Loading...
LTC 084-2023 Update on the Miami-Dade County Beach Corridor Baylink ProjectMIAMI BEACH NO. LTC# TO: FROM: DATE: LETTER TO COMMISSION Honorable Mayor Dan Gelber and Members of the City Commission Alina T. Hudak, City Managffe< February 21, 2023 SUBJECT: Update on the Miami-Dade County Beach Corridor/Baylink Project The purpose of this Letter to Commission (L TC) is to provide information on the Miami-Dade County ("County") Beach Corridor/Baylink project ("Project"). The Project proposes a rapid mass transit connection from Design District to South Beach. The Project is comprised of three (3) distinct geographic segments: the Miami Extension along North Miami Avenue from the existing School Board Metromover station to the Design District; the Bay Crossing/Trunkline from a multimodal hub in Downtown Miami to a proposed station at Washington Avenue and 5 Street via the MacArthur Causeway; and the Miami Beach Extension along Washington Avenue from 5 Street to the Miami Beach Convention Center (to be implemented as a separate County project). On January 30, 2020, the Miami-Dade Transportation Planning Organization unanimously selected a locally preferred alternative (LPA) for the project. Specifically for the City of Miami Beach service, the LPA consists of an automated and elevated rubber-tire technology (monorail or automated people mover (APM)) along the MacArthur Causeway/5 Street corridors to a proposed station in the vicinity of 5 Street and Washington Avenue; and bi-directional at-grade dedicated bus/trolley lanes along Washington Avenue to connect to/from the Miami Beach Convention Center (to be implemented separately). New stations along the Bay Crossing/Trunkline are proposed at Miami Children's Museum on Watson Island, at 5 Street/Lenox Avenue, and at 5 Street/Washington Avenue. In July 2022, as part of the Project Development & Environment (PD&E) phase of the Project, the County released two reports: the Draft Preliminary Engineering Report prepared by Parsons Transportation Group Inc. and the Draft Environmental Assessment prepared by Parsons Transportation Group, Inc. and E Sciences, Inc. On August 1, 2022, the City Administration was notified by County staff in the Department of Transportation and Public Works (DTPW) that the PD&E reports for the Beach Corridor Bay Crossing/Trunkline were available for public review and comment, and that DTPW was hosting a public meeting in our City on August 9, 2022. On August 9, 2022, Mayor Dan Gelber transmitted letters to Miami-Dade County Mayor Daniella Levine Cava and Board of County Commissioners Chairman Jose "Pepe" Diaz (Attachment 1) outlining some of the City's concerns with the monorail project as proposed in the County's reports. In addition, City staff from the Environment and Sustainability, Transportation and Mobility, Public Works, and Planning departments expeditiously reviewed the draft report and provided technical comments to DTPW staff and its consultant team on September 22, 2022. DTPW responded to the City's comments on October 18, 2022; however, some comments remain outstanding. 084-2023 Page 2 of3 L TC Update on the Miami-Dade County Beach Corridor/Bay/ink Project February 21, 2023 While the County had been working with a private consortium (Miami Beach Monorail Partners, LLC (MBM)) since October 2020 on a proposed monorail solution for the Bay Crossing/Trunkline connection from a proposed station at Herald Plaza in Downtown Miami to South Beach, on November 2, 2022, Miami-Dade County Mayor Daniella Levine Cava formally informed the Board of County Commissioners via memorandum (Attachment 2) that the County was no longer pursuing a public-private partnership with MBM due to significant pricing increase and instead pursuing a new solicitation for an extension of the existing Metromover system from the Museum Park Metromover station in Downtown Miami to a proposed station at Washington Avenue/5 Street. The memo from Mayor Levine Cava cited the community-desired "one-seat ride", operational efficiencies, and capital and operational cost savings as significant advantages of a Metromover extension over a monorail solution. In addition, County staff has advised that it is in the process of developing technological upgrades to the existing Metromover system that will allow for faster travel times (i.e. express route) between Government Center station and Museum Park Metromover station. It is important to note that a Metromover extension and "one-seat ride" from a major multimodal hub in Downtown Miami aligns with the Administration's and City Commission's requests and adopted City Commission resolution associated with the Project (Attachment 3 - City Commission Resolution No. 2019-30911 ). At the February 1, 2023 City Commission meeting, County Commissioner Eileen Higgins and DTPW Director Eulois Cleckley presented an update on the Beach Corridor/Baylink project. During the presentation, Mr. Cleckley described the County's two-step approach to procuring the design and construction of the Project. The first step would consist of issuing a Request For Qualifications (RFQ) leading to a qualifications-based selection of short-listed firms. The second step would consist of issuing a Request For Proposals (RFP), including a design criteria package, to the short-listed firms leading to selection of a firm based on the merits of its technical and financial proposal. While the County did not provide a timeline for the completion of the procurement documents, it expressed a commitment to include a Miami Beach representative to participate in the upcoming selection committee process for this competitive solicitation. Pursuant to City Commission direction, the Administration has requested to review and provide comments on the County's draft procurement documents (RFQ and RFP), including the design criteria package, however, the County has advised that the draft RFQ document will not be available to the City for another few weeks as the documents are still in draft form and being reviewed by the Florida Department of Transportation for technical sufficiency. County staff indicated they will endeavor to provide the City with the RFQ prior to issuance. In addition, as you are aware, the Baylink public meeting originally scheduled by the County for February 16, 2023 has been temporarily postponed by the County citing venue capacity constraints and concerns with anticipated traffic congestion associated with the Boat Show. As follow-up to the City's outstanding comments and the County's responses on the PD&E reports, the Administration has requested a detailed briefing from DTPW on the technical reports and procurement documents. The County advised that it would coordinate a briefing for City staff as it relates to the PD&E reports. In addition, if desired by the City Commission, the Administration is prepared to engage a consultant to conduct a thorough and independent technical review of the PD&E reports and procurement documents and present its findings to the City Commission. A similar effort was undertaken in 2019 when the Administration engaged lnfraStrategies to conduct an independent review of the County's draft RFP for the Bay Crossing/Trunkline as well as various draft environmental and engineering reports available at that time. The consultant's findings and recommendations were presented to the City Commission at the January 15, 2020 Commission meeting. Page 3 of3 L TC Update on the Miami-Dade County Beach Corridor/Bay/ink Project February 21, 2023 The Beach Corridor/Baylink project is without a doubt one of the most significant infrastructure projects in our horizon with the potential to reshape our urban landscape and transform our City's future. Transit projects of this magnitude will impact communities for generations and have a lasting impact on the City's mobility, sustainability, quality-of-life, and economic viability. While the City has historically expressed support for an efficient and effective rapid mass transit link between Miami Beach and Downtown Miami, including a "one-seat ride" from a multimodal hub in Downtown Miami to a hub in Miami Beach, the Administration is sensitive to the concerns recently raised by various resident groups in our City. As such, staff will require time to conduct a thorough review of all relevant Project documents (once made available by the County) and to coordinate with our County partners to evaluate and formulate a professional recommendation based on the technical merits of the Project and what is in the best interest of the City. Please feel free to reach out to me if you have any questions. Attachment 1: Letters from Mayor Dan Gelber dated August 9, 2022 Attachment 2: Memorandum from Mayor Daniella Levine Cava dated November 2, 2022 Attachment 3: City Commission Resolution No. 2019-30911 R/i)� ATH/RW/JRG . ~ . August 9, 2022 Honorable Mayor Daniella Levine Cava Miami-Dade County Office of the Mayor Stephen P. Clark Center 111 NW 1st Street, 29th Floor Miami, FL 33128 RE: Draft Environmental Assessment for the Beach Corridor Rapid Transit Bay Crossing/Trunk Line Dear Mayor Levine Cava: I appreciate your leadership and the earnest efforts of the entire Miami-Dade Board of County Commissioners as we all seek to address the complex and pressing transportation challenges facing our community. These are not easy issues and clearly our County Commissioners and staff are working extremely hard to craft feasible solutions. Respectfully, however, I believe the Beach Corridor Bay Crossing, as currently proposed in the Draft Environmental Assessment (EA), will not achieve this goal, has suffered from unforeseen and massive cost increases and delays, and will subject our residents to the significant disruption that comes with the construction of such a major project. Further, it is distracting us from pursuing more viable options at a time when our community needs action. On August 1, 2022, we were notified by your staff in the Department of Transportation and Public Works (DTPW) that the Draft EA for the Beach Corridor Bay Crossing/Trunk Line was available for public review and comment, and that DTPW was hosting a public meeting in our City on August 9th regarding the Draft EA. DAN GELBER MAYO R CITY OF M IAMI BEACH I 700 CONVENTION CENTER DRIVE, MIAMI BEACH , FLORI DA 33139 305.673 .7035 • OANOELBER@MIAMIBEACHFL.OOV I would like to take this opportunity to reiterate key concerns that our City continues to have with the Beach Corridor Trunk Line project as described in the Draft EA, with the hope that we can inform your decision-making and provide full transparency to this process. While our City firmly believes that rapid transit connectivity to the mainland is crucial for our City’s and region’s mobility, economic sustainability, and quality-of-life, we have consistently articulated various concerns with regard to a monorail technology and a proposed station at Herald Plaza that do not appear to have been addressed through the project development process. City Commission Resolution # 2019-30911 adopted on July 19, 2019 establishes the following goal for a cross-bay mass transit project: a direct, seamless, one-seat ride to Miami Beach from an integrated mobility hub in Miami such as Miami Central Station, Government Center, or Overtown Transit Village to a multimodal hub in Miami Beach. Furthermore, you may be aware that in January 2020, the City’s independent transit consultant conducted a peer review of the Draft Project Development and Environment (PD&E) Study and found that, while light rail transit would be a more contextual option in Miami Beach (than elevated rail), an express automated people mover (i.e. Metromover) may also provide a direct one-seat ride from Washington Avenue/5 Street to Government Center. Despite our Resolution and our independent consultant’s report, the Draft EA states “DTPW proposes to construct the elevated transit guideway adjacent to and south of MacArthur Causeway from Herald Plaza in Miami to the median of 5th Street in Miami Beach near Washington Avenue.” Our position continues to be that a monorail technology and a proposed station at Herald Plaza will not accomplish the goal of regional connectivity as outlined in the City Commission Resolution. Simply stated, we believe that a monorail shuttling people between a stop on 5th Street and a proposed station at Herald Plaza will force several unwarranted transfers and be inefficient and ineffective in terms of providing regional connectivity and mobility for the tens of thousands of commuters, residents, and visitors traveling to and from Miami Beach daily. Most commuters will continue to use their private vehicle as their mode of choice unless a meaningful and convenient regional transit connection is provided from an integrated major hub in Miami to a multimodal hub in Miami Beach. In the near term, I urge the County to expedite the Beach Express North - Bus Express Rapid Transit service connecting Golden Glades Multimodal Facility and Miami Intermodal Center/Earlington Heights Metrorail Station to Miami Beach via the Julia Tuttle Causeway. I am convinced that service will represent a tangible improvement in the daily commute of thousands of workforce employees who reside in the Greater Miami area. By way of this letter, I would also like to formally request an update from DTPW staff on the status of the P3 Trunk Line project. It has been more than two and a half years since DTPW provided a briefing or presentation to the City Commission or City Administration on the P3 project, albeit after multiple requests from City staff. The City Commission, Administration, and I would appreciate your consideration of this request. Ultimately, the cost to build and operate the monorail project, according to numerous reports, has only ballooned since it was initially pitched as a more affordable option. And the proponents of the project have been unable to adhere to the deadlines initially contemplated. At this point, I believe the monorail option is only distracting our community from pursuing more viable and, candidly, much more practical options. I think it’s time to get off this train. Thank you, again, for your service to our community. Sincerely, Dan Gelber Mayor August 9, 2022 Honorable Chairman Jose “Pepe” Diaz Miami-Dade County Board of County Commissioners Stephen P. Clark Center 111 NW 1st Street, Suite 220 Miami, FL 33128 RE: Draft Environmental Assessment for the Beach Corridor Rapid Transit Bay Crossing/Trunk Line Dear Chairman Diaz: I appreciate your leadership and the earnest efforts of the entire Miami-Dade Board of County Commissioners as we all seek to address the complex and pressing transportation challenges facing our community. These are not easy issues and clearly our County Commissioners and staff are working extremely hard to craft feasible solutions. Respectfully, however, I believe the Beach Corridor Bay Crossing, as currently proposed in the Draft Environmental Assessment (EA), will not achieve this goal, has suffered from unforeseen and massive cost increases and delays, and will subject our residents to the significant disruption that comes with the construction of such a major project. Further, it is distracting us from pursuing more viable options at a time when our community needs action. On August 1, 2022, we were notified by your staff in the Department of Transportation and Public Works (DTPW) that the Draft EA for the Beach Corridor Bay Crossing/Trunk Line was available for public review and comment, and that DTPW was hosting a public meeting in our City on August 9th regarding the Draft EA. DAN GELBER MAYO R CITY OF M IAMI BEACH I 700 CONVENTION CENTER DRIVE, MIAMI BEACH , FLORI DA 33139 305.673 .7035 • OANOELBER@MIAMIBEACHFL.OOV I would like to take this opportunity to reiterate key concerns that our City continues to have with the Beach Corridor Trunk Line project as described in the Draft EA, with the hope that we can inform your decision-making and provide full transparency to this process. While our City firmly believes that rapid transit connectivity to the mainland is crucial for our City’s and region’s mobility, economic sustainability, and quality-of-life, we have consistently articulated various concerns with regard to a monorail technology and a proposed station at Heral d Plaza that do not appear to have been addressed through the project development process. City Commission Resolution # 2019-30911 adopted on July 19, 2019 establishes the following goal for a cross-bay mass transit project: a direct, seamless, one-seat ride to Miami Beach from an integrated mobility hub in Miami such as Miami Central Station, Government Center, or Overtown Transit Village to a multimodal hub in Miami Beach. Furthermore, you may be aware that in January 2020, the City’s independent transit consultant conducted a peer review of the Draft Project Development and Environment (PD&E) Study and found that, while light rail transit would be a more contextual option in Miami Beach (than elevated rail), an express automated people mover (i.e. Metromover) may also provide a direct one-seat ride from Washington Avenue/5 Street to Government Center. Despite our Resolution and our independent consultant’s report, the Draft EA states “DTPW proposes to construct the elevated transit guideway adjacent to and south of MacArthur Causeway from Herald Plaza in Miami to the median of 5th Street in Miami Beach near Washington Avenue.” Our position continues to be that a monorail technology and a proposed station at Herald Plaza will not accomplish the goal of regional connectivity as outlined in the City Commission Resolution. Simply stated, we believe that a monorail shuttling people between a stop on 5th Street and a proposed station at Herald Plaza will force several unwarranted transfers and be inefficient and ineffective in terms of providing regional connectivity and mobility for the tens of thousands of commuters, residents, and visitors traveling to and from Miami Beach daily. Most commuters will continue to use their private vehicle as their mode of choice unless a meaningful and convenient regional transit connection is provided from an integrated major hub in Miami to a multimodal hub in Miami Beach. In the near term, I urge the County to expedite the Beach Express North - Bus Express Rapid Transit service connecting Golden Glades Multimodal Facility and Miami Intermodal Center/Earlington Heights Metrorail Station to Miami Beach via the Julia Tuttle Causeway. I am convinced that service will represent a tangible improvement in the daily commute of thousands of workforce employees who reside in the Greater Miami area. By way of this letter, I would also like to formally request an update from DTPW staff on the status of the P3 Trunk Line project. It has been more than two and a half years since DTPW provided a briefing or presentation to the City Commission or City Administration on the P3 project, albeit after multiple requests from City staff. The City Commission, Administration, and I would appreciate your consideration of this request. Ultimately, the cost to build and operate the monorail project, according to numerous reports, has only ballooned since it was initially pitched as a more affordable option. And the proponents of the project have been unable to adhere to the deadlines initially contemplated. At this point, I believe the monorail option is only distracting our community from pursuing more viable and, candidly, much more practical options. I think it’s time to get off this train. Thank you, again, for your service to our community. Sincerely, Dan Gelber Mayor c: Miami-Dade Board of County Commissioners Date: November 2, 2022 To: Honorable Chairman Jose “Pepe” Diaz and Members, Board of County Commissioners From: Daniella Levine Cava Mayor Subject: Recommendation of Metromover Extension for Rapid Mass Transit Solution for the Beach Corridor/Baylink My administration is committed to developing rapid transit solutions that improve mobility, reduce traffic, and expand access to job opportunities – while delivering projects that provide maximum value to taxpayers. As we work to accelerate progress on the SMART Program strategic transit plan, I directed the Department of Transportation and Public Works (DTPW) to develop a beach corridor solution that provides the best experience to users while mitigating costs and project delays. Our staff’s analysis indicated that a seamless extension of the County’s existing Metromover system to Miami Beach – the community-preferred, one-seat option – would yield significant benefits and provide the highest overall value to residents. While monorail technology was originally estimated at a lower cost in 2018, proposed costs have escalated significantly – the latest pricing in the Interim Agreement with MBM Partners, LLC (MBM) includes a capital cost of $1.3 billion. Although we provided time for MBM to propose cost-saving measures, the monorail proposal has not come down from this price. As a result of the substantial increase in cost and additional concerns outlined below and attached, I cannot recommend that the Board proceed to enter into a Project Agreement with MBM for the monorail transit solution. Accordingly, the interim phase has expired without a recommendation for an agreement. It’s critical that we make fiscally responsible infrastructure investment decisions and act as good stewards of public tax dollars, as we aim to expand transit across Miami-Dade with limited resources. A Metromover option can accomplish the much-needed Beach Corridor/Baylink connection at a lower cost than the original monorail plan, while delivering a more accessible one-seat ride to residents and visitors. Further, DTPW can repurpose engineering and environmental work already completed for the monorail proposal to ensure we deliver the Metromover extension in a comparable timeframe. Pricing Increase Under the terms of the Interim Agreement approved by this Board in October 2020, MBM was to complete predevelopment activities while the final long-term Project Agreement was negotiated. From November 2020 through October 2022, County staff negotiated in good faith with MBM to arrive at a final Project Agreement. During the negotiation phase, the capital cost of the project more than doubled from the original proposal. While some increases were expected – due to the increased scope for an additional transit station in Miami Beach, as well as changes in economic conditions related to the pandemic – the cost increases have significantly exceeded what was expected. Further, due to the change in interest rates, an even more substantial increase in availability payments is indicated by MBM. These significant cost escalations may minimize the County’s ability to mitigate other risks as the project moves forward, and could jeopardize our ability to finance and procure the other priorities outlined in the SMART Plan proforma. Benefits of a Metromover Solution Expanding Metromover for the Baylink connection offers numerous advantages and closely aligns with the Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) adopted by the Miami-Dade Transportation Planning Organization in January 2020. A M d MIAMI·· emoran um emiiiJ Honorable Chairman Jose “Pepe” Diaz and Members, Board of County Commissioners Page 2 key benefit is the ability to offer users a one-seat ride from any Metromover station to Miami Beach and back. This is a significant advantage over a monorail solution which requires a transfer – integrating seamlessly with existing transit infrastructure, while maintaining comparable travel times and passenger capacities. This solution also provides operational efficiencies associated with extending a system that the County is familiar with and already operates. The extension of Metromover allows for County staff to operate and maintain the system, providing economies of scale and eliminating the uncertainty and inefficiencies that an entirely new mode of transportation would introduce. It is also important to note that the Beach Corridor of the SMART Plan considers multiple transit extensions beyond the Baylink connection to Miami Beach, including the expansion of Metromover service north to the Design District. Maintaining consistent service to both Miami Beach and Design District yields the greatest user, system and community benefits. We also anticipate that the Metromover solution will yield capital and operational cost savings, enhance the County’s ability to gain support from funding partners, and provide the opportunity to explore American- made fleet vehicles. Next Steps To implement the Beach Corridor/Baylink transit extension as swiftly as possible, staff will proceed to advertise a competitive solicitation for a Metromover extension. During the term of the Interim Agreement, MBM completed required predevelopment work – including topographical and utility surveys, geotechnical studies, environmental assessments, structural analyses, and more – which will be used for the design criteria package in the advertisement, allowing the vendor community to provide more refined pricing by reducing project risk associated with geotechnical, environmental, and utility risk. The project will undergo competitive solicitation to facilitate selection because of qualifications, technical capabilities, cost, and overall best value. The immediate advertisement of the solicitation will mitigate delays and allow for the solution to be delivered in a comparable timeframe to that of the monorail solution. Engineering and other work performed to-date with relation to the project will be leveraged to the furthest extent possible to accelerate procurement. It is anticipated that the advertisement, evaluation, negotiations, and presentation of a recommendation to award to the Board can be achieved by October 2023. This will facilitate an accelerated delivery with project design commencing in 2024, construction beginning in 2025, and operations anticipated by 2029. We have the unique opportunity to implement a world-class, user-friendly transit solution that creates a vital link for residents, visitors, and businesses between Miami’s urban core, Miami Beach, and the economic engines of Miami International Airport and PortMiami, as we work to more seamlessly connect all corners of our community. I look forward to providing the Board with regular updates on the status of this project. Please don’t hesitate to reach out to me or DTPW Director Eulois Cleckley with any questions. Attachments c: Geri Bonzon-Keenan, County Attorney Gerald K. Sanchez, First Assistant County Attorney Jess McCarty, Executive Assistant County Attorney Office of the Mayor Senior Staff Eulois Cleckley, DTPW Director Yinka Majekodunmi, Commission Auditor Jennifer Moon, Chief, Office of Policy and Budgetary Affairs Basia Pruna, Director, Clerk of the Board Date: To: From: Subject: d MIAMI-~ Memoran um rmmmiiiil' November 1, 2022 Mayor Daniella Levine Cava Eulois Cleckley, Director & CEO~ Miami-Dade Department of Transportation and Public Works Conclusion of Negotiations with MBM Partners, LLC and Recommendation for a Beach Corridor I Baylink Solution On October 20, 2020, under Resolution No. R-1080-20, the Board approved the award of an Interim Agreement to MBM Partners, LLC (MBM) to perform pre-development activities and have the exclusive right to negotiate a comprehensive 30-year Project Agreement with the County to design, build, finance, operate and maintain a monorail system from Downtown Miami/Overtown area of the City of Miami connecting to two locations in the City of Miami Beach. As part of the negotiations, MBM provided pricing updates which included a detailed breakdown of capital costs as well as a breakdown of the operating and maintenance costs. These figures were to be used to derive the availability payments that would be made by the County to MBM for the term of the Project Agreement. The pricing updates have continued to increase throughout the term of the Interim Agreement. While increases were expected as a result of the additional station in Miami Beach as well as impacts on material and labor costs as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, this cost exceeds the amount supported by the cost analysis, with the most recent pricing including a capital cost of approximately $1.3 billion. Given the importance of developing a regional transportation solution that connects Miami's urban core with Miami Beach, DTPW will proceed to develop a transit solution that maximizes the user experience, enhances community and operational benefits, while mitigating taxpayer costs and delivering the project in a timeframe comparable to that of the monorail solution. Attached you will find report of negotiation results for RFP-01353 which outlines the process undertaken and associated outcomes. Attachment: Report of Negotiation Result RFP-01353: Interim Agreement for the Design, Construction, Financing, Operation and Maintenance of the Rapid Mass Transit Solution for the Beach Corridor Trunk Line Page2 c: Jimmy Morales, Chief Operations Officer Josenrique Cueto, Deputy Director, Chief Project Delivery Officer DTPW Eddie Gonzalez, Assistant County Attorney Bruce Libhaber, Assistant County Attorney Monica Rizo, Assistant County Attorney d MIAMI-~ Memoran um tmmmiil' Date: To: Thru: From: Subject: Background: October 31, 2022 Eulois Cleckley Director and CEO Department of Transportation and Public Works Josenrique Cueto, P .E., LEED Green Associate, ENV SP Deputy Director -Chief Project Delivery Officer Department of Transportation and Public Works Ryan Fisher, P.E. Project Manager, Manager Highway Bridge Engineering Department of Transportation and Public Works Beth Goldsmith, CPPB, ENV SP Acting Chief Negotiator Information Technology Department Report of Negotiation Results for RFP-01353: Interim Agreement for the Design, Construction, Financing, Operation and Maintenance of the Rapid Mass Transit Solution for the Beach Corridor Trunk Line On October 20, 2020, under Resolution No. R-1080-20, the Board approved the award of an Interim Agreement to MBM Partners, LLC (MBM) to perform pre-development activities and have the exclusive right to negotiate a comprehensive 30-year Project Agreement with the County to design, build, finance, operate and maintain a monorail system from Downtown Miami/Overtown area of the City of Miami connecting to two locations in the City of Miami Beach. Under the terms of the Interim Agreement, the County receives proprietary ownership of all predevelopment work completed by MBM, including utility identification, environmental reviews, topographic studies, geotechnical studies, roadway and drainage studies, structural analysis and a basis of design. The long-term Project Agreement was to include the final terms, conditions, and all costs associated with the project to be paid by the County via availability payments over the 30-year agreement term. The Interim Agreement established a not-to-exceed capital cost of $586,500,000 for the solution, not including the second station to be located within the City of Miami Beach. The results of negotiation process are summarized below. Technical Working Groups: Pursuant to the Interim Agreement, the following technical working groups were formed: • Environmental / Permitting • Guideway Design • Facilities Design • Constructability and Traffic Management • Right of Way and Transit Oriented Development • Public Information and Outreach • Vehicles, Systems, Operations and Maintenance • System Integration Page 2 Ryan Fisher, P.E. Report of Negotiation Team for RFP-01353: Interim Agreement for the Design, Construction, Financing, Operation And Maintenance Of The Rapid Mass Transit Solution For The Beach Corridor Trunk Line From November 2020 through April 2022, meetings for each working group were held weekly, bi-weekly, or monthly depending on the number of actions to be discussed. Working groups consisted of representatives from MBM, the County, County technical consultants and representatives from the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). During sessions, various technical discussions were held in each subject area to facilitate the completion of the predevelopment work, completion of conceptual design, establishment of construction means and methods, and development of the technical appendixes for the Project Agreement. In April 2022, most discussion topics had been addressed, therefore structured sessions were discontinued. The parties continued to exchange technical feedback via email or in ad hoc meetings on specific issues. Interim Agreement Design Deliverables: During the term of the Interim Agreement, MBM produced predevelopment deliverables required per the scope of the agreement. Prior to issuing acceptance of any deliverable, the County reviewed the deliverables for conformance with the technical requirements of the Interim Agreement, and where applicable, provided the deliverable to the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) for review and comment. Comments were responded to by MBM, comment resolution meetings were held, and submittals were updated to achieve final acceptance by the County. These predevelopment deliverables are reusable assets to the County in terms of geotechnical exploration, preliminary foundation design, guideway alignment, utility location and preliminary relocation coordination, conceptual power systems supply, concept level traffic control plans and sequencing, traffic engineering and studies, 15% roadway and drainage design, 25% station and facility design, conceptual systems and vehicles layout and concept of operations. The County has proprietary ownership over all deliverables required under the Interim Agreement and has received all deliverables in their native file formats. Legal, Commercial, and Financial Working Group: In addition to the technical working groups, a legal, commercial, and financial working group was formed to include appropriate decision makers from MBM and DTPW, representatives acting on behalf of the Internal Services Department and County Attorney's Office, as well as outside financial and technical consultants. This working group was responsible for the development of all contractual documents related to the Project Agreement, including terms and conditions, legal provisions, and technical and financial appendixes, amounting to more than 800 pages of contractual documents. This working group was responsible for the negotiation of all aspects of the Project Agreement and began meeting in January 2021 following the establishment of initial draft documents. Initial sessions to determine key areas of negotiation were held virtually, with multi-day in person sessions held in December 2021. Sessions continued to be on various topics, followed by an additional round multi-day in person meetings in May 2022. The working group was able to successfully establish most parameters of the Project Agreement in a manner that provided appropriate protections for the County in a manner consistent with public-private partnership market standards. Upon resolution of the majority of provisions, major points of negotiation, as further described below, remained as topics of discussion, including three primary aspects: 1) Project Risk such as unknown site conditions, utilities risk, and governmental approval risk; 2) design, construction, operation, and maintenance considerations; and 3) Price. Page 3 Ryan Fisher, P.E. Report of Negotiation Team for RFP-01353: Interim Agreement for the Design, Construction, Financing, Operation And Maintenance Of The Rapid Mass Transit Solution For The Beach Corridor Trunk Line Project Risk Negotiations: Key areas of project risk have played a significant role in negotiations to achieve the Project Agreement. These included geotechnical risk, utility risk, unknown site conditions, and governmental approval (i.e., permitting) risk. The County has maintained a position, consistent with the original RFP, that MBM should bare the financial risk of geotechnical and utility risk with time relief allowed by the County. The County has offered some allowable compensation for unknown site conditions under specific parameters negotiated by the parties. Regarding governmental approval risks, per the Interim Agreement, the County has borne the risk of various conceptual permits, including completion of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) environmental assessment process. The County's position has remained that MBM would be responsible for any reevaluation of governmental approvals triggered by the means and methods being proposed by MBM. While significant progress was made on these topics, the final tum of the terms and conditions received from MBM on October 24, 2022, did not remedy the County's concerns regarding project risk. Additionally, the topics of project bonding and insurance requirements remain unresolved. Accordingly, final agreement has not been achieved as staffs position remains that given the cost of the solution, the risk profile places too much burden on the County. Design, Construction, Operation and Maintenance Negotiations: Provisions pertaining to the design, construction, operation, and maintenance represent the most voluminous portion of the Project Agreement. Hundreds of pages of provisions were reviewed and mutually agreed to by the parties. A final round of documents was provided by MBM well after close of business on October 28, 2022. As it pertains to design and construction, two main areas of dissent remain. The first being that MBM has maintained the position that the basis of design should take precedence over established codes and standards. The County has maintained the position that codes and standards, particularly those established by FDOT as the owner of the majority of the right of way needed for the project, must have authority over the basis of design. Secondly, MBM has failed to provide any design or technical provisions for the vehicles, despite multiple requests from the County. Staff does not recommend finalizing the Project Agreement without the ability to review provisions with the County's consultants that have technical expertise in this vehicle type. Regarding operation and maintenance, the parties were able to reach resolution on all material issues. Of note, the County agreed to take on armed guard services at transit stations. Price Negotiations: The Interim Agreement required the submission of three pricing updates from MBM, including a detailed breakdown of capital costs of the solution as well as a breakdown of the operating and maintenance costs. These figures are used to derive the availability payments that will be made by the County to MBM for the term of the Project Agreement. Price Update 1: The first pricing update was received November 15, 2021, and included a capital cost of $917,000,000, including the additional station in the City of Miami Beach and the associated engineering and infrastructure changes to update the monorail from a shuttle system to a loop system. The associated annual availability payment to the County, inclusive of the operation and maintenance of the solution as well as the repayment of the capital costs, was approximately $99,000,000. Page4 Ryan Fisher, P.E. Report of Negotiation Team for RFP-01353: Interim Agreement for the Design, Construction, Financing, Operation And Maintenance Of The Rapid Mass Transit Solution For The Beach Corridor Trunk Line Upon receipt of the price update, the County requested a more detailed breakdown of unit pricing in the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) format to conduct a more detailed cost analysis and understand areas of price increase in greater detail. The County requested MBM to review the costs and identify areas of reduction. Two value engineering meetings were held in which the MBM presented changes to the design or the performance standards which they felt could result in cost savings. The County accepted proposed changes that were not impactful to the overall quality of the project, such as roof type for facilities and the fac;ade of the maintenance facility. However, proposed items that would have negatively impact user experience, and therefore ridership, or were contrary to the original technical specifications established in the original solicitations, were not accepted such as uncovered walkways, a reduction in the number of escalators and elevators, a reduction in the scope of the multimodal facility requiring a substantial distance between the two platforms, and removal of a mezzanine level the downtown station which would have impacted passenger flow. Price Update 2: The second pricing update was received on January 18, 2022, and included a capital cost of $979,000,000 as well as an additional budget of $90,000,000 for cost escalations over the five- year period expected for construction, bring the total capital cost to approximately $1,069,000,000, and an approximate annual availability payment of $117,300,000. In response to this cost, on March 21, 2022, the County Mayor issued a six-month extension of the Interim Agreement and a memorandum advising that the cost was unacceptable and specifically directed MBM to find ways to bring the cost back to a figure that reasonably aligned with the original project cost estimate including in the Interim Agreement and to finalize an appropriate risk profile, design and construction parameters, and a sustainable long-term operating model. The County and MBM met to establish the schedule for the remaining negotiation meetings and milestones for document exchanges to allow MBM time to re-evaluate the pricing of the project as well as alternative concepts with the intent of fulfilling the County Mayor's direction. Price Update 3: The third pricing update was received on August 10, 2022, and included a capital cost of $1,201,956,755 as well as additional budget of $93,750,000 for cost escalations over the five-year period expected for construction, bringing the total capital cost to approximately $1,295,706,755, and an approximate annual availability payment of $159,584,609. County staff, along with third party technical and financial consultants evaluated the capital cost and found that project wide the pricing was about 20% higher than expected. Areas of price increase from the initial costs established in the Interim Agreement included a 435% increase for systems, 381 % for the vehicle maintenance storage facility, 170% increase in vehicles cost, and 56% increase for professional services. The civil construction price increased 38% and stations costs increase of 83%, however, those increases are consistent with other increases being seen in Page5 Ryan Fisher, P.E. Report of Negotiation Team for RFP-01353: Interim Agreement for the Design, Construction, Financing, Operation And Maintenance Of The Rapid Mass Transit Solution For The Beach Corridor Trunk Line other capital construction projects as a result of changes in market conditions for concrete and steel construction over the term with verifiable structural concrete price escalation of approximately 75% between May 2020 and May 2022 for civil infrastructure projects in Florida. In addition to the pricing for the monorail solution, the third pricing update also included an alternative solution proposal for a cable-pulled car technology with a capital expenditure stated to be $1,040,000,000 and a 20% reduction in the availability payment. Staff analyzed the cable-pulled car technology option proposed by the Concessionaire and deemed that it does not fit in to the current technologies used by the County's existing mass transit systems specifically the machinery and equipment which is outdated technologically and may not be preferrable in the environmental conditions of the project. This system would pose operations and maintenance challenges for the County in the future. This type of technology was deemed to not be a viable option, especially due to the cost in excess of$1B, as this was higher than the second pricing update capital charge which resulted in the request to explore all options to make the project financially viable. The findings of the County's analysis were used as the basis for the price component of the final negotiations more thoroughly described in the following section. Final Negotiations: The parties convened for a final in person negotiation session on October 7, 2022. Negotiation topics included in depth discussion around all project risks described in the foregoing section, high level discussion regarding the outstanding design, construction, operation, and maintenance provisions, and specific discussion regarding Price Update 3. The County presented information regarding the price analysis that had been done, indicating to MBM the areas that the County had determined to be excessive. MBM was advised that staff could not recommend support of the project at the cost included in Price Update 3, even with adjustments to the risk profile of the Project Agreement. It was agreed that documents would continue to be circulated between the parties to establish final positions. On October 12, 2022, the County requested MBM to provide a best and final price offering. On October 24, 2022, MBM notified the County that no price reduction was to be expected. Consensus Statement: The capital cost of the project is more than double (221 % ) the original proposal, and while increases due to the increased scope for an additional transit station in the City of Miami Beach as well as changes in economic conditions were expected, this cost exceeds the amount supported by the cost analysis. Further, due to the change in interest rates from 3.34% to 5.22%, an even more substantial increase in the year one availability payment from $61,043,750 to $159,584,609 (261 %) is indicated by MBM. These significant costs may minimize the County's ability to mitigate the other risks it would need to take on if the project were to move forward with and may also jeopardize the ability to finance and procure other legislative priorities outlined in the SMART Plan proforma. Additionally, those project risk and design and construction outlined herein remain. As a result of these factors, the results of the negotiations are being presented for consideration to proceed without a recommendation for a Project Agreement. 2019-30911 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, ACCEPTING THE RECOMMENDATIONS MADE AT THE CITY COMMISSION TRANSPORTATION WORKSHOP HELD ON JULY 15, 2019, AND DIRECTING THE CITY ADMINISTRATION TO WORK WITH ALL STRATEGIC MIAMI AREA RAPID TRANSIT ("SMART") PLAN BEACH CORRIDOR AND BUS EXPRESS RAPID TRANSIT ("BERT") PROJECT PARTNERS, INCLUDING MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA ("COUNTY), FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, MIAMI-DADE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING ORGANIZATION, AND THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA TO INCORPORATE THE FOLLOWING GOALS WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPOSED BEACH CORRIDOR PROJECT CONNECTING MIAMI BEACH TO THE MAINLAND ("BEACH CORRIDOR PROJECT"): (1) EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT CONNECTIVITY REGARDLESS OF MODALITY, TO PROVIDE A DIRECT, SEAMLESS, ONE-SEAT RIDE CONNECTION FROM A TO BE DETERMINED LOCATION WITHIN MIAMI BEACH TO AN INTEGRATED MOBILITY HUB, SUCH AS THE MIAMI CENTRAL STATION/OVERTOWN TRANSIT VILLAGE, CONNECTING TO METRORAIL, METROMOVER, BRIGHTLINE, COUNTY BUS SERVICE, AND FUTURE TRI- RAIL COASTAL LINK ON THE FLORIDA EAST COAST RAIL CORRIDOR, TO REDUCE TRANSFERS AND MAXIMIZE RIDERSHIP POTENTIAL FOR ANY MODE AND FOR ALL COMMUTERS; (2) SUFFICIENT COMPLETION OF THE PARSONS TRANSPORTATION GROUP ("PARSONS") STUDY TO MEANINGFULLY INFORM MIAMI-DADE COUNTY'S REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR THE BEACH CORRIDOR PROJECT AND RELATED CONTRACT SPECIFICATIONS ("RFP"); (3) A COMPETITIVE AND TRANSPARENT COUNTY RFP PROCESS WHICH IS OPEN TO ALL TECHNOLOGIES BEING EVALUATED IN TIER 2 OF THE PARSONS STUDY, INCLUDING BUS RAPID TRANSIT, LIGHT RAIL/MODERN STREETCAR, AUTOMATED PEOPLE MOVER, AND MONORAIL, WITH A TIMELINE THAT PROVIDES BIDDERS WITH OPPORTUNITIES TO SUBMIT PROPOSALS FOR ANY OF THE ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGIES; (4) THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH TO COMMENT ON THE COUNTY RFP BEFORE IT IS ISSUED; (5) THE APPOINTMENT OF AT LEAST ONE MIAMI BEACH- SELECTED REPRESENTATIVE TO THE RFP EVALUATION COMMITTEE; (6) THAT THE RFP REQUIRE THE DEVELOPMENT AND CONSTRUCTION OF AN INTERMODAL HUB IN MIAMI BEACH; (7) THAT THE RFP REQUIRE FLEXIBLE, NON-INTRUSIVE TECHNOLOGY THAT CAN OPERATE AT- GRADE WITHIN MIAMI BEACH, BE EXPANDED THROUGHOUT THE CITY, AND OPERATE ABOVE-GRADE ON THE MACARTHUR CAUSEWAY; (8) THAT THE RFP REQUIRE DEVELOPER TO PROVIDE AND ADHERE TO A TRAFFIC MITIGATION PLAN DURING CONSTRUCTION OF THE BEACH CORRIDOR PROJECT; (9) THAT THE RFP PROHIBIT GAMBLING ESTABLISHMENTS IN CONNECTION WITH THE BEACH CORRIDOR PROJECT, INCLUDING WITH RESPECT TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF ANY PROJECT PHYSICALLY CONNECTED, OR IN PROXIMITY TO, THE BEACH CORRIDOR PROJECT; (10) THAT THE RFP FURTHER PROHIBIT THE DEVELOPER AND OPERATOR OF THE BEACH CORRIDOR PROJECT, AND THEIR RESPECTIVE SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, FROM HOLDING ANY INTEREST IN ANY GAMBLING ESTABLISHMENT IN MIAMI-DADE COUNTY THROUGHOUT THE TERM OF THE AGREEMENT; (11) THAT THE RFP ADDRESS CYBER SECURITY CONCERNS IN CONNECTION WITH THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND TECHNOLOGY UTILIZED FOR THE BEACH CORRIDOR PROJECT; (12) THAT THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE BEACH CORRIDOR PROJECT ACCOMMODATE THE PROPOSED MIAMI BEACH 5TH STREET PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE PROJECT; (13) THAT USER FARES FOR THE BEACH CORRIDOR PROJECT, IF ANY, BE AFFORDABLE AND REASONABLE, AND INCLUDE A REGIONAL FARE STRUCTURE AND COLLECTION SYSTEM FOR EASE OF USE FOR COMMUTERS; AND (14) THE IMPLEMENTATION, AS EXPEDITIOUSLY AS POSSIBLE, OF THE PROPOSED BERT ROUTES CONNECTING TO MIAMI BEACH, AND, IN PARTICULAR, THE BEACH EXPRESS NORTH BERT SERVICE ON THE JULIA TUTTLE CAUSEWAY SHOULDERS. WHEREAS , the 2016 Miami Beach Transportation Master Plan recommended cross-bay mass rapid transit connectivity and exclusive transit corridors to provide a reliable , connected , and continuous infrastructure network with the goal of achieving the City of Miami Beach's 2035 multimodal vision and 2040 goal of becoming less car centric; and WHEREAS , the Miami-Dade County Strategic Miami Area Rapid Transit ("SMART') Plan contains six Rapid Transit Corridors and nine Bus Express Rapid Transit ("BERT') routes for Miami-Dade County ; and WHEREAS , the SMART Plan envisions one rapid transit corridor connecting Downtown Miami and the Miami Beach Convention Center via the MacArthur Causeway ("Beach Corridor Project "), and three BERT rou tes connect ing Miami Beach to the mainland (Beach Express North , Beach Express Central , and Beach Express South); and WHEREAS , pursuant to City Commission Resolution No . 2016-29690 and Resolution No. 2018-30179, Miami Beach staff is coordinating with Miami-Dade County's BERT and Beach Corridor Project study team (hereinafter "Parsons "); and WHEREAS , Miami-Dade County anticipates selecting a Locally Preferred Alternative for the Beach Corridor Project in Fall 2019 ; and WHEREAS , on May 2 , 2019 , the Miami-Dade County received an unsolicited proposal from a consortium of firms identified as the Miami Beach Monorail Consortium to design , build , finance , operate, and maintain a monorail system between mainland Miami and Miami Beach , along the MacArthur Causeway; and WHEREAS, on July 10, 2019 , Miami-Dade County Board of County Commissioners ("BCC ") approved the issuance of a Request for Proposals ("RFP ") for the same project purpose as the May 2, 2019 unsolicited proposal , to design, build, finance , operate and maintain a rapid transit system connecting mainland Miami to Miami Beach; and said RFP is anticipated to be considered by the Miami-Dade County Board of County Commissioners at its September, 2019 meeting; and WHEREAS , in accordance with Section 255 .065 of the Florida Statutes , the unsolicited proposal is confidential and exempt from public records disclosure at this t ime ; and WHEREAS, on July 15, 2019, the Mayor and City Commission of Miami Beach held a Transportation Workshop with all public sector project partners to discuss the forthcoming County solicitation, Parsons' Beach Corridor study, and Miami-Dade County's existing BERT study, and expressed the foregoing goals -which are herein set forth in this Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE iT DULY RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA that the Mayor and City Commission hereby accept the recommendations made at the City Commission Transportation Workshop held on July 15, 2019, and direct the City Administration to work with all Strategic Miami Area Rapid Transit ("SMART") Plan Beach Corridor and Bus Express Rapid Transit ("BERT") Project partners, including Miami-Dade County ("County"), Florida Department of Transportation, Miami Dade Transportation Planning Organization , and City of Miami, Florida to incorporate the following goals with respect to the proposed Beach Corridor Project connecting Miami Beach to the mainland ("Beach Corridor Project"): (1) Effective and efficient connectivity regardless of modality, to provide a direct, seamless, one-seat ride connection from a to be determined location within Miami Beach to an integrated mobility hub such as the Miami Central Station/Overtown Transit Village, connecting to Metrorail, Metromover, Brightline , County bus service, and future Tri-Rail Coastal Link on the Florida East Coast rail corridor, to reduce transfers and maximize ridership potential for any mode and for all commuters; (2) Sufficient completion of the Parsons Transportation Group ("Parsons") study to meaningfully inform Miami-Dade County's Request for Proposals for the Beach Corridor Project and related contract specifications ("RFP"); (3) A competitive and transparent County RFP process which is open to all technologies being evaluated in Tier 2 of the Parsons study, including bus rapid transit, light rail/modern streetcar, automated people mover, and monorail, with a timeline that provides bidders with opportunities to submit proposals for any of the alternative technologies; (4) The opportunity for the City of Miami Beach to comment on the County RFP before it is issued; (5) The appointment of least one Miami Beach-selected representative on Miami-Dade County's RFP Evaluation Committee; (6) That the RFP require the development and construction of an intermodal hub in Miami Beach ; (7) That the RFP require flexible, non-intrusive technology that can operate at-grade within Miami Beach, be expanded throughout the City, and operate above-grade on the MacArthur Causeway ; (8) That the RFP require developer to provide and adhere to a traffic mitigation plan during construction of the Beach Corridor Project; (9) That the RFP prohibit gambling establishments in _connection with the Beach Corridor Project , including with respect to the development of any project physically connected, or in proximity to, the Beach Corridor Project ; (10) That the RFP further prohibit the developer and operator of the Beach Corridor Project , and their respective successors and assigns, from holding any interest in any gambling establishment in Miami-Dade County throughout the term of the agreement; ( 11) That the RFP address cyber security concerns in connection with the infrastructure and technology utilized for the Beach Corridor Project; (12) That the design and construction of the Beach Corridor Project accommodate the proposed Miami Beach 5th Street Pedestrian Bridge Project ; (13) That user fares for the Beach Corridor Project , if any, be affordable and reasonable, and include a regional fare structure and collection system for ease of use for commuters ; and (14) The implementation, as expeditiously as possible, of the proposed BERT routes connecting to Miami Beach , and , in particular, the Beach Express North BERT service on the Julia Tuttle Causeway shoulders. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of July, 2019. ATTEST: nado, City Clerk (Sponsored by Mayor Dan Gelber) ... . .. . . . . . ~;:;~IB·'.::::::::l:,,.. . I . . . . . . ··... ..•· ~------- APPROVED AS TO FORM & LANGUAGE & FOR EXECUTION