LTC 233-2002
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
Office of the City Manager
Letter to Commission No. c233.cOtJtJ:L
m
From:
Mayor David Dermer 08te: October 16, 2002
Members of the City Commission
Jorge M. Gonzalez \ ~
City Manager U
Amendments to EDAW's AE Contract for the Design of Flamingo
Neighborhood Right of Way Improvements
To:
Subject:
At the September 11th 2002 Commission meeting, Commissioner Garcia raised a number
of questions regarding increases in fees paid to EDAW for professional design services for
the Flamingo Neighborhood Right of Way Improvement Project. The following information
provides an explanation of the fee changes approved for the project to date.
On July 18, 2001, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution 2001-24506
authorizing the execution of an Agreement between the City of Miami Beach and EDAW,
Inc.,in the not to exceed amount of $1,840,000 for Professional Services for the design of
the Flamingo/Lummus Neighborhood Right of Way Improvement Project. EDAW's
responsibilities for this project include urban design, landscape architecture, and
engineering services required for the planning and design of the project as well as
assistance with bidding and construction administration. The fee approved for this work
was negotiated by Engineering Management Consultant Pappas and Associates based on
an approximate quantification of the level of effort involved in completing the work. This
includes the cost of various deliverables such as documents, workshops, meetings, etc, as
well as the cost of an estimated number of landscape and engineering drawing pages.
Through City Commision and RDA Resolutions 2002-24732, 2002-24733,416-2002, 415-
2002 passed after the initial design contract was negotiated with EDAW, an additional
$4,955,984 in funding was added to the project. This action was taken because during the
design process various needed enhancements were identified in RDA areas which were
eligible for RDA funding. Some of this additional work required a new dedicated design
effort on the part of EDAW. Other parts of it added a level of complexity to design and
engineering drawings that already were being produced for an area albeit with fewer
improvements. Again, Pappas and Associates was hired to negotiate a fee of $278,806 for
the additional services based on the actual additional work required to be done rather than
on a percentage of the funding added to the project.
Similarly, when $564,662 in funding was transferred to the Flamingo project from the
Washington Avenue project which turned out to be ineligible for the funds, Pappas and
Associates was hired to determine how much additional level of effort would be required to
design improvements with these funds. In this particular case, the desired area of
improvement was outside EDAW's contractual geographic boundary in their scope of
work. This was taken into consideration along with the additional amount of design work
required from EDAW and a fee of $35,999 was negotiated for the added work.
In summary, Edaw's original design fee of $1,840,000 was to design $20,807,792 worth
of improvements. Although fee negotiations are not based on a strict percentage as
discussed above, the fee as a percentage of total funds for the original contract was
approximately 8.84%. With the addition of the $4,955,984 in RDA funded improvements
and the addition of $564,662 in G.O. Bond money, the overall project budget increased to
$26,328,438, a 26% increase, while the total overall fee to EDAW, $2,154,805, decreased
as a percentage of funded improvements from 8.84% initially to 8.2%.
Regarding Commisioner's Garcia question about further increases to EDAW's fees for
design services for the Flamingo neighborhood, it is entirely possible that continued
examination of funding sources may identify money for additional desired and needed
improvements in the neighborhood. If additional funding is identified, and the design of the
improvements requires additional work on the part of EDAW, then there is a potential for
the need to pay additional fees to EDAW.
If such a situation occurs, then the City will continue to employ a professional negotiator to
confirm that the fees requested are representative of the additional work to be done. To
expect EDAW to do additional work without pay to design new improvements added to a
project is not a feasible strategy.
Current possibilities for additional increases in fees to EDAW include the potential of
adding more waterline im~rovements and the potential for incorporating whatever work is
ultimately done on the 16 Street transportation project to take advantage of the fact that
EDAW is already designing improvements in that area. It should be kept in mind that
these fee amendments are not change orders due to cost overruns on the original scope of
work or flaws in work done but rather the valid cost of adding new, unanticipated work to a
project.
JMG
all\Donald\CIP\ROW Projects\Flamingo\oct02Itc.doc
~ >0-3 (') tIl ca :::1 ~ "d ."
tIlO ~. 0 ~m ~ !;
'" a.
~ 00-3 (') ::r o . ClS.
Ol :~ "'d o ::l ::l ;J ~
~ ~ aOtl e:.
0 (11 0 (') -
0 IC"d S' "'d Z
::> ~ ~::l 0-3
Ol ;:::.~ ....
.... ..9. G')
s; >>~ (11 ....(11
t:0 o .... d
D. ~~~ 'gg: (11 0
I S;J 0
.... z
(') ~~> ~~> ..9. 0 ~ I::l Z
'" ~~"rj 8 a- m
0-3 (11 (11 S 8.(1I"rj ....
.Q ~~ -0 Z -
co' d 00S- ~~8. 3'8- s' ~ G')
~ VI..... __ ~ """0 s C) Otl :E:
'" z 25 -...Otl o-"'::l m
Ol
3 I::l ooVJ 00 VJ Otl ~9
-...0 -...!;2 0
S' 52 0-'" 00
(Q NS NN ~ to p~s :;u
9-
co '-l e:g :E:
~ oas
~ > ~~ 0
~ tIl ~ ~~
g g' o tIl 0
! 0 ::l (11 a
~ ~~ ~~~ c
Ol ~ ;!!
::l- g
C. G')
g (11 :E:
-I
~ 0
~ ~~..... ."
N ~~ VI,j::......
=" ~~ N..... ~ 'Vl'No ~
~ 0'\ VI Nu. VI .....,j::.VI
N O'\,j::. ,j::.O 0'\ VJOVJ ~
00 ..... -J N,j::. .,j::. wOou.
~ u.w ''....IN 0'\
~ VJ 00 0'\
VJ -J -J ,j::.1.O 0'\ VI 00 1.0 -
00 NVJ N -J N ~
-a
:;u
~6 6'0 6'0 0 (') ~
.... ~ .... ~ -J 0 m
-... ~
00-3 ~~ s:::::: ..... z
00 m
~~ (11 25 -... tIl
>S ::l'N 0 ~ z
.....
~(') g'::: ~ t"' -I
.... (') ~
;:::'0 ~ 0 0-3 -a
t:z ~(') ~ ~ ClS. ~
(11 0 :;u
QtIl ~::l ~~ ::l 0-3 0
N~ _.::j e:.
.g~ tIj- 0 Co.
0-3 5 ~ 0 m
~ ~ ~ =-:(1) ~ 0
~::l ~ -I
S g ~s -
~ ~s I>>
g ~ ~ ~
t'":l en (11
a (11 S t'":l
a"
..... (11
0 a
a-
~ ~
~ .....
~ 00
.... N ~
~ -J VJ ,j::.
$X' VI 0
~ i.o "'0
00 00
Q 0 1.0 0
UI 0'\ 1.0 0