bidders and FDOT State Averages. Lanzo should confirm in writing that the unit prices cover the scope of the work. • Bid Item 91: Erosion and Sediment Control- Prices vary greatly on this pay item between the three contractors and there is no M&P to define the scope. Lanzo I � I I i may have been incorporated into other pay items under General Conditions but should confirm in writing that the scope is covered. • Bid items 96,97,98, 101, 104, 105, and 106: Lanzo should confirm in writing that the work will be done at the unit prices in the bid for. Unit prices bid are significantly lower than FDOT State Averages and below other bidders. • Bid Item 65 and Alternate Storm Sewer A2: Restore and Slipline Existing 15" Pipe- Base Bid unit price is $72.00 and the credit unit price is$56.00. Lanzo should clarify the reason for the difference in price for the same work. We have attached spreadsheet backup for our analysis of the bids. The first sheet is the summary of issues of concern or comments about the bids/specs. The second sheet outlines issues that we identified, and later verified were addressed by addendums. We have also attached a spreadsheet with prices bid on similar work. . In summary, we find Lanzo's overall bid to be acceptable. However, some items as listed above should be further verified and confirmed to ensure that the contractor has included the full scope of work anticipated by the Engineer of Record, and to ensure that the construction methods will conform with City requirements. This may also require additional input from the FOR to confirm that this coincides with how the quantities for bid were calculated. So although the price is 12% higher than original estimates, we feel that the bid is acceptable based on the Site Conditions including dewatering, poor soils, time limitations, etc as outlined above. j j i I � I i ! Z i zTOZ b zTOZ£ O ZTOZ z ZTOZ T TTOZ b T U TZOZ£ O r W + ' TTOZ z O. \° I I TTOZ T j O OTOZ b W r m i i OTDZE OiOZ Z ` ( ( { oTOZ T F- ( I i 600Z b v 6002 E ! 600z Z C` 600Z T m i M soot b { 800Z E 7 O I m I ! so0z z CL I eooz T c I i i cooz b coot E ' c i cooz z a CJ a I LDDZ T fA i o 1900z b a to i I Not E 0 1 ' 9002 z G I Q- u I ! '900z T r+ ! `a a I sooz b i I SOW E E `0 I I cooz z I t i j soot T ( M vooz b 1 0 b00z E I bo0z Z a { booz T O i ( EOOZ b LL � EOOZ F ! IEOOZ Z ui { EOOZ T C i i ZDOZ b zo0z E zooz z V I z00Z T i ! To0z b Q i { TOOZ E f TDOZ Z I I TOOZ T ( i OOOZ b i 0002 E j o0oZ Z j OOOZ T ' t +i� i 1 • g i ¢jQ 00600. CONTRACT: CONTRACT THIS IS A CONTRACT, by and between the City of Miami Beach, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, hereinafter referred to as City, and LANZO CONSTRUCTION CO., FLORIDA, hereinafter referred to as Contractor. W I T N E S S E T H, that Contractor and City, for the considerations hereinafter named, agree as follows: ARTICLE 1 SCOPE OF WORK Contractor hereby agrees to furnish all of the labor, materials, equipment services and incidentals necessary to perform all of the work described in the Contract Documents and related thereto for the Project. ARTICLE 2 CONTRACT TIME 2.1 Contractor shall be instructed to commence the Work by written instructions in the form of a Standing Order issued by the City's Procurement Director and a Notice to Proceed issued by the Contract Administrator. Two (2) Notices to Proceed will be issued for this Contract. Contractor shall commence scheduling activities, permit applications and other preconstruction work within five (5) calendar days after the Project Initiation Date, which shall be the same as the date of the first Notice to Proceed. The first Notice to Proceed and Purchase Order will not be issued until Contractor's submission to City of all required documents (including but limited to: Payment and Performance Bonds, and Insurance Certificate) and after execution of the Contract by both parties. 2.1.1. The receipt of all necessary permits by Contractor and acceptance of the full progress schedule in accordance with technical specifications section, submittal schedule and schedule of values is a condition precedent to the issuance of a second Notice to Proceed to mobilize on the Project site and commence with physical construction of the work. The Contractor shall submit all necessary documents required by this provision within twenty-one (21) calendar days of the issuance of the first Notice to Proceed. 2.2 Time is of the essence throughout this Contract. This project shall be substantially completed within four hundred and twenty-six (426) calendar days from the issuance of the second Notice to Proceed, and completed and ready for final payment in accordance with Article 5 within thirty (30) calendar days from the date certified by Consultant as the date of Substantial Completion. 2.3 Upon failure of Contractor to substantially complete the Contract within the specified period of time, plus approved time extensions, Contractor shall pay to 76 I City the sum of one thousand four hundred dollars ($1,400.00) for each calendar day after the time specified in Section 2.2 above, plus any approved time extensions, for Substantial Completion. After Substantial Completion should Contractor fail to complete the remaining work within the time specified in Section 2.2 above, plus approved time extensions thereof, for completion and readiness for final payment, Contractor shall pay to City the sum of one thousand four hundred dollars ($1,400.00) for each calendar day after the time specified in Section 2.2 above, plus any approved extensions, for completion and readiness for final payment. These amounts are not penalties but are liquidated damages to City for its inability to obtain full beneficial occupancy and/or use of the Project. Liquidated damages are hereby fixed and agreed upon between the parties, recognizing the impossibility of precisely ascertaining the amount of damages that will be sustained by City as a consequence of such delay, and both parties desiring to obviate any question of dispute concerning the amount of said damages and the cost and effect of the failure of Contractor to complete the Contract on time. The above-stated liquidated damages shall apply separately to each portion of the Project for which a time for completion is given. 2.4 City is authorized to deduct liquidated damages from monies due to Contractor for the Work under this Contract or as much thereof as City may, in its sole discretion, deem just and reasonable. 2.5 Contractor shall be responsible for reimbursing City, in addition to liquidated damages, for all costs incurred by Consultant in administering the construction of the Project beyond the completion date specified above, plus approved time extensions. Consultant construction administration costs shall be pursuant to the contract between City and Consultant, a copy of which is available upon request of the Contract Administrator. All such costs shall be deducted from the monies due Contractor for performance of Work under this Contract by means of unilateral credit change orders issued by City as costs are incurred by Consultant and agreed to by City. ARTICLE 3 THE CONTRACT SUM [ X ] This is a Unit Price Contract:* 3.1 City shall pay to Contractor the amounts determined for the total number of each of the units of work completed at the unit price stated in the schedule of prices bid. The number of units contained in this schedule is an estimate only, and final payment shall be made for the actual number of units incorporated in or made necessary by the Work covered by the Contract Documents. 3.2 Payment shall be made at the unit prices applicable to each integral part of the Work. These prices shall be full compensation for all costs, including overhead and profit, associated with completion of all the Work in full conformity with the requirements as stated or shown, or both, in the Contract Documents. The cost of any item of work not covered by a definite Contract unit price shall be included in the Contract unit price or lump sum price to which the item is most applicable. 77 [] This is a Lump Sum Contract:* 3.1 City shall pay to Contractor for the performance of the Work described in the Contract Documents, the total price stated as awarded. 3.2 Payment shall be at the lump sum price stated in the Contract. This price shall be full compensation for all costs, including overhead and profit, associated with completion of all the work in full conformity with the requirements as stated or shown, or both, in the Contract Documents. The cost of any item of work not covered by a definite Contract lump sum should be included in the lump sum price to which the item is most applicable. *Note: Some projects include both unit prices and lump sums in which case both sections shall apply to the Work identified for each type of Contract. ARTICLE 4 PROGRESS PAYMENTS 4.1 Contractor may make Application for Payment for work completed during the Project at intervals of not more than once a month. Contractor's application shall show a complete breakdown of the Project components, the quantities completed and the amount due, together with such supporting evidence as may be required by Consultant. Contractor shall include, but same shall be limited to, at Consultant's discretion, with each Application for Payment, an updated progress schedule acceptable to Consultant as required by the Contract Documents and a release of liens and consent of surety relative to the work which is the subject of the Application. Each Application for Payment shall be submitted in triplicate to Consultant fora approval. City shall make payment to Contractor within thirty (30) PP Y P Y days after approval by Consultant of Contractor's Application for Payment and submission of an acceptable updated progress schedule. 4.2 Ten percent (10%) of all monies earned by Contractor shall be retained by City until Final Completion and acceptance by City in accordance with Article 5 hereof, except that after ninety percent (90%) of the Work has been completed, the Contract Administrator may reduce the retainage to five percent (5%) of all monies previously earned and all monies earned thereafter. Any reduction in retainage shall be in the sole discretion of the Contract Administrator, shall be recommended by Consultant and Contractor shall have no entitlement to a reduction. Any interest earned on retainage shall accrue to the benefit of City. All requests for retainage reduction shall be in writing in a separate stand alone document. 4.3 City may withhold, in whole or in part, payment to such extent as may be necessary to protect itself from loss on account of: 4.3.1 Defective work not remedied. 4.3.2 Claims filed or reasonable evidence indicating probable filing of claims by other parties against Contractor or City because of Contractor's performance. 4.3.3 Failure of Contractor to make payments properly to Subcontractors or for material or labor. 78 4.3.4 Damage to another contractor not remedied. 4.3.5 Liquidated damages and costs incurred by Consultant for extended construction administration. 4.3.6 Failure of Contractor to provide any and all documents required by the Contract Documents. When the above grounds are removed or resolved satisfactory to the Contract Administrator, payment shall be made in whole or in part. ARTICLE 5 ACCEPTANCE AND FINAL PAYMENT 5.1 Upon receipt of written notice from Contractor that the Work is ready for final inspection and acceptance, Consultant shall, within ten (10) calendar days, make an inspection thereof. If Consultant and Contract Administrator find the Work acceptable, the requisite documents have been submitted and the requirements of the Contract Documents fully satisfied, and all conditions of the permits and regulatory agencies have been met, a Final Certificate of Payment (Form 00926) shall be issued by Consultant, over its signature, stating that the requirements of the Contract Documents have been performed and the Work is ready for acceptance under the terms and conditions thereof. 5.2 Before issuance of the Final Certificate for Payment, Contractor shall deliver to Consultant a complete release of all liens arising out of this Contract, receipts in full in lieu thereof; an affidavit certifying that all suppliers and subcontractors have been paid in full and that all other indebtedness connected with the Work has been paid, and a consent of the surety to final payment; the final corrected as- built drawings; and the final bill of materials, if required, and invoice. 5.3 If, after the Work has been substantially completed, full completion thereof is materially delayed through no fault of Contractor , and Consultant so certifies, City shall, upon certificate of Consultant, and without terminating the Contract, make payment of the balance due for that portion of the Work fully completed and accepted. Such payment shall be made under the terms and conditions governing final payment, except that it shall not constitute a waiver of claims. 5.4 Final payment shall be made only after the City Manager or his designee has reviewed a written evaluation of the performance of Contractor prepared by the Contract Administrator, and approved the final payment. The acceptance of final payment shall constitute a waiver of all claims by Contractor, except those previously made in strict accordance with the provisions of the General Conditions and identified by Contractor as unsettled at the time of the application for final payment. 79 ARTICLE 6 MISCELLANEOUS 6.1 This Contract is part of, and incorporated in, the Contract Documents as defined herein. Accordingly, all of the documents incorporated by the Contract Documents shall govern this Project. 6.2 Where there is a conflict between any provision set forth within the Contract Documents and a more stringent state or federal provision which is applicable to this Project, the more stringent state or federal provision shall prevail. 6.3 Public Entity Crimes In accordance with the Public Crimes Act, Section 287.133, Florida Statutes, a person or affiliate who is a contractor, consultant or other provider, who has been placed on the convicted vendor list following a conviction for a public entity crime may not submit a bid on a contract to provide any goods or services to the City, may not submit a bid on a contract with the City for the construction or repair of a public building or public work, may not submit bids on leases of real property to the City, may not be awarded or perform work as a contractor, supplier, subcontractor, or consultant under a contract with the City, and may not transact any business with the City in excess of the threshold amount provided in Section 287.017, Florida Statutes, for category two purchases for a period of 36 months from the date of being placed on the convicted vendor list. Violation of this section by Contractor shall result in cancellation of the City purchase and may result in Contractor debarment. 6.4 Independent Contractor Contractor is an independent contractor under this Contract. Services provided by Contractor pursuant to this Contract shall be subject to the supervision of Contractor. In providing such services, neither Contractor nor its agents shall act as officers, employees, or agents of the City. This Contract shall not constitute or make the parties a partnership or joint venture. 6.5 Third Party Beneficiaries Neither Contractor nor City intends to directly or substantially benefit a third party by this Contract. Therefore, the parties agree that there are no third party beneficiaries to this Contract and that no third party shall be entitled to assert a claim against either of them based upon this Contract. The parties expressly acknowledge that it is not their intent to create any rights or obligations in any third person or entity under this Contract. 80 6.6 Notices Whenever either party desires to give notice to the other, such notice must be in writing, sent by certified United States Mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, or by hand-delivery with a request for a written receipt of acknowledgment of delivery, addressed to the party for whom it is intended at the place last specified. The place for giving notice shall remain the same as set forth herein until changed in writing in the manner provided in this section. For the present, the parties designate the following: For City: Procurement Division 1700 Convention Center Drive Miami Beach, Florida 33139 Attn: Alex Denis, Procurement Director With copies to: City Attorney City of Miami Beach 1700 Convention Center Drive Miami Beach, Florida 33139 For Contractor: Lanzo Construction Co. Florida 125 S.E. 5 1h Court Deerfield Beach, Florida 33441 Attn: Michael Bone, Vice President Phone: 954-973-9700 Fax: 954-974-3894 E-mail: michaelb(a-_)lanzo.org 6.7 Assignment and Performance Neither this Contract nor any interest herein shall be assigned, transferred, or encumbered by either party. In addition, Contractor shall not subcontract any portion of the work required by this Contract except as authorized by Section 27 of the General Conditions. Contractor represents that all persons delivering the services required by this Contract have the knowledge and skills, either by training, experience, education, or a combination thereof, to adequately and competently perform the duties, obligations, and services set forth in the Scope of Work and to provide and perform such services to City's satisfaction for the agreed compensation. Contractor shall perform its duties, obligations, and services under this Contract in a skillful and respectable manner. The quality of Contractor's performance and all interim and final product(s) provided to or on behalf of City shall be comparable to the best local and national standards. 81 6.8 Materiality and Waiver of Breach City and Contractor agree that each requirement, duty, and obligation set forth in these Contract Documents is substantial and important to the formation of this Contract and, therefore, is a material term hereof. City's failure to enforce any provision of this Contract shall not be deemed a waiver of such provision or modification of this Contract. A waiver of any breach of a provision of this Contract shall not be deemed a waiver of any subsequent breach and shall not be construed to be a modification of the terms of this Contract. 6.9 Severance In the event a portion of this Contract is found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the remaining provisions shall continue to be effective unless City or Contractor elects to terminate this Contract. An election to terminate this Contract based upon this provision shall be made within seven (7) days after the finding by the court becomes final. 6.10 Applicable Law and Venue This Contract shall be enforceable in Miami-Dade County, Florida, and if legal action is necessary by either party with respect to the enforcement of any or all of the terms or conditions herein exclusive venue for the enforcement of same shall lie in Miami-Dade County, Florida. By entering into this Contract, Contractor and City hereby expressly waive any rights either party may have to a trial by jury of any civil litigation related to, or arising out of the Project. Contractor shall specifically bind all subcontractors to the provisions of this Contract. 6.11 Amendments No modification, amendment, or alteration in the terms or conditions contained herein shall be effective unless contained in a written document prepared with the same or similar formality as this Contract and executed by the Board and Contractor. 6.12 Prior Agreements This document incorporates and includes all prior negotiations, correspondence, conversations, agreements, and understandings applicable to the matters contained herein and the parties agree that there are no commitments, agreements or understandings concerning the subject matter of this Contract that are not contained in this document. Accordingly, the parties agree that no deviation from the terms hereof shall be predicated upon any prior representations or agreements, whether oral or written. It is further agreed that no modification, amendment or alteration in the terms or conditions contained herein shall be effective unless set forth in writing in accordance with Section 6.11 above. 82 IN WITNESS WHERE p � ve set their hands and seals the day and year first above written. ATTEST: E ITY OF MIAMI AC :INCORP ORATE �'''•. City lerk gRCH 26�` r Contractor MUST EXECUTE THIS CONTRACT AS INDICATED BELOW. USE CORPORATION OR NONCORPORATION FORMAT, AS APPLICABLE. [If incorporated sign below.] Contractor ATTEST: Lanzo Construction Co., Florida (Name of Corporation) By: (Secretary) (Sign ture) Michael R. Bone, Vice President (Corporate Seal) (Print Name and Title) 1� day of -. 20 /3 [If not incorporated sign below.] Contractor WITNESSES: (Name of Firm) By: (Signature) (Print Name and Title) day of , 20 CITY REQUIRES FOUR(4) FULLY-EXECUTED CONTRACTS, FOR DISTRIBUTION. APPROVED AS TO FORM & LANGUAGE &FOR EXECUTION 83 City Att neVX Date 00708. FORM CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE A certificate of insurance form will be attached here. BID NO:49-11/12 CITYOF MIAMI BEACH DATE:July 9,2012 84 ACO® CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE F4110/2013 D IDDIY THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER,AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the policy(ies) must be endorsed. If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy,certain policies may require an endorsement A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s). PRODUCER -NAME,CONTACT NDonna Griffiths NAME: Guy Hurley Blaster and Heuer, LLC PHONE (248)519-1439 FAX AIC No (248)519-1401 1080 Kirts Blvd. , Suite 500 ADDRe :dgriffiths @ghb.com INSURERS AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIC p Troy MI 48084 INSURER AAmerisure Insurance Company 19488 INSURED INSURER B.Ameri sure Mutual Ins. Co. 23396 Lanzo Construction Co. , Florida INSURER C: 1 Stainless Plaza INSURER D: 125 S.E. 5th Court INSURER E: Deerfield Beach FL 33441 1 INSURER F: COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER:12-13 Master REVISION NUMBER: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES.LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. ILTR TYPE OF INSURANCE I U POLICY NUMBER MMIDDYIYYYY POLICY/ //YYXYI' LIMITS GENERAL LIABILITY EACH OCCURRENCE $ 1,000,000 X COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY PREMISES Ea occurrence $ 100,000 A CLAIMS-MADE a OCCUR X CPP2079089 9/30/2012 9/30/2013 MED EXP(Any one person) $ 5,000 X XCU Coverage Incl PERSONAL&ADV INJURY $ 1,000,000 GENERAL AGGREGATE $ 2,000,000 GE N'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER: PRODUCTS-COMP/OP AGG $ 2,000,000 JFCT F-1 X I POLICY X PRO LOC $ AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT (Ea accident) $ 1,000,000 A X ANY AUTO BODILY INJURY(Per person) $ X ALL OWNED X SCHEDULED CA2079088 9/30/2012 9/30/2013 BODILY INJURY(Per accident) $ AUTOS AUTOS NON-OWNED PROPERTY DAMAGE X HIRED AUTOS X AUTOS Per accident $ Underinsured motorist $ X UMBRELLA LIAB OCCUR EACH OCCURRENCE $ 5,000,000 B EXCESS LIAB CLAIMS-MADE AGGREGATE $ 5,000,000 DIED I X I RETENTION$ 0 CU2079090 9/30/2012 9/30/2013 $ WORKERS COMPENSATION WC STATU- I 1OTH- AND EMPLOYERS'LIABILITY Y I N TORY LIMITS I I ER ANY PROPRIETOR/PARTNER/EXECUTIVE❑ NIA E.L.EACH ACCIDENT $ OFFICERIMEMBER EXCLUDED? (Mandatory In NH) E.L.DISEASE-EA EMPLOYE $ If Yes,describe under DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS below E.L.DISEASE-POLICY LIMIT $ A Inland Marine [PP2079089 9/30/2012 9/30/2013 Leased/RemedEquipment $250,000 DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS I LOCATIONS/VEHICLES (Attach ACORD 101,Additional Remarks Schedule,If more space Is required) Project: Lanzo Job F415, Invitation to Bid (ITB) No. 49-11/12, Venetian Islands Bid Package 13C. The City of Miami Beach is an Additional Insured for General Liability when required by written contract. CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION (786)394-4010 kpatterson @miamibeachfl.go SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN City Of Miami Beach ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS. Risk Management 1700 Convention Center Drive AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE Miami Beach, FL 33139 Paul Hurley/CSMITH ACORD 25(2010/05) ©1988-2010 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved. INS025/9ninnsi nt Tho hr(,ipn name and Innn aro ronieforori marka of aP npn LANZO-1 OP ID: LS DATE(MMIDDNYYY) CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE 04/10/2013 THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER,AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED,the policy(ies) must be endorsed. If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED,subject to the terms and conditions of the policy,certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s). PRODUCER Phone:561-392-3300 CONTACT Workers Compensation Group PHONE Greg Carignan FAX P 0 Box 410 Fax:561-361-1132 A/C No E>n:561-392-3300 A/C No): 561-361-1132 Boca Raton,FL 33429-0410 E-MAIL Workers Compensation Group ADDRESS:certs @workerscompgroup.com INSURER(S)AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIC p INSURER A:Bridgefield Employers Ins 10701 INSURED Lanzo Construction Co. FL INSURER B 125 S.E.5th Court Deerfield Beach,FL 33441' INSURER C INSURER D: INSURER E INSURER F COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER: REVISION NUMBER: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT,TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES.LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. INSR TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER MM LTR /DD/YYYY MMIDONYYY LIMITS GENERAL LIABILITY EACH OCCURRENCE $ COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY AMA PREMISES Ea occurrence) $ CLAIMS-MADE F—I OCCUR MED EXP(Any one person) $ PERSONAL 8 ADV INJURY $ GENERAL AGGREGATE $ GENT AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER: PRODUCTS-COMP/OP AGG $ POLICY 71 PRO LOC $ AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT Ea accident ANY AUTO BODILY INJURY(Per person) $ ALL OWNED SCHEDULED BODILY INJURY(Per accident) $ AUTOS AUTOS NON-OWNED PROPERTY DAMAGE $ HIRED AUTOS AUTOS Per accident $ UMBRELLA LIAB OCCUR EACH OCCURRENCE $ EXCESS LIAB HCLAIMS-MADE AGGREGATE $ DED I I RETENTION$ $ WORKERS COMPENSATION X NC STATU- OTH- AND EMPLOYERS'LIABILITY TORY LIMITS I I ER A ANY PROPRIETOR/PARTNER/EXECUTIVE YIN 830-24200 01101/2013 01/01/2014 E.L.EACH ACCIDENT $ 1,000,000 ❑ OFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED? N/A (Mandatory In NH) E.L.DISEASE-EA EMPLOYEE $ 1,000,000 If yes,describe under DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS below E.L.DISEASE-POLICY LIMIT $ 1,000,000 DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS I LOCATIONS I VEHICLES (Attach ACORD 101,Additional Remarks Schedule,If more space Is required) Lanzo Job F415. Bid (ITB) No. 49-11/12, Venetian Islands Bid Package 13C **30 Days of notice of cancellation, 10 days for Non-Payment of premium CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION MIAMIBE SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE City of Miami Beach THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN ty ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS. Attn: Risk Management 1700 Convention Center Dr. Miami Beach, FL 33139 AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE ©1988-2010 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved. ACORD 25(2010105) The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD WORKERS COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYERS LIABILITY INSURANCE POLICY WC 99 06 08 (Ed.7-11) NOTICE OF CANCELLATION AND NON-RENEWAL TO THIRD PARTIES It is hereby understood and agreed PART SIX: CONDITIONS, Section D, of the policy is amended by adding the following subsection 5: If we initiate cancellation of this policy,we will notify the person(s)or organization(s)as shown at the address in the Schedule below, as follows: a. 30 days notice will be given for notice of cancellation for non-payment of premium. b. 30 days notice will be given for notice of cancellation for any reason other than non-payment of premium. c. 3o days notice will be given for notice of non-renewal. If the insured initiates cancellation of this policy, notification will be mailed upon rebeipt of the cancellation request from the insured. Notwithstanding the provisions above, in no event will the number of days notice of cancellation or non-renewal be fewer than the number of days required by the applicable state workers compensation law. SCHEDULE Name of Person or Organization: South Central Regional Wastewater and Disposal Board,the Boards' members, officials, officers and employess Mailing Address: 1801 N Congress Ave Delray Beach, FL 33445-2523 This endorsement changes the policy to which it is attached and is effective on the date issued unless otherwise stated. Date Prepared: April 04, 2013 Carrier: Bridqefield Employers Insurance Company Effective Date of Endorsement: April 04, 2013 Policy Number: 0830-24200 Countersigned by: C Insured: Lanzo Construction Co. WC 99 06 08(Ed.7-11) AC40RL? CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE DATE(MMIDDIYY 12/29i2o11 THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER,AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED,the policy(ies)must be endorsed. If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED,subject to the terms and conditions of the policy,certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder In lieu of such endorsement(s). PRODUCER CONTACT Carle Smith NAME: Guy Hurley Blaser and Heuer, LLC PHONE (248)519-1400 NC No:(24e)519-14 01 IAIC 1080 Kirts Blvd. , Suite 500 E-MAIL ADDRE INSURERS AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIC p Troy MI 48084 INSURER AAmerlsure Mutual Ins. Co. 3396 INSURED INSURER B Lanzo Lining Services, Inc. INSURERC: Attention: Kevin Pawlowski INSURER D: 1 Stainless Plaza, 125 S.E. 5th Court INSURER E: Deerfield Beach FL 33441 1 INSURER F: COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER:11-12 Master REVISION NUMBER: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS. EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES.LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. INSR TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY EFF POLICY EXP LIMITS LTR IN SR WV POLICY NUMBER MMlDD/YYYY MMIDDIYYYY GENERAL LIABILITY EACH OCCURRENCE S 1,000,000 X COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY PR MI E R"EON ED rO $ 300,000 A CLAIMS-MADE ❑X OCCUR X X PP2080597 12/31/2011 2/31/2012 MEDEXP(An oneperscn) S 10,000 X XCU Coverage Incl PERSONAL S AOV INJURY 5 1,000,000 X I Contractual Liab GENERAL AGGREGATE 5 2,000,000 GEN'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER: PRODUCTS-COAIPIOPAGG 5 2,000,000 X POLICY PRO LOC $ AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY COM6INED SINGLE LIMIT Ea .den 1,000,000 X1 ANY AUTO BODILY INJURY(Per person) 5 A Ix ALLOV.4JED SL` X X F2080594 2/31/2011 2/31/2012 AUTOS AUTOS BODILY INJURY(Per accident) S X NONd`hNED PP.OPERTY DAMAGE S HIRED AUTOS AUTOS Peraccident Uninsured motonsl combined S X UMBRELLA LIAII X OCCUR X X EACH OCCURRENCE S 4,000,000 A EXCESS LIAR CLAIMS-MADE AGGREGATE S 4,000,000 LIED X RETENTION CU20BO595 2/31/2011 2/31/2012 5 A WORKERS COMPENSATION X WC STATU- OTH AND EMPLOYERS'LIABILITY TQRY I WITS Pp ANY PRCPRIETORIPARTNEPJEXECUTIVE YIN N r A E.L.EACH ACCIDENT S 1,000,000 OFFICERIMEMBER EXCLUDED? �rC2080596 2/31/2011 2/31/2012 (Mandatory In NH) E.L.DISEASE-EA EMPLOYE S 1 000 000 It yes,describe under DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS below X E.L.DISEASE-POLICY LIMIT I 5 1,000,000 A Inland Marine CPP2080597 2/31/201112/31/2012 Leased/Rented $650,000 Deductible $1,000 DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS LOCATIONS I VEHICLES (Attach ACORD 101,Additional Remarks Schedule,If more space Is required) CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN Evidence Of Coverage ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE Paul Hurley/CSMITH ACORD 25(2010/05) ©1988-2010 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved. INS025rnrrrnn;nn, Tho er-npn n—❑nri Innn aro rcnictorurf marlrc of arnpn THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS AIA Document A310 Bid Bond KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that we Lanzo Construction Co.,Florida (Here insert full name and address or legal title of Contractor) 125 SE 5th Court,Deerfield Beach,Florida 33441 as Principal, hereinafter called the Principal, and Liberty Mutual Insurance Company (Here insert full name and address or legal title of Surety) 5600 New King Street,Suite 360,Troy,Michigan 48098 a corporation duly organized under the laws of the State of Massachusetts as Surety, hereinafter called the Surety, are held and firmly bound unto City of Miami Beach (Here insert full name and address or legal title of Owner) 1700 Convention Center Drive,Miami Beach,Florida 33139 as Obligee, hereinafter called the Obligee, in the sum of Five Percent of Accompanying Bid Dollars (; 5% of Bid ) for the payment of which sum well and truly to be made, the said Principal and the said Surety, bind ourselves, our heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. WHEREAS. the Principal has submitted a bid for Right of Way Infrastructure Improvement Program Venetian Islands Bid Package 13C-ITB No.49-11/12 NOW, THEREFORE, if the Obligee shall accept the bid of the Principal and the Principal shall enter into a Contract with the Obligee in accordance with the terms of such bid, and give such bond or bonds as may be specified in the bidding or Contract Documents with good and sufficient surety for the faithful performance of such Contract and for the prompt payment of labor and material furnished in the prosecution thereof, or in the event of the failure of the Principal to enter such Contract and give such bond or bonds, if the Principal shall pay to the Obligee.the difference not to exceed the penalty hereof between the amount specified in said bid and such larger amount for which the Obligee may in good faith contract with another party to perform the Work covered by said bid, then this obligation shall be null and void, otherwise to remain in full force and effect. Signed and sealed this TJ day of 1 �OV emV�e� ,2012 Lanzo Construction Co.,Florida ( (ncip (Seal) fitness) (Title) Liberty Mutual Insurance Company ku/Sh-E (Surety) (Seal) It ss) Michelle Buechel (Title) Attorney-In-Fact AIA DOCUMENT A310• BID BOND •AIA B• FEBRUARY 1970 ED•THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS, 1735 N.Y. AVE., N.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006 ® Printed on Recycled Paper 9193 TINS M,-'ER OF ATTORNEY IS NOT VALID UNLESS IT IS PRINTED ON RED BACKGROUND. 5452442 This Power of Attorney limits the acts of those named herein,and they have no authority to bind the Company except in the manner and to the extent herein stated. Certificate No. American Fire and Casualty Company Liberty Mutual Insurance Company The Ohio Casualty Insurance Company Peerless Insurance Company West American Insurance Company POWER OF ATTORNEY KNOWN ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: That American Fire&Casualty Company and The Ohio Casualty Insurance Company are corporations duly organized under the laws of the State of Ohio,that Liberty Mutual Insurance Company is a corporation duly organized under the laws of the State of Massachusetts,that Peerless Insurance Company is a corporation duly organized under the laws of the State of New Hampshire,and West American Insurance Company is a corporation duly organized under the laws of the State of Indiana(herein collectively called the"Companies"),pursuant to and by authority herein set forth,does hereby name,constitute and appoint, ANNE BARICK;C.A.JOHNSON;KRISTYN M.LANGBEEN; LINDA L AUSTIN;MARGARET M.KOHLOFF;MICHAEL D.LECHNER;MICHELLE BUECHEL;PAUL M.HURLEY;ROBERT D.HEUER;T.R.GUY.......................................................................... .............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. all of the city of TROY state of MI each individually if there be more than one named,its true and lawful attomey-in-fact to make,execute,seal,acknowledge and deliver,for and on its behalf as surety and as its act and deed,any and all undertakings,bonds,recognizances and other surety obligations,in pursuance of these presents and shall be as binding upon the Companies as if they have been duly signed by the president and attested by the secretary of the Companies in their own proper persons. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,this PowerofAttorney has been subscribed by an authorized officer orofficial of the Companies and the corporate seals of the Companies have been affixed thereto this 28th day of JUNE 2012 , j American Fire and Casualty Company z Q`�0.P1 Fig tj t'•H8L 1uP �suk� �S�RAtd� SZ AJdFR7 U) " � ` The Ohio Casualty Insurance Company O Liberty Mutual Insurance Company a °•— C �i, a Peerless Insurance Company 0 HloabE��, � NcE cQQ� West American Insurance Company co:; > cc By. Gregory W Davenport,Assistant Secretary STATE OF WASHINGTON ss _ COUNTY OF KING 0 O c1 O On this 28th day of JUNE 2012 before me personally appeared Gregory W.Davenport,who acknowledged himself to be the Assistant Secretary of American Fire and >,Cn p Casualty Company,Liberty Mutual Insurance Company,The Ohio Casualty Company,Peerless Insurance Company and West American Insurance Company,and that he,as such,being LLI > authorized so to do,execute the for oin Instrument for the ur oses therein contained b si nin on behalf of the co orations b himself as a dul authorized officer. 0 Q > e9 9 P P Y signing rP Y Y G e 10 IN WITNESS WHEREOF,I have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed my notarial seal at Seattle,Washington,on the day and year first above written. Q M C_ ` O ru=-V_ = KID Riley,Nota Public 3 O This Power ofAttomey is made and executed pursuant to and by authority of the following By-laws and Author zations of American Fire and Casualty Company,The Ohio Casualty Insurance N +r Company,Liberty Mutual Insurance Company,WestAmerican Insurance Company and Peerless Insurance Company,which resolutions are now in full force and effect reading as follows: O C It w ARTICLE IV—OFFICERS—Section 12.Power of Attorney.Any officer or other official of the Corporation authorized for that purpose in writing by the Chairman or the President,and subject O•= to such limitation as the Chairman or the President may prescribe,shall appoint such attomeys-in-fact,as may be necessary to act in behalf of the Corporation to make,execute,seal, :a 3 E acknowledge and deliver as surety any and all undertakings,bonds,recognizances and other surety obligations. Such attomeys-in-fact,subject to the limitations set forth in their respective '�m powers of attorney,shall have full power to bind the Corporation by their signature and execution of any such instruments and to attach thereto the seal of the Corporation. When so > "— L executed,such instruments shall be as binding as if signed by the President and attested to by the Secretary.Any power or authority granted to any representative or attomey-in-fact under m a > the provisions of this article may be revoked at any time by the Board,the Chairman,the President or by the officer or officers granting such power or authority. N > C E > L ARTICLE XIII—Execution of Contracts—SECTION 5.Surety Bonds and Undertakings.Any officer of the Company authorized for that purpose in writing by the chairman or the president, �I Zv and subject to such limitations as the chairman or the president may prescribe,shall appoint such attorneys-in-fact,as may be necessary to act in behalf of the Company to make,execute, 0 0 seal,acknowledge and deliver as surety any and all undertakings,bonds,recognizances and other surety obligations. Such attomeys-in-fact subject to the limitations set forth in their 5 rl respective powers of attorney,shall have full power to bind the Company by their signature and execution of any such instruments and to attach thereto the seal of the Company. When so 0 e� executed such instruments shall be as binding as if signed by the president and attested by the secretary. Certificate of Designation—The President of the Company,acting pursuant to the Bylaws of the Company, authorizes Gregory W. Davenport,Assistant Secretary to appoint such attorney-in-fact as may be necessary to act on behalf of the Company to make,execute,seal,acknowledge and deliver as surety any and all undertakings,bonds,recognizances and other surety obligations. Authorization—By unanimous consent of the Company's Board of Directors,the Company consents that facsimile or mechanically reproduced signature of any assistant secretary of the Company,wherever appearing upon a certified copy of any power of attorney issued by the Company in connection with surety bonds,shall be valid and biding upon the Company with the same force and effect as though manually affixed. I, David M.Carey,the undersigned,Assistant Secretary,of American Fire and Casualty Company,The Ohio Casualty Insurance Company, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company,West American Insurance Company and Peerless Insurance Company do hereby certify that the original power of attorney of which the foregoing is a full,true and correct copy of the Power of Attorney executed by said Companies,is in full force and effect and has not been revoked. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF,I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seals of said Companies this day of h!20 ` ,CAR F):a LSq If'�lf 3,�t'•?•eu.• �URAt,; �S AH..t: �C dJ� Lw/ia�7� t Esr�aarry I 19 7 1 n B � S SEA,!, David M.Carey,Assistant Secretary oY�s,-°!say ��� \ / r 0� POA-AFCC,LMIC,OCIC,PIC&WAIC LMS 12873 041012 0 1080 KIRTs ROAD SuTE 500,TRoy,Mlai1GAN 48084 TELEPHONE: 248.519.1400 F4,csjw :248.519.1401 July 13, 2012 City of Miami Beach 1700 Convention Center Drive Miami Beach, FL 33139 Re: Lanzo Construction Co., Florida To Whom It May Concern: Lanzo Construction Company is a valued surety client of the Liberty Mutual Insurance Company. A surety bond line of credit is in place for Lanzo Construction Company for projects up to $100,000,000. Lanzo Construction Company is well managed and operates from a strong financial base. We are pleased to recommend Lanzo Construction Company to you. Should Lanzo Construction Co., Florida be awarded a final contract with the Obligee, it is our present intention to provide the bond or bonds and become Surety on said bond or bonds, which may be required guaranteeing performance of the contract. You understand, of course, that any arrangement for the final bond or bonds is a matter between the contractor and ourselves and we assume no liability to third parties or to you if for any reason we do not execute said bond or bonds. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions or desire additional information on this fine account. LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY 6 Paul M. Hurley Attorney-in-fact THIS POWER OF ATTORNEY IS NOT VALID UNLESS IT IS PRINTED ON RED BACKGROUND. 5140539 This Powor of Attorney limits the acts of those named herein,and they have no authority to bind the Company except in the manner and to the extent herein stated. LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY BOSTON,MASSACHUSETTS POWER OF ATTORNEY KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: That Liberty Mutual Insurance Company(the"Company'),a Massachusetts stock insurance company, pursuant to and by authority of the By-law and Authorization hereinafter set forth,does hereby name,constitute and appoint T.R.GUY,PAUL M.HURLEY, C.A.JOHNSON,LINDA L.AUSTIN,ANNE BARICK,MARGARET M.KOHLOFF,ROBERT D.HEUER,MICHELLE BUECHEL,MICHAEL D.LECHNER, KRISTYN M.LANGBEEN,ALL OF THE CITY OF TROY,STATE OF MICHIGAN.............................................................................................................................................. ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. , each individually if there be more than one named, its true and lawful attomey-in-fact to make, execute,seal, acknowledge and deliver,for and on its behalf as surety and as its act and deed, any and all undertakings, bonds, recognizances and other surety obligations in the penal sum not exceeding ONE HUNDRED FIFTY MILLION AND 00/700**• «««..,.««.............«..«««.........«. DOLLARS($ 150,000,000.00*'--- """"""" ) each, and the execution of such undertakings,bonds,recognizances and other surety obligations,in pursuance of these presents,shall be as binding upon the Company as if they had been duly signed by the president and attested by the secretary of the Company in their own proper persons. That this power is made and executed pursuant to and by authority of the following By-law and Authorization: ARTICLE XIII-Execution of Contracts:Section 5.Surety Bonds and Undertakings. Any officer of the Company authorized for that purpose in writing by the chairman or the president, and subject to such limitations as the N chairman or the president may prescribe,shall appoint such attomeys-in-fact,as may be necessary to act in behalf of the Company to make, N O execute,seal,acknowledge and deliver as surety any and all undertakings,bonds,recognizances and other surety obligations. Such attorneys- d C in-fact,subject to the limitations set forth in their respective powers of attorney,shall have full power to bind the Company by their signature and e -p execution of any such instruments and to attach thereto the seal of the Company. When so executed such instruments shall be as binding as if 7 �c y signed by the president and attested by the secretary. M w A J3 By the following instrument the chairman or the president has authorized the officer or other official named therein to appoint attorneys-in-fact: M 3 Pursuant to Article XIII,Section 5 of the By-Laws,David M.Carey,Assistant Secretary of Liberty Mutual Insurance Company,is hereby authorized M O to appoint such attorneys-in-fact as may be necessary to act in behalf of the Company to make,execute,seal,acknowledge and deliver as surety V l'- any and all undertakings,bonds,recognizances and other surety obligations. >4 LU O� � c d > That the By-law and the Authorization set forth above are true copies thereof and are now in full force and effect. `O CL .'3 IN WITNESS WHEREOF,this Power of Attorney has been subscribed by an authorized officer or official of the Company and the corporate seal of Liberty ,a ch c" `lutual Insurance Company has been affixed thereto in Plymouth Meeting, Pennsylvania this day Of 3rd day of February O 0 , 2012 C L_ �s;,, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY 3 p d a 10 1472 c,� � 15 yo 0 rn David M.Carey,A slstant Secretary w of COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA ss O r- 42 COUNTY OF MONTGOMERY O.� 3 £4"M On this 3rd day of February 2ot2 , before me, a Notary Public, personally came David M. Carev, to me known, and p acknowledged that he is an Assistant Secretary of Liberty Mutual Insurance Company; that he knows the seal of said corporation;and that he executed > the above Power of Attorney and affixed the corporate seal of Liberty Mutual Insurance Company thereto with the authority and at the direction of said .00 r., - r_ corporation. N co > d EN IN TESTIMONY WHER O JfA Iz 'ere o subscribed my name and affixed my notarial seal at Plymouth Meeting, Pennsylvania,on the day and year w Zfirst above written. g�ONW c� 040 p� e Teresa as';ari�l Seal V r Pasie!tn,tic,ary Puo6c OF ?iprr:euth T,ap.,P9anEyomsr�r Coua,4 �/ 't& (O 1?y Cc.^xriss�o.^.Expires Mar.28.2,213 BYE F" Mentor,Pennsyvarda A2llo a-?a:ci NGRarles Teresa Pastella, Notary Public CERTIFICATE 0 t,the undersigned,Assista�gcre B erty Mutual Insurance Company,do hereby certify that the original power of attorney of which the foregoing is a full,true and correct copy,ls"i lfo ce and effect on the date of this certificate;and I do further certify that the officer or official who executed the said power of attorney is an Assistant Secretary specially authorized by the chairman or the president to appoint attorneys-in-fact as provided in Article XIII, Section 5 of the By-laws of Liberty Mutual Insurance Company. This certificate and the above power of attorney may be signed by facsimile or mechanically reproduced signatures under and by authority of the following vote of the board of directors of Liberty Mutual Insurance Company at a meeting duly called and held on the 12th day of March,1980. VOTED that the facsimile or mechanically reproduced signature of any assistant secretary of the company,wherever appearing upon a certified copy of any power of attorney issued by the company in connection with surety bonds, shall be valid and binding upon the company with the same force and effect as though manually affixed. 1 TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed the corporate seal of the said company, this 13 4 day of . LA 22�2► 1572 �- SS�;n�°�,aei �' Gregory W. Davenport,Assistant Secretary Bond#013125556 00710. FORM OF PERFORMANCE BOND BY THIS BOND, We Lanzo Construction Co., Florida as Principal, hereinafter called Contractor,and Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. , as Surety,are bound to the City of Miami Beach, Florida, as Obligee, hereinafter called City, in the amount of *SEE BELOW Dollars ($ 11.373.491 ) for the payment whereof Contractor and Surety bind themselves. their heirs. executors. administrators. sumtessom anti asainn_S, jointly and severally. Eleven Million Three Hundred Seventy-three Thousand Four Hundred Ninety-one & NO/100 WHEREAS, Contractor has by written agreement entered into a Contract, Bld/Contract No.: ITB 49-11/12 . awarded the 13 day of March , 2013 , with City which Contract Documents are by reference incorporated herein and made a part hereof, and specifically Include provision for liquidated damages, and other damages identified, and for the purposes of this Bond are hereafter referred to as the'Contract THE CONDITION OF THIS BOND is that if Contractor. 1. Performs the Contract between Contractor and City for construction of Invitation to Bid(ITB)No.49-11/12,Venetian Islands Bid Package 13C the Contract being made a part of this Bond by reference, at the times and in the manner prescribed In the Contract; and 2. Pays City all losses, liquidated damages, expenses, costs and attorney's fees including appellate proceedings, that City sustains as a result of default by Contractor under the Contract; and 3. Performs the guarantee of all work and materials furnished under the Contract for the time specified In the Contract;then THIS BOND IS VOID, OTHERWISE IT REMAINS IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT. Whenever Contractor shall be, and declared by City to be, In default under the Contract, City having performed City obligations thereunder, the Surety may promptly remedy the default, or shall promptly: 3.1. Complete the Project In accordance with the terms and conditions of the Contract Documents; or 3.2. Obtain a bid or bids for completing the Project in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Contract Documents, and upon determination by Surety of the lowest responsible Bidder, or, if City elects, upon determination by City and Surety jointly of the lowest responsible Bidder, arrange for a contract between such Bidder and City, and make available as work progresses(even though there should be a default or a succession of defaults under the Contract BID NO:49-11112 CITYOF MIAMI BEACH DATE:July 9,2012 85 FORM OF PERFORMANCE BOND (Continued) or Contracts of completion arranged under this paragraph) sufficient funds to pay the cost of completion less the balance of the Contract Price; but not exceeding, Including other costs and damages for which the Surety may be liable hereunder, the amount set forth In the first paragraph hereof. The term "balance of the Contract Price," as used In this paragraph, shall mean the total amount payable by City to Contractor under the Contract and any amendments thereto, less the amount properly paid by City to Contractor. No right of action shall accrue on this bond to or for the use of any person or corporation other then City named herein. The Surety hereby waives notice of and agrees that any changes in or under the Contract Documents and compliance or noncompliance with any formalities connected with the Contract or the changes does not affect Suretyrs obligation under this Bond. Signed and sealed this 10th day of April 2013 WITNESSES: Lanzo Construction Co., Florida (Name of Corporation) Asst.Secretary By: (Signature) (CORPORATE SEAL) Michael R. Bone,Vice President (Print Name and Title) IN THE PRESENCE OF: INSURANCE COMPANY: Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. I By: Holly Nichols Agent and Attorney-in-Fact � � - Address: 5600 New King St., Ste. 360 (Street) Troy, MI 48098 (City/State/Zip Code) Telephone No.: (248)519-1400 BID NO:49.11112 CITYOF(MIAMI BEACH DATE:July 8,2012 86 Bond#013125556 00720. FORM OF PAYMENT BOND BY THIS BOND, We Lanzo Construction Co., Florida as Principal, hereinafter called Contractor, and Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. , as Surety, are bound to the City of Miami Beach, Florida, as Obligee, hereinafter called City, In the amount of "SEE BELOW Dollars ($11,373,491.00 ) for the payment whereof Contractor and Surety bind themselves, their heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns,jointly and severally. Eleven Million Three Hundred Seventy-three Thousand Four Hundred Ninety-one & NO/100 WHEREAS, Contractor nas oy wrmen agreement enterea into a contract, mcit:ontract No.: ITB 49-11/12 , awarded the 13 day of March . 20 13 . with City which Contract Documents are by reference incorporated herein and made a part hereof, and specifically Include provision for liquidated damages, and other damages Identified, and for the purposes of this Bond are hereafter referred to as the"Contract"; THE CONDITION OF THIS BOND is that if Contractor. 1. Pays City all losses, liquidated damages, expenses, costs and attorney's fees Including appellate proceedings, that City sustains because of default by Contractor under the Contract; and 2. Promptly makes payments to all claimants as defined by Florida Statute 255.05(1)for all labor, materials and supplies used directly or indirectly by Contractor In the performance of the Contract; THEN CONTRACTOR'S OBLIGATION SHALL BE VOID; OTHERWISE, IT SHALL REMAIN IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT SUBJECT, HOWEVER, TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 2.1. A claimant, except a laborer, who is not in privity with Contractor and who has not received payment for its labor, materials, or supplies shall, within forty-five (45) days after beginning to furnish labor, materials, or supplies for the prosecution of the work, furnish to Contractor a notice that he Intends to look to the bond for protection. 2.2. A claimant who is not in privity with Contractor and who has not received payment for its labor, materials, or supplies shall, within ninety (90) days after performance of the labor or after complete delivery of the materials or supplies, deliver to Contractor and to the Surety, written notice of the performance of the labor or delivery of the materials or supplies and of the nonpayment. 2.3. No action for the labor, materials, or supplies may be instituted against Contractor or the Surety unless the notices stated under the preceding conditions(2.1) and(2.2)have been given. BID NO:49-11112 CITYOF MIAMI BEACH DATE:July 9,2012 87 2.4. Any action under this Bond must be Instituted In accordance with the Notice and Time Limitations provisions prescribed in Section 255.05(2), Florida Statutes. The Surety hereby waives notice of and agrees that any changes In or under the Contract Documents and compliance or noncompliance with any formalities connected with the Contract or the changes does not affect the Suretys obligation under this Bond. Signed and sealed this 10th day of April 2013 Contractor ATTEST: Lanzo Construction Co., Florida (N me f Corporation) By: _/",o Asst.(Secretary) ( ignature) Michael R. Bone, Vice President (Corporate Seal) (Print Name and Title) 10th day of April . 2013 IN THE PRESENCE OF: INSURANCE COMPANY: V�t I fm�� Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. y� By. Holly Nichols Agent and Attorney-In-Fact Address: 5600 New King St., Ste. 360 (Street) Troy, MI 48098 (City/State/Zip Code) Telephone No.: (248) 519-1400 BID NO:4941112 CITYOF MIAMI BEACH DATE:July 9,2012 88 00721. CERTIFICATE AS TO CORPORATE PRINCIPAL I, Kevin Pawlowski,Assistant Secretary certify that I am the Secretary of the corporation named as Principal in the foregoing Performance and Payment Bond (Performance Bond and Payment Bond); that Michael R. Bone , who signed the Bond(s) on behalf of the Principal, was then Vice President of said corporation; that I know his/her signature; and his/her signature thereto is genuine; and that said Bond(s) was (were) duly signed, sealed and attested to on behalf of said corporation by authority of its governing body. (SEAL) Asst.Secretary(on behalf of) Lanzo Construction Co., Florida Corporation STATE OF FLORIDA ) ) SS COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADE ) Before me, a Notary Public duly commissioned, qualified and acting personally, appeared Michael R. Bone to me well known,who being by me first duly sworn upon oath says that he/she has been authorized to execute the foregoing Performance and Payment Bond (Performance Bond and Payment Bond) on behalf of Contractor named therein In favor of Clty. A Subscribed and Sworn to before me this day of �I'—i L. 20 i✓ My commission expires: - o Jv Public,St of Florida at Large �� ly1 203 Bonded by r �,iN E JOE H.BROWN,JR. Commission#DD 903256 Expires July 14,2013 °.` Bonded Thru Tmy Fain Inwrante BoMaS.7019 BID NO:49-11/12 CITYOF MIAMI BEACH DATE:July 6,2012 89 THIS POWER OF ATTORNEY IS NOT VALID UNLESS IT IS PRINTED ON RED BACKGROUND-. Thi9 Power of Attorney limits the acts of those named herein,and they have no authority to bind the Company except in the manner and to the extent herein stated. Certificate No.6043885 American Fire and Casualty Company Liberty Mutual Insurance Company =_The Ohio Casualty Insurance Company ; West American Insurance-Company - = POWER OF ATTORNEY KNOWN ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: That American Fire&Casualty Company and The Ohio Casualty Insurance Company are corporations duly organized under the laws of the State of New Hampshire,that Liberty Mutual Insurance Company is a corporation duty organized under the laws of the State of Massachusetts,and West American Insurance Company is a corporation duly organized under the laws of the State of Indiana(herein collectively called the"Companies"),pursuant to and by authority herein set forth,does hereby name,constitute and appoint, Anne Banck;Holly Nichols;Linda L.Austin;Margaret M.Kohloff;Michael D.Lechner;Michelle Buechel;Paul M.Hurley;Richard S. McGregor;Robert D.HeueF uy all of the city of Troy state of MI each.individually if there be more than one named,its true and lawful attomey-in-fact to make,execute,seal,acknowledge and deliver,for and on its behalf as surety and as its act and deed,any and all undertakings,bonds,recognizances and other surety obligations,in pursuance of these presents and shall be as binding upon the Companies as if they have been duly signed by-the president and attested by the secretary of the Companies in their own proper persons. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,this Power of Attorney has been subscribed by an authorized officer or official of the Companies and the corporate seals of the Companies have been affixed thereto this 20th day of March —2013 Pp1D Cr?s� ttY 1ftiSU 5N5Uq NkfiSUp - American Fire and Casualty Company v y `� 'r� �Jy •,�, �� � U�� W4 �� The Ohio Casualty Insurance Company rn Q" 'N S��xvr„ '�Y L¢.xhw.�'Y N OC. « 1soeo 0 19ts�n _1 12 ° < ?991 y Liberty Mutual Insurance Company _ West American Insurance Company T� ° tll d`a' r%,.n,ws�Tab y` �� �J -'•a. 1-, s - _ •N c STATE OF WASHINGTON ss Gregory W.Davenport,Assistant Secretary C M L. COUNTY OF KING O d3 On this 20th day of March 2013 ,before me personally appeared Gregory W. Davenport,who acknowledged himself to be the Assistant Secretary of American M u at Fire and Casualty Company,Liberty Mutual Insurance Company,The Ohio Casualty Company,and West American Insurance Company,and that he,as such,being authorized so to do, >�N '~ 2 execute the foregoing instrument for the purposes therein contained b signing on behalf of the corporations b himself as a dul authorized officer. d W O 9 9 P P Y 9 9 P Y Y d > IN WITNESS WHEREOF,I have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed my notarial seal at Seattle,Washington,on the dayand year first above written.: `O C. t0 _ 'wciEy's, Q M = �n c Y KID Riley,No Public d 0 E c This Power of Attorney is made and executed pursuant to and by authority wi N of the follong By-laws and Authorizations of American Fire and Casualty Company,The Ohio Casualty Insurance c Company,Liberty Mutual Insurance Company,and West American Insurance Company which resolutions are now in full force:and effect reading as follows: .0 e 04. �+QI M` ARTICLE N-OFFICERS-Section 12.Power of Attorney.Any officer or other official of the Corporation authorized for that purpose in writing by the Chairman or the President,and subject p = 0)a> to such limitation as the Chairman or the President may prescribe,shall appoint such attomeys-in-fact,as may be necessary to act in behalf of the Corporation to make,execute,seal, 0 9 surety Y g cog surety 9 Y 1 P a p e acknowledge and deliver as sure an and all undertakings,bonds,recognizances and other sure obligations. Such attome s-in-fact,subject to the limitations set forth in their respective E powers of attorney,shall have full power to bind the Corporation by their signature and execution of any such instruments and to attach thereto the seal of the Corporation. When so '� y +' executed,such instruments shall be as binding as if signed by the President and attested to by the Secretary.Any power or authority granted to any representative or attomey-in-fact under > the provisions of this article may be revoked at any time by the Board,the Chairman,the President or by the officer or officers granting such power or authority. t'V ARTICLE XIII-Execution of Contracts-SECTION 5.Surety Bonds and Undertakings.Any officer of the Company authorized for that purpose in writing by the chairman or the president, M r_> ` and subject to such limitations as the chairman or the president may prescribe,shall appoint such attomeys-in-fad,as may be necessary to act in behalf of the Company to make,execute, C M p seal,acknowledge and deliver as surety any and all undertakings,bonds,recognizances and other surety obligations. Such attomeys-in-fact subject to the limitations set forth in their C aQ Z ct respective powers of attorney,shall have full power to bind the Company by their signature and execution of any such instruments and to attach thereto the seal of the Company. When so u o executed such instruments shall be as binding as if signed by the president and attested by the secretary. O to Certificate of Designation-The President of the Company;aciing`pursuant to the Bylaws of the Company,authorizes`Gregory W.Davenport,Assistant Secretary to appoint such ~ attorneys-in-fact as may be necessary to act on behalf of the Company to make,execute,seal,acknowledge and deliver as surety any and all undertakings,bonds,recognizances and other surety obligations. - Authorization-By unanimous consent of the Company's Board&.Directors,the Company consents that facsimile or mechanically reproduced signature of any assistant secretary of the Company,wherever appearing upon a certified copy of any power of attomey issued by the Company in connection with surety bonds,shall be valid and binding upon the Company with the same force and effect as though manually affixed.: I,David M.Carey,the undersigned,Assistant Secretary,.ofAmerican Fire and Casualty Company,The Ohio Casualty Insurance Company,Liberty Mutual Insurance Company,and West American Insurance Company do hereby certify that the original power of attorney of which the foregoing is a full,true and correct copy of the Power of Attorney executed by said Companies, is in full force and effect and has not been revoked. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF,I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seals of said Companies this! day of ``-C 20 aOCnSL �,rtYlrvSU - - P4INSVA,;gf - ��`A/yFNSVq,�� - 4 190b o c 1919 o F 191 By v v w a y David M.Carey,Assistant Secretary LMS 12873 092012 36 of 500 00720. FORM OF PAYMENT BOND BY THIS BOND, We as Principal, hereinafter called Contractor , and as Surety, are bound to the City of Miami Beach, Florida, as Obligee, hereinafter called City, in the amount of Dollars ($ ) for the payment whereof Contractor and Surety bind themselves, their heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns,jointly and severally. WHEREAS, Contractor has by written agreement entered into a Contract, Bid/Contract No.: , awarded the day of , 20 , with City which Contract Documents are by reference incorporated herein and made a part hereof, and specifically include provision for liquidated damages, and other damages identified, and for the purposes of this Bond are hereafter referred to as the "Contract"; THE CONDITION OF THIS BOND is that if Contractor: 1. Pays City all losses, liquidated damages, expenses, costs and attorney's fees including appellate proceedings, that City sustains because of default by Contractor under the Contract; and 2. Promptly makes payments to all claimants as defined by Florida Statute 255.05(1) for all labor, materials and supplies used directly or indirectly by Contractor in the performance of the Contract; THEN CONTRACTOR'S OBLIGATION SHALL BE VOID; OTHERWISE, IT SHALL REMAIN IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT SUBJECT, HOWEVER, TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 2.1. A claimant, except a laborer, who is not in privity with Contractor and who has not received payment for its labor, materials, or supplies shall, within forty-five (45) days after beginning to furnish labor, materials, or supplies for the prosecution of the work, furnish to Contractor a notice that he intends to look to the bond for protection. 2.2. A claimant who is not in privity with Contractor and who has not received payment for its labor, materials, or supplies shall, within ninety (90) days after performance of the labor or after complete delivery of the materials or supplies, deliver to Contractor and to the Surety, written notice of the performance of the labor or delivery of the materials or supplies and of the nonpayment. 2.3. No action for the labor, materials, or supplies may be instituted against Contractor or the Surety unless the notices stated under the preceding conditions (2.1) and (2.2) have been given. BID NO:49-11/12 CITYOF MIAMI BEACH DATE:July 9,2012 87 2.4. Any action under this Bond must be instituted in accordance with the Notice and Time Limitations provisions prescribed in Section 255.05(2), Florida Statutes. The Surety hereby waives notice of and agrees that any changes in or under the Contract Documents and compliance or noncompliance with any formalities connected with the Contract or the changes does not affect the Surety's obligation under this Bond. Signed and sealed this day of 20 Contractor ATTEST: (Name of Corporation) By: (Secretary) (Signature) (Corporate Seal) (Print Name and Title) day of 20 IN THE PRESENCE OF: INSURANCE COMPANY: By: Agent and Attorney-in-Fact Address: (Street) (City/State/Zip Code) Telephone No.: BID NO:49-11/12 CITYOF MIAMI BEACH DATE: July 9,2012 88