HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-25197 Reso RESOLUTION NO. 2003-25197
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, SELECTING THE MOST
QUALIFIED CONSULTING FIRM FROM THE THREE HIGHEST
RANKED PROPOSALS RECEIVED PURSUANT TO REQUEST FOR
QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ) NO. 36-02~03, FOR EVALUATION OF
RAPID TRANSIT OPTIONS; AUTHORIZING THE ADMINISTRATION
TO ENTER INTO NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE TOP RANKED FIRM
AS SPECIFIED BY THE CITY COMMISSION, AND SHOULD THE
ADMINISTRATION NOT BE ABLE TO NEGOTIATE AN
AGREEMENT WITH THE TOP RANKED FIRM; AUTHORIZING THE
ADMINISTRATION TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE SECOND-RANKED
FIRM, AND SHOULD THE ADMINISTRATION NOT BE ABLE TO
NEGOTIATE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE SECOND-RANKED
FIRM; AUTHORIZING THE ADMINISTRATION TO NEGOTIATE
WITH THE THIRD-RANKED FIRM; AND FURTHER AUTHORIZING
THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT
UPON COMPLETION OF SUCCESSFUL NEGOTIATIONS.
WHEREAS, at a special City Commission meeting on March 10, 2003 to address
the Baylink project and to consider the locally preferred alternative and mode choice, the
City Commission adopted Resolution No. 2003-25143, which provided the following
direction:
1. Request that Miami-Dade County extend the East-West Corridor up to the
northern boundary of Miami Beach to give the City the greatest flexibility as
opposed to terminating at the Convention Center as part of their re-authorization
request to the federal government for the Intermodal Surface Transportation
Efficiency Act (ISTEA);
2. To refer the request to both the County Commission and the MPO; and
3. That rather than doing a DEIS extension [the current DEIS] at this point, that
the City of Miami Beach engage its own mass transit consultant to assist the City
with the transit issue and planning in the community and to fund with MPO funds or
if necessary, out of the transportation tax. The motion was approved 7-0; and
WHEREAS, subsequent to the City Commission vote, the MPO deferred to fund the
study that was requested by the City and further requested that the City of Miami Beach
reach a decision on the Baylink project within the next 120 day period; and
WHEREAS, in the March 19, 2003 City Commission meeting following the MPO
vote, the Commission discussed the MPO vote and took specific actions on the
Baylink/transit study issue. The Commission voted to undertake a RFQ process to select a
consultant to study the various transit modes available to help the Commission and the
community reach a conclusion of the preferred mode of transit for the community. The
study was also to address routes for possible transit systems and how best to serve the
mid and north beach areas in the future; and
WHEREAS, the Commission further specified that the report is to be completed and
presented to the Commission within the 120 day time frame; and
WHEREAS, in response to the City Commission vote to undertake additional study
of the Baylink issue and transit more broadly in the community, on March 26, 2003, RFQ
No. 36-02/03 was provided to 39 Architectural and Engineering Firms with a deadline for
submission of their qualifications by April 11,2003; and
WHEREAS, the following firms submitted responsive qualifications packages by the
deadline:
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
HDR Engineering, Inc.
URS
Wilbur Smith Associates
Edwards and Kelcey
American Consulting Engineers of Florida
Glatting Jackson Kercher Anglin Lopez Rinehart, Inc.; and
WHEREAS, on April 15, 2003, the City Manager via Letter to Commission (LTC) No.
94-2003, informed the City Commission that he was considering the appointment of the
following individuals to the Evaluation Committee (the "Committee"):
Jorge Chartrand, Assistant CIP Director
Diane Downs, Resident, Citizen-at-Large
Francois LeJeune, Planning Board Member/representative
Jorge Gomez, Planning Director
Steven Nostrand, Chairman of the Transportation and Parking
Committee/representative
Melvyn Schlesser, Planning Board Member/representative
Robert Warren, Transportation and Parking Committee
member/representative; and
WHEREAS, the Committee convened on April 24, 2003 in the Commission
Chambers and listened to presentations from all six (6) firms, and participated in a question
and answer session after each presentation. Absent from the meeting were Committee
Members Steven Nostrand, Melvyn Schlesser and Robert Warren. Ms Erika Brigham was
added to the Committee. Jorge Gomez chaired the Committee meeting, and each
presentation and the deliberations were video taped; and
WHEREAS, the Committee, after discussions of each firm's strengths and
weaknesses, scored and ranked the firms (see attachment A); and
WHEREAS, each of the top three ranked firms impressed the committee members
that they had an appropriate focus on the dynamics of achieving community consensus, a
sensitivity for design and fit in the community and a broad transit knowledge with no
preconceived notion of a preferred or correct technology; and
WHEREAS, on the motion of Jorge Chartrand and seconded by Diane Downs, the
Committee unanimously agreed on the following ranking:
Top-ranked:
Second-ranked:
Third-ranked:
HDR
Glatting Jackson
Wilbur Smith Associates; and
WHEREAS, the three highest ranked consulting firms are well qualified to undertake
the study desired by the City, and any of the three would be able to successfully complete
the study in a manner that would be acceptable to the City; and
WHEREAS, as perceptions may be a factor in this selection process and given the
nature of the community discussion to date, the selection process and the actual selection
takes on a slightly different nature than most of our consultant choices. The different
nature of this process and selection also necessitates a slightly different approach to the
manner in which a recommendation is forwarded to the City Commission; and
WHEREAS, under normal circumstances a specific recommendation is made to the
members of the Commission for final action. In this case, with the heightened sensitivity to
perceptions and the passion of the community on the issue, the Administration's
recommendation is in the form of endorsing the top three ranked firms as selected by the
evaluation committee. The recommendation specifically recognizes that any of the top
three firms is capable and that the City's interests would be well served with any of the
three; and
WHEREAS, while the evaluation committee's and the Administration's due diligence
protect the City's interests and fulfill the statutory requirements for selection by
recommending qualified consultants, the Administration's recommendation goes no further
in a conscious effort not to add to any of the perception issues that may be a part of the
process; and
WHEREAS, each of the top three firms will be invited to the April 30, 2003 City
Commission meeting to make a presentation to the Commission and any interested
members of the public on their proposal. The Commission will be able to form an opinion
as to how best to proceed and which of the three firms will best fit the needs of the
Commission and the community.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS
OF THE MIAMI BEACH CITY COMMISSION, selecting the most qualified consulting firm
from the three highest ranked proposals received pursuant to Request for Qualifications
(RFQ) No. 36-02/03, for Evaluation of Rapid Transit Options; authorizing the Administration
to enter into negotiations with the top ranked firm as specified bythe City Commission, and
should the Administration not be able to negotiate an agreement with the top ranked firm;
authorizing the Administration to enter into negotiations with the second-ranked firm, and
should the Administration not be able to negotiate an agreement with the second-ranked
firm; authorizing the Administration to enter into negotiations with the third-ranked firm; and
further authorizes the Mayor and City Clerk to execute an agreement upon completion of
successful negotiations.
PASSED and ADOPTED this 30th day of April ., 2003.
'~ EST:
CITY C LEt~'K
JMG :RCM :GL
APPROVED A,q TO
FORM & LANGUAGE
& FOfl EXECUTION
T:~AGEN(3A~003~apr3003¥egular/rapid transil reso.doc
CI1Y OF MIAMI BEACH
COMI~ISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
A Resolution Selecting the Most Qualified Consulting Firm from the Three Highest Ranked Proposals for I
Evaluation of Rapid Transit Options; Authorizing the Administration to Enter into Negotiations with the Top
Ranked Firm as Specified by the City Commission; and Further Authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to
Execute an Agreement Upon Completion of Successful Negotiations.
Issue:
IShall the City Commission Select the Most Qualified Firm, Authorize Negotiations, and Authorize the Mayor
and City Clerk to Execute an Agreement?
Item Summary/Recommendation:
In response to the City Commission vote to undertake additional study of the Baylink issue and transit more
broadly in the community, on March 26, 2003, RFQ No. 36-02/03 was provided to 39 Architectural and
Engineering Firms with a deadline for submission of their qualifications by April 11, 2003. Six firms
submitted responsive qualifications packages by the deadline.
The Committee of five members convened on April 24, 2003 in the Commission Chambers and listened to
presentations from all six (6) firms, and participated in a question and answer session after each
presentation. Jorge Gomez chaired the Committee meeting, and each presentation and the deliberations
were video taped. The Committee unanimously agreed on the following ranking: Top-ranked: HDR; Second-
ranked: Glatting Jackson; Third-ranked: Wilbur Smith Associates.
With the heightened sensitivity to perceptions and the passion of the community on the issue, the
Administration recommendation is in the form of endorsing the top three ranked firms as selected by the
evaluation committee. The recommendation specifically recognizes that any of the top three firms is
capable and that the City's interests would be well served with any of the three. While the evaluation
committee's and the administrations due diligence protect the City's interests and fulfill the statutory
requirements for selection by recommending qualified consultants, the administration recommendation goes
no further in a conscious effort not to add to any of the perception issues that may be a part of the process.
THE ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDS THAT THE CITY COMMISSION ADOPT THE ATTACHED
RESOLUTION.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
N/A
Financial Information:
Source of Amount Account Approved
Funds:
2
3
4
Finance Dept. Total
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking:
Bob Middaugh, City Manager's Office
Sign-Offs:
I Department Director
FB
Assistant City Manager
RCM
T:~AGEN DA~2003~apr3003\regular\RapidSurnmaw.doc
City Manager
AGENDAITEM
DATE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
CITY HALL 1700 CONVENTION CENTER DRIVE MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA 33139 · ~
www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
To:
From:
Subject:
Mayor David Dermer and Date: April 30, 2003
Members of the City Commission
Jorge M. Gonzalez ~ ~~
City Manager
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, SELECTING THE MOST QUALIFIED
CONSULTING FIRM FROM THE THREE HIGHEST RANKED PROPOSALS
RECEIVED PURSUANT TO REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ) NO.
36-02103, FOR EVALUATION OF RAPID TRANSIT OPTIONS;
AUTHORIZING THE ADMINISTRATION TO ENTER INTO NEGOTIATIONS
WITH THE TOP RANKED FIRM AS SPECIFIED BY THE CITY
COMMISSION, AND SHOULD THE ADMINISTRATION NOT BE ABLE TO
NEGOTIATE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE TOP RANKED FIRM;
AUTHORIZING THE ADMINISTRATION TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE
SECOND-RANKED FIRM AS DESIGNATED BY THE CITY COMMISSION,
AND SHOULD THE ADMINISTRATION NOT BE ABLE TO NEGOTIATE AN
AGREEMENT WITH THE SECOND-RANKED FIRM; AUTHORIZING THE
ADMINISTRATION TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE THIRD-RANKED FIRM AS
DESIGNATED BY THE CITY COMMISSION; AND FURTHER
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AN
AGREEMENT UPON COMPLETION OF SUCCESSFUL NEGOTIATIONS.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution which specifies from the top three ranked consultant proposals the City
Commission's first, second and third ranked firm.
ANALYSIS
At a special City Commission meeting on March 10, 2003 to address the Baylink project
and to consider the locally preferred alternative and mode choice, the City Commission
adopted Resolution No. 2003-25143, which provided the following direction:
Request that Miami-Dade County extend the East-West Corridor up to the
northern boundary of Miami Beach to give the City the greatest flexibility as
opposed to terminating at the Convention Center as part of their re-authorization
request to the federal government for the Intermodal Surface Transportation
Efficiency Act (ISTEA);
2. To refer the request to both the County Commission and the MPO; and
Commission Memo
RFQ No. 36-02/03 - Evaluation of Rapid Transit Options
April 3O, 2003
Page 2 of 6
That rather than doing a rEIS extension [the current rEIS] at this point, that the
City of Miami Beach engage its own mass transit consultant to assist the City
with the transit issue and planning in the community and to fund with MPO funds
or if necessary, out of the transportation tax. The motion was approved 7-0.
Subsequent to the City Commission vote, the MPO deferred to fund the study that was
requested by the City and further requested that the City of Miami Beach reach a decision
on the Baylink project within the next 120 day period.
In the March 19, 2003 City Commission meeting following the MPO vote, the Commission
discussed the MPO vote and took specific actions on the Baylink/transit study issue. The
Commission voted to:
In phase 1; Study the transit alternatives and compare and contrast Light Rail
Transit and Bus Rapid Transit and other variances
· In phase 2; Study the particular routes in the South, Mid and North Beach
areas
· The Commission further specified that the report is to be completed and
presented to the Commission within the 120 day time frame.
The March 19 section of the after action report with the specific motion and discussion is
attached.
Also attached are the LTC's that transmitted the RFQ scope of services and the evaluation
team members.
RFQ PROCESS
In response to the City Commission vote to undertake additional study of the Baylink issue
and transit more broadly in the community, on March 26, 2003, RFQ No. 36-02/03 was
provided to 39 Architectural and Engineering Firms with a deadline for submission of their
qualifications by April 11, 2003. The following firms submitted responsive qualifications
packages by the deadline:
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
American Consulting Engineers of Florida
Edwards and Kelcey
Glatting Jackson Kercher Anglin Lopez Rinehart, Inc
HDR Engineering, Inc.
URS
Wilbur Smith Associates
On April 15, 2003, the City Manager via Letter to Commission (LTC) No. 94-2003, informed
the City Commission that he was considering the appointment of the following individuals
to the Evaluation Committee (the "Committee"):
Commission Memo
RFQ No. 36.02/03 - Evaluation of Rapid Transit Options
April 30, 2003
Page 3 of 6
Jorge Chartrand, Assistant CIP Director
Diane Downs, Resident, Citizen-at-Large
Francois LeJeune, Planning Board Member/representative
Jorge Gomez, Planning Director
Steven Nostrand, Chairman of the Transportation and Parking
Committee/representative
Melvyn Schlesser, Planning Board Member/representative
Robert Warren, Transportation and Parking Committee member/representative
The representatives of the Planning Board and the Transportation and Parking Committee
were designated by the respective Board Chair.
In assembling the evaluation committee in the short time frame that was necessary for the
evaluation, Melvyn Schlesser of the Planning Board and both of the designees from the
Transportation and Parking Committee were unable to participate. In order to maintain at
least one representative from both Boards, another designee was solicited from the
Transportation and Parking Committee. The Transportation and Parking Committee Chair
designated Erika Brigham as the new representative of the Board.
The Committee of five members convened on April 24, 2003 in the Commission Chambers
and listened to presentations from all six (6) firms, and participated in a question and
answer session after each presentation. Jorge Gomez chaired the Committee meeting,
and each presentation and the deliberations were video taped. Copies of the proceedings
can be made available to interested members of the Commission.
The Committee, after discussions of each firm's strengths and weaknesses, scored and
ranked the firms (see attachment A).
In their deliberations and rankings, the evaluation committee specifically sought
consultants that had expressed a sensitivity to the community and the process that was
necessary to achieve an understanding and possible consensus on transit issues. The
Committee also looked for and selected firms on the basis of their experience and focus on
system design and impacts on the community. Special attention was focused by the
committee on how the proposing firms had dealt with historic elements in design and the
attention each had given to creating the correct scale and scope of transit systems in
communities with features similar to Miami Beach. A final area which the committee
focused attention was the proposers overall grasp of transit knowledge and their work
experience that embraced a wide range of technologies and transit modes. Single or
limited focus firms did not rise to the top rankings. Each of the top three firms
demonstrated a broad knowledge of transit systems and the importance of making transit
selections that were a good fit for the respective community.
Each of the top three ranked firms impressed the committee members that they had an
appropriate focus on the dynamics of achieving community consensus, a sensitivity for
design and fit in the community and a broad transit knowledge with no preconceived notion
of a preferred or correct technology.
Commission Memo
RFQ No. 36-02/03 - Evaluation of Rapid Transit Options
April 30, 2003
Page 4 of 6
On the motion of Jorge Chartrand and seconded by Diane Downs, the Committee
unanimously agreed on the following ranking:
Top-ranked:
Second-ranked:
Third-ranked:
HDR
Glatting Jackson
Wilbur Smith Associates
In ranking HDR first, the Committee members stated that the HDR team was very
impressive, especially Mr. Charles Hales who demonstrated a thorough knowledge of rapid
transit options, and provided the Committee with an excellent presentation of HDR's
capabilities, and approach to Miami Beach's needs in this study.
Included are the proposals and reference checks of the three top ranked firms.
CITY MANAGER REVIEW
In the review of the Committee recommendations, the consultant proposals, and the
selection process it is clear that the committee members did a very thorough job of review
and focused their questions and rankings on concerns and issues of very high importance
to our community. The committee members were open and unbiased in their review and
conducted an open and impartial selection process to arrive at their recommendations.
The three highest ranked consulting firms are well qualified to undertake the study desired
by the City, and any of the three would be able to successfully complete the study in a
manner that would be acceptable to the City. As such, the recommendations of the
evaluation committee are accepted without reservation.
Beyond the selection process information, there is additional information for two of the
consulting firms which may be relevant and which the Commission should consider as part
of its deliberations.
HDR
In the fact finding trip to the west coast, the members of the City delegation met with the
project leader of the HDR team, Mr. Charles Hales. The meeting was to discuss the
Portland transit system, in which Mr. Hales had played a prominent role. Unfortunately the
delegation members had no way of knowing that in a future Commission meeting a transit
study would be requested or that the consulting firm of HDR would be a respondent. At the
time of the meeting, Mr. Hales volunteered his time to the delegation to be helpful about
the operation of the Portland transit system.
Even though the meeting with Mr. Hales did not violate any sunshine or ethical standards
and the proposal of HDR should not be tainted by any such implication, there is an obvious
Commission Memo
RFQ No. 36-02/03 - Evaluation of Rapid Transit Options
April 30, 2003
Page 5 of 6
perception issue that must be at least acknowledged in the process. Ultimately the
Commission must determine if the transit study and discussion would be impacted by this
information.
Glattin.q Jackson
As part of the discussion leading up to the consultant reviews, the second ranked firm,
Glatting Jackson was retained by a local property interest to make a presentation both to
the Planning Board and to the Commission on transit. The firm was appropriately
registered with the City, and did not commit any breaches of standards maintained by the
City. There are no procedural barriers to employing this firm, but there may be a
perception issue that arises out of the representation earlier in the process.
In each of the previous situations, the information is disclosed publicly in an abundance of
caution. Both firms are very capable and there are no formal barriers to the engagement of
either firm by the City for the intended transit study. The disclosure is made so that as the
Commission considers its choice, it is done with full knowledge of all issues and all
information available.
As perceptions may be a factor in this selection process and given the nature of the
community discussion to date, the selection process and the actual selection takes on a
slightly different nature than most of our consultant choices. The different nature of this
process and selection also necessitates a slightly different approach to the manner in
which a recommendation is forwarded to the City Commission.
Under normal circumstances a specific recommendation is made to the members of the
Commission for final action. In this case, with the heightened sensitivity to perceptions and
the passion of the community on the issue, the administration recommendation is in the
form of endorsing the top three ranked firms as selected by the evaluation committee. The
recommendation specifically recognizes that any of the top three firms is capable and that
the City's interests would be well served with any of the three.
While the evaluation committee's and the administrations due diligence protect the City's
interests and fulfill the statutory requirements for selection by recommending qualified
consultants, the administration recommendation goes no further in a conscious effort not to
add to any of the perception issues that may be a part of the process.
Each of the top three firms will be invited to the April 30, 2003 City Commission meeting to
make a presentation to the Commission and any interested members of the public on their
proposal. The Commission will be able to form an opinion as to how best to proceed and
which of the three firms will best fit the needs of the Commission and the community.
Commission Memo
RFQ No. 36-02/03- Evaluation of Rapid Transit Options
April 30, 2003
Page 6 of 6
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends that the City Commission adopt the attached resolution,
which accepts the top three ranked firms as recommended by the City Manager, and that
the City Commission specify the rank order of the firms such that a first, second and third
choice is designated, and that the Administration is authorized to pursue negotiations with
the Commission designated choices, and further authorizes the Mayor and City Clerk to
execute an agreement upon completion of successful negotiations.
JMG:RCM:GL
T:~AGENDA~2003~apr3003\regular~Rapid Transit memo.doc
Attach ments
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
Office of the City Ma_p,na_ger
Letter to Commission No. ,:/r-j.. ~/~0~
To:
From:
Subject:
Mayor David Dermer and
Members of the City Commission
Jorge M. Gonzalez ~ .._~MJ~ ~, .,, ~
City Manager ,~l/(~~ ~
BAY LINK CONSULTANTS' SC(iLp~ OF SERVICES
Date: March 25, 2003
As directed during the last Commission Meeting, I am forwarding the attached subject
scope of services for your review and comments.
I would ask that your comments be completed as soon as possible but no later than
Thursday, March 27, 2003. As you know, the time available to issue the Consultant RFQ
and to select and award a contract is very short, if we are to have a report in the July
timeframe.
JM~ H~B~JJ\II
c: Robert C. Middaugh, Assistant City Manager
Fred H. Beckmann, Director of Public Works
F:\WORK~$ALL\O Lucy\LTC Baylink Constultants Scope of Servs.doc
Bay Link Scope of Services
Phase One
Explain the significance of rapid transit to Miami Beach in addressing
growth and traffic congestion issues in light of known and imminent
development in the community.
Review and comment on study accuracy and completeness of the Bay
Link Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), dated October 2002.
Study and contrast in generic terms and also specifically to the conditions
of Miami Beach the advantages and disadvantages of the following
system modes (technology): bus, Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and Light Rail
Transit (LRT) or other variations (i.e. Trackless Trolley, etc.) Develop data
beyond the DEIS, if necessary, to support a full explanation of the different
transit modes. Comparison should include the effectiveness of each
individual transit mode and their projected passenger capture rates within
Miami Beach. Evaluate total life cycle cost for bus, BRT, LRT, and other
options; including necessary infrastructure and other similar factors to
enable the Commission to have a full understanding of the practical transit
modes available.
Evaluate the long term impact on land use and infrastructure of bus, BRT,
and LRT.
Evaluate how a bus, BRT, LRT, or other options fit into the regional
transportation system.
Provide a definitive description as to how the local and federal transit
project funding process works. Explain the consequences in project
funding and priority of prompt action to proceed with a Final Environmental
Impact Statement (FEIS) versus the approach of continuing to review and
discuss over the next years, and then proceeding with a FEIS.
Complete and provide the above tasks in a written document, inclusive of
text, drawings, graphic charts, etc.
Present findings and recommendations at public meetings and to the
Miami Beach City Commission no later than July 1 O, 2003.
Phase Two
Assist the City with evaluation of route alignments, station locations,
vehicle selection, etc. in the event the City Commission determines to
proceed with a FEIS.
Develop a preliminary transit master plan that would encompass the entire
city and delineate the steps necessary to have such plan funded in the
Federal transit project process,
F:~WORK'~ALL~0 Lucy\Bay Link Evalua~on.doc
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
Office of the City Man_ager
Letter to Commission No.
To:
From:
Subject:
Mayor David Dermer and
Members of the City Commission
Jorge M. Gonzalez ~ -~
City Manager /] ~"/'"
PROPOSED EVALUATION COMMITTEE FOR RFQ NO. 36-02103, FOR
EVALUATION OF RAPID TRANSIT OPTIONS FOR MIAMI BEACH.
Date: April 15, 2~)03
The purpose of this Letter to Commission is to update the Mayor and City Commission on
the Request for Qualifications (RFQ) No. 36-02/03 soliciting quotations for the Evaluation
of Rapid Transit Options for Miami Beach.
I am considering appointing the following seven (7) people to the evaluation committee:
Two (2) members as recommended by the Planning Board:
Prof. Francois LeJeune
Melvyn Schlesser
Two (2) members as recommended by the Transportation and Parking Committee:
Steven Nostrand, Chairman
Robert Warren
One (1) citizen-at-large:
Diane Downs, resident - 240 Collins Avenue
Two (2) City representatives:
Jorge Gomez, Planning Director
Jorge Chartrand, Assistant CIP Director
If you have any comments or questions regarding these appointments, please contact me
by Thursday, April 17, 2003.
JMG~J~B/~;~aj
F:\WORK~TRAV~vlELIA~VlPO\RapidTransitEval.ltc.doc
Afteraction
March 19, 2003
City of Miami Beach
Addendum item.
10:17:39 a.m.
ACTION: Motion made by Commissioner Steinberg to add item R9E as an emergency item to the agenda;
seconded by Commissioner Cruz; Voice vote: 7-0.
10:23:23 a.m.
R9E Discussion And Referral Regarding The MPO's 120-Day Extension For The Bay Link.
(Requested By Commissioner Richard L. Steinberg)
ACTION: Discussion held.
Motion made by Commissioner Gross to hire a consultant through an RFQ process to:
Phase 1. Study the alternatives of Light Rail Transit (LRT) and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) or other
variances, that the preliminary determination as to the mode of transit be brought to the
City Commission within 120 days. The consultant needs to compare and contrast LRT vs.
BRT.
Phase 2. Study the particular routes whether North Beach, Mid Beach and South Beach; and
Schedule a Special Commission meeting within 120 days to discuss the findings of the report, have a
presentation, and make a determination.
Seconded by Commissioner Steinberg; Voice vote 7-0. Robert Middaugh to handle.
Motion '1:
Motion made by Commissioner Steinberg to refer to the Neighborhoods Committee to discuss
what action, if any, the City needs to take during the 120 days window provided by the MPO.
No second offered.
Mayor Dermer stated that this issue is of great public importance and he does not want to put it into a
committee process when it has already been to City Commission.
Discussion continued.
Mayor Dermer stated that he recently gave the City Manager a memorandum requesting that the
Administration prepare information and a presentation on trackless trolleys, buses, routing, and how
Miami Beach routes will interface with the transit system Miami selects. He stated that this will give
the Commission a full view of the options, aesthetics, the effects on infrastructure, routes and
everything else. Robert Middaugh to handle.
Discussion continued.
Commissioners Gross and Bower raised the issue of the City engaging the services of a consultant.
Jorge Gonzalez, City Manager, stated that to do the study would require a competitive bid process to
acquire the services of a consultant. The RFP process typically takes 60-90 days and depending on
how future Commission Meeting dates workout, unless the Commission wants to waive competitive
bidding. He also stated that the County has approved its own consultant study that Miami-Dade
County Commissioner Barreiro has been requesting to study an elevated rail transportation system. It
will be 60-90 days before the County consultant's report is available.
Prepared by the City Clerk's Office Page No. 3
M:\$CMB\CITYC LER~AFTE RAC'r~2003~Afteractions\aa030319.dt)c
Afteraction
March 19, 2003
City of Miami Beach
Commissioner Smith stated that the Federal funds will be gone very quickly. There is a great deal of
competition between the communities for the remaining funds. In his opinion, he doesn't think the
MPO will give the City of Miami Beach a time extension beyond the 120 days.
Motion #2:
Motion made by Commissioner Bower to authorize the Administration to develop the scope for
an RFQ to engage the services of a consultant to study what is the best transit system for
Miami Beach. No second offered. Discussion continued.
Commissioner Gross asked what can reasonably be expected to be studied in the 120 day timeframe.
The threshold question is what mode of transit is this Commission interested in exploring and where
should the routes be located?
Jorge Gonzalez, City Manager, stated that he wants guidance as to what specifically the Commission
wants to accomplish with the RFQ and what the consultant will study.
Discussion continued.
Motion #3:
Motion made by Commissioner Gross to hire a consultant through an RFQ process to study in
phases:
Phase 1. The alternatives by comparing and contrasting, Light Rail Transit (LRT) and Bus Rapid
Transit (BRT) or other variances. That the preliminary determination as to the mode of
transit be brought to the City Commission, and to do this within 120 days.
Phase 2. Study the particular routes in North Beach, Mid Beach and South Beach. At the end of the
120 days the City can go to the MPO and request additional time to study the particular
route(s); but the MPO will know where the City is in the process. He stated that the
decision to grant additional time will be determined by the mode of transportation the City
chooses and how the study is conducted.
Discussion continued.
Jorge Gonzalez, City Manager, stated that the consultant should inform the City of the differences and
impact of mass transit versus rapid transit on Miami Beach. The phase 1 study should focus on a
route to Dade Boulevard. Phase 2 can study the remainder of the City. He suggested taking what is
in the current draft Environmental Impact Statement prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff, Inc. which was
prepared for the MPO and included BRT, and apply it to Miami Beach.
Amendment to Motion #3:
Commissioner Steinberg seconded the motion and added a friendly amendment that a Special
Commission be scheduled within 120 days to discuss the findings of the report, have a presentation,
and make a determination.
Commissioner Steinberg's amendment was accepted by Commissioner Gross.
Jorge Gonzalez, City Manager, stated that the Administration will work to get the RFQ out as
expeditiously as possible. He stated that he does not believe a waiver of competitive bid is
appropriate. The Administration will prepare the RFQ and come back to the Commission for approval
of a consultant in May. The scope of the RFQ will be developed based on what was said today, and
he will transmit the scope to the Commission via an LTC for their review and comments.
Jorge Gonzalez, City Manager, stated that the LTC will be placed on the City's website. He explained
that it will take him 60 days to get a consultant and that leaves 60 days for the consultant to do the
Prepared by the City Clerk's Office Page No. 3
M:\$CM B\CITYCLE R~AFTE RACT~2003~Afteractions\aa030319.~c
Afteraction March 19, 2003 City of Miami Beach
study and report back to the City Commission. He stated that he believes 60 days is probably enough
time to answer the question of the mode (BRT versus LRT).
Discussion continued.
Mayor Dermer instructed the City Attorney to prepare a referendum question for the November
election. Legal Department to handle.
Jorge Gonzalez, City Manager, stated that he wants to be very clear on his directions. He stated that
his direction is to 1) have the authorization to issue an RFQ; 2) the scope of the RFQ will be shared
with Commission via LTC for their review and input; 3) The Administration will bring back, as quickly
as possible, the selected consultant. He also stated that the project for the consultant is to report
back within 120 days with the answer to the question of mode, comparing bus rapid transit, light rail
transit or some other form of transportation and to give the pros and cons of each.
Mayor Dermer asked for the presentation of the trackless trolleys that was requested in his
memorandum. Robert Middaugh to handle.
Amendment:
Commissioner Bower asked to include in the study the technology involved in connecting elevated rail
to ground rail since the City of Miami Beach does not want elevated rail while it appears Miami-Dade
County Commissioner Barreiro is looking at heavy rail or elevated rail.
Commissioner Gross did not accept the amendment.
Commissioner Gross stated that he does not want to issue a second RFQ to do Phase II.
Motion #3, as proposed by Commissioner Gross and seconded as amended by Commissioner
Steinberg; Voice vote: 7-0.
Addendum item.
11:25:50 a.m.
Supplemental Material-Resolution:
R9F Discussion Of Florida Department Of Transportation's (FDOT) Plans Regarding Configuration Of
Harding Avenue.
(Requested By Vice-Mayor Luis R. Garcia, Jr.)
ACTION: Discussion held. Resolution No. 2003-25160 adopted. Motion made by
Commissioner Steinberg; seconded by Commissioner Bower; Voice vote: 6-0; Absent:
Commissioner Cruz. Vice-Mayor Garcia, Fred Beckmann and FDOT to meet to find an acceptable
solution and prepare a resolution. Commissioner Steinberg requested that the City Commission
authorize the Administration, in the event the discussions with FDOT fail, to add this issue to the City's
lobbyist priority list and also to try to enlist the support of the City's elected officials in Tallahassee.
Robert Middaugh to handle.
Vice-Mayor Garcia stated that there were two fatalities within the last year in almost the same spot.
Harding Avenue is a very dangerous street. The lanes are very narrow, there is parking on both sides
of the street, and the street is wide. The street is used as a thoroughfare by the City's neighbors to
the North to avoid paying tolls. He stated that he thought FDOT and the City had agreed on a plan
but FDOT has ignored the City's request. FDOT's solution will make the situation worse. Basically it
has maintained the unsafe conditions while eliminated parking. The issue is safety.
Prepared by the City Clerk's Office Page No. 3
M:\$C M B\C ITYC LER~AFTE RAC712003~Afteractions\aa030319.d~c