20110413 BOOKMARKED ocrMIAMIBEACH
City Commission Meeting
City Hall, Commission Chambers, 3rd Floor, 1700 Convention Center Drive
April 13,201 1
Mayor Matti Herrera Bower
Vice-Mayor Jonah Wolfson
Commissioner Jorge Exposito
Commissioner Michael Gongora
Commissioner Jerry Libbin
Commissioner Edward L. Tobin
Commissioner Deede Weithorn
City Manager Jorge M. Gonzalez
City Attorney Jose Smith
City Clerk Robert E. Parcher
Visit us at www.miamibeachfl.gov for agendas and video "streaming" of City Commission Meetings.
ATTENTION ALL LOBBYISTS
Chapter 2, Article VII, Division 3 of the City Code of Miami Beach entitled "Lobbyists" requires
the registration of all lobbyists with the City Clerk prior to engaging in any lobbying activitywith
the City Commission, any City Board or Committee, or any personnel as defined in the subject
Code sections. Copies of the City Code sections on lobbyists laws are available in the City
Clerk's office. Questions regarding the provisions of the Ordinance should be directed to the
Office of the City Attorney.
Special note: In order to ensure adequate public consideration, if necessary, the Mayor and City Commission
may move any agenda item to the alternate meeting date which will only be held if needed. In addition, the
Mayor and City Commission may, at their discretion, adjourn the Commission Meeting without reaching all
agenda items.
Call to Order - 9:00 a.m.
Inspirational Message, Pledge of Allegiance
Requests for Additions, Withdrawals, and Deferrals
The City Commission will recess for lunch at approximately 1:00 p.m.
Presentations and Awards Regular Agenda
PA Presentations and Awards R2 Competitive Bid Reports
R5 Ordinances
Consent Agenda R7 Resolutions
C2 Competitive Bid Reports R9 New Business and Commission
C4 Commission Committee Assignments R10 City Attorney Reports
C6 Commission Committee Reports
C7 Resolutions Reports and Informational Items
We are committed to providing excellent public service and safety to all who live, work, and play in our vibrant, tropical, historic community.
Consent Agenda, April 13,201 1
Presentations and Awards
PA1 Certificate Of Appreciation To Be Presented To The Miami Beach Police Department's Officer Of
The Month For February 201 1. (Page 3)
(Requested by Commissioner Jorge Exposito)
PA2 Certificates Of Recognition To Be Presented To The Participants In The loth Annual Tour Of Miami
Beach Residential Gardens.
(Requested by Commissioner Jorge Exposito)
PA3 Certificate Of Recognition To Be Presented To Marcia Jo Zerivitz For Being A 201 I Glass Ceiling
Honoree For The Lifetime Achieving Award.
(Requested by Commissioner Jorge Exposito)
PA4 Proclamation To Be Presented To The Miami-Dade County League Of Cities, In Honor Of Earth Day.
(Requested by Commissioner Deede Weithorn)
PA5 Key To The City To Be Presented To Officer Eduard Alba For His Military Service.
(Requested by Commissioner Jerry Libbin)
PA6 Certificate Of Recognition To Be Presented To Las Vacas Gordas For Its 1 5th Year Anniversary In
Miami Beach.
(Requested by Commissioner Jerry Libbin)
PA7 Donation To The City's IB Educational Program From The Miami Beach Chamber Of Commerce
Annual Golf Classic Tournament.
(Requested by Commissioner Jerry Libbin)
PA8 Certificates Of Appreciation To Be Presented To The Organizers Of The Miami Beach Women's
Conference.
(Requested by Mayor Matti Herrera Bower)
PA9 Proclamation To Be Presented To Voices Against Brain Cancer In Recognition Of Its Life-Saving
Mission.
(Requested by Mayor Matti Herrera Bower)
PA10 Presentation On The Miami-Dade County League Of Cities By J.C. Bermudez, MDCLC President.
(Requested by Mayor Matti Herrera Bower)
PA1 1 Certificates Of Recognition To Be Presented To Miami Beach Senior High School Students For Their
Performance And Technical Assistance For The Laramie Project.
(Requested by Commissioner Michael Gongora)
Consent Agenda, April 13,201 1
Presentations and Awards (Continued)
PA12 Certificate Of Recognition To Be Presented To Robert Wennett For Being The Top Fundraiser For
AIDS Walk 201 1.
(Requested By Commissioner Michael Gongora)
PA13 Certificates Of Appreciation To Be Presented To The U15 Soccer Team For Winning The State
Championship This Past Weekend And Are Now Eligible To Move On To The Region Ill Title
Competition In Alabama On June 9".
(City Manager's Office)
PA14 Certificate Of Recognition To Be Presented To Neighborhood Resource Officer, Julio Blanco, Miami
Beach Police Department.
(Requested By Vice-Mayor Jonah Wolfson)
PA1 5 Certificate Of Recognition To Be Presented To Code Administrator, Mercedes Carcasses, Miami
Beach Code Enforcement Department.
(Requested By Vice-Mayor Jonah Wolfson)
CONSENT AGENDA
Action:
Moved:
Seconded:
Vote:
C2 - Com~etitive Bid Reports
C2A Request For Approval To lssue A Request For Qualifications (RFQ) For A Construction Manager At
Risk Firm To Provide Pre-Construction Services And Construction Phase Services Via A Guaranteed
Maximum Price (GMP) Amendment For The Property Management Facility. (Page 7)
(Capital lmprovements ProjectslProcurement)
C2B Request For Retroactive Approval To lssue A Request For Qualifi cations (RFQ) For Resident Project
Representative Services For Right-of-way lmprovements To Neighborhood No. 8, Central Bayshore
(Package A), Lower North Bay Road (Package B), And Lake Pancoast (Package C). (Page 19)
(Capital lmprovements ProjectslProcurement)
C2C Request For Approval To Award A Contract, Pursuant To Invitation To Bid No. 15-1011 1, For The
Purchase And Installation Of Video Monitoring Equipment For The Miami Beach Convention Center;
Authorizing The Mayor And City Clerk To Execute An Agreement With ASE Telecom & Data, Inc., At
The Not-To-Exceed Amount Of $600,000 From Convention Center Fund 440; Further Authorizing The
Administration To Engage In Value Engineering To Further Reduce The Cost And Time For
Completion Of Said Project. (Page 31)
(Procurement/Tourism & Cultural Development)
iii
Consent Agenda, April 13,201 1
C2 - Competitive Bid Reports (Continued)
C2D Request For Approval To Award Contracts To Aegis Rapidtext, Inc. As Primary Vendor, And National
Captioning Institute Inc. As Secondary Vendor, Pursuant To Invitation To Bid (ITB) No. 08-1011 1 For
Real-Time Closed Captioning Services Of All City Of Miami Beach Commission Meetings, And Other
Televised Meetings, As Required, To Include Real-Time Spanish Closed Captioning And Translation
Services, In The Estimated Annual Amount Of $75,000. (Page 41)
(City Clerk's Office/Procurement)
C4 - Commission Committee Assignments
C4A Referral To The NeighborhoodICommunity Affairs Committee - Discussion Regarding Altos Del Mar
Sculpture Park's (ADMSP) Request For An Extension Of Time Of ADMSP's Deadline To Obtain A
Building Permit From May 13,201 1 To February 13,2012. (Page 49)
(Tourism & Cultural Development)
C4B Referral To The NeighborhoodICommunity Affairs Committee - Discussion Regarding The Lack Of
Accessibility Of The City's Website To The Disabled. (Page 53)
(Requested by Commissioner Edward L. Tobin)
C4C Referral To The NeighborhoodICommunity Affairs Committee - Discussion On The Status Of Sunrise
Plaza. (Page 55)
(Requested by Commissioner Edward L. Tobin)
C4D Referral To The NeighborhoodICommunity Affairs Committee - Discussion Concerning The Flamingo
Becoming Florida's Most Pedestrian Friendly Neighborhood. (Page 57)
(Requested by Commissioner Michael Gongora)
C4E Referral To The Land Use And Development Committee To Discuss Administrative Determinations
And A Proposal That They Be Published. (Page 65)
(Requested by Vice-Mayor Jonah Wolfson)
C4F Referral To The Land Use And Development Committee - Discussion Regarding The Rezoning Of
Property At 1729 Lenox Avenue. (Page 67)
(Requested by Mayor Matti Herrera Bower)
C4G Referral To The Land Use And Development Committee - Discussion Regarding The Possibility Of
Changing The Permitted Uses In A CD2 District To Allow For Self Storage. (Page 69)
(Requested By Commissioner Jerry Libbin)
Consent Agenda, April 13,201 1
C4 - Commission Committee Assinnments (Continued)
C4H Referral To The Land Use And Development Committee - Discuss Possible Amendment To The
Accessory Use Regulations For RM-2 Zoning District To Permit A Limited Number Of Commercial
Accessory Uses In An Apartment Building Adjacent To A Public Baywalk To Be Open To The Public.
(Page 73)
(Requested by Commissioner Edward L. Tobin)
C41 Referral To The Finance And Citywide Projects Committee - Discussion Regarding A Proposed
Ordinance On Ethics Guidelines For Acceptance Of Gifts, Favors, Or Services By City Employees.
(Page 75)
(Requested by Vice-Mayor Jonah Wolfson)
C4J Referral To The Finance And Citywide Projects Committee - Discussion Regarding Security Alliance.
(Page 101)
(Requested by Vice-Mayor Jonah Wolfson)
C4K Referral To The Sustainability Committee - Discussion Regarding Providing Motivation For Local Gas
Stations To Offer Or Install Ethanol (E85) Pumps. (Page 105)
(Requested by Commissioner Jorge Exposito)
C4L Referral To The Land Use And Development Committee - Discussion Regarding A Potential Method
Of Replacing Pine Trees On Historic Pine Tree Drive. (Page 107)
(Requested by Mayor Matti Herrera Bower)
C4M Referral To The Finance And Citywide Projects Committee - Discussion Bayfront To Miami Ferry And
A Proposal To Rent The Old Pilot House South Of Miami Beach Marina. (Page 109)
(Requested by Vice-Mayor Jonah Wolfson)
Consent Agenda, April 13,201 1
C6 - Commission Committee Reports
C6A Report Of The Land Use And Development Committee On March 16, 2011: 1) a. Discussion
Regarding An Ordinance Requiring A Maintenance Bond To Ensure Abandoned Construction Sites
Meet Property Maintenance Standards. I) b. Discussion On Vacant Or Abandoned Buildings. 2)
Discussion On Proposed Amendments To Land Development Regulations Amending Minimum Unit
Size And Parking Requirements For Affordable Housing Projects. 3) Discussion Regarding
Temporary Storefront Signs. 4) Discussion On The Development Of A Citywide Transportation Plan.
5) Short-Term Rental Ordinance Enforcement. 6) Discussion Regarding An Ordinance Amending The
Code Of The City Of Miami Beach, By Amending Chapter 2, "Administration," Article 11, "City
Commission", By Enacting A New Section 2-1 2, "Meeting Agendas," Requiring Proposed Legislation
Or Ordinances That Appear On A City Commission Or Commission Committee Agenda To Have A
Commissioner Sponsor Identified; Providing For Repealer; Codification; Severability; And An Effective
Date. 7) Discussion Regarding The Gale Hotel Height Limits. 8) Status Update On 1-1 Light Industrial
District Proposed Amendments. 9) Discussion Regarding The Present Plans To Build A Convention
Center And Casino In Miami-Dade County And The Potential Impact On Miami Beach. 10) Discussion
Regarding Schools And Daycare Centers Within Existing Nonconforming Commercial Buildings In
Single Family Zoning Districts, As A Conditional Use. (Page 1 13)
C6B Report Of The Capital lmprovement Projects Oversight Committee Meeting On February 7,201 1 : I)
Attendance. 2) Requested Reports: 2a) Public Works To Provide Landscaping Plan Of Prairie
Avenue, South Of 23rd Street; 2b) Beachfront Restrooms - Construction Cost Comparison; 2c) Cost
Breakdown For South Pointe Phase II Co For Construction Of 3rd Street Improvements. 3) Old
Business: 3a) Status Report: Venetian Island Neighborhood lmprovement Project; 3b) Status Report:
Sunset Islands I & II; 3c) Status Report: Sunset Islands 111 & IV; 3d) Status Report: Palm & Hibiscus
Island Undergrounding; 3e) Status Report: FlamingoNVest Avenue Neighborhood Row; 39 PW
Verbal Status Report: Royal Palm Avenue And 44* Street Flooding Mitigation; 4) Requested Reports:
4a) Status Update: Lower North Bay Road Proposed Generator; 5) Commission Items: 5a) A
Resolution Approving And Authorizing The Mayor And City Clerk To Execute Amendment No. 14 To
The Agreement Between The City And Wolfberg Alvarez & Partners, Inc., Dated September 25,2002,
For Professional Architectural And Engineering (AIE) Services For The Right Of Way Infrastructure
Improvements Program Neighborhood 12- South Pointe RDA Phase II (Project); 5b) A Resolution Of
The Mayor And City Commission Of The City Of Miami Beach, Florida, Appropriating Funds In The
Amount Of $81,921, For Consulting Services For The Sunset Harbor Storm Water System, With
Funding From Fund 429, Stormwater Projects Line Of Credit; With Such Funds To Be Repaid From
Proposed Future Stormwater Bonds For The Sunset Harbor Pump Station Upgrades Project; 6)
Review And Acceptance Of Minutes. 7) Public Comments. 8) Adjournment. (Page 1 19)
Consent Agenda, April 13,201 1
C6 - Commission Committee Reports (Continued)
Report Of The Finance And Citywide Projects Committee Meeting On February 24, 2011: I)
Discussion Of Lincoln RoadWashington Collins Median. 2) Selection Of Chair For Finance And
Citywide Committee. 3) Discussion Regarding The Miami Beach Convention Center And Conference
Facility Expansion And Enhancement Plan. 4) Discussion Regarding Renewal Options In The
Management Agreement With Global Spectrum For The Management Of The Miami Beach
Convention Center, Colony Theater, And Byron Carlyle Theater. 5) Discussion Regarding Resolution
Of The Miami Beach Convention Center Advisory Board Urging Consideration For The Creation Of A
Reduced Parking Rate Pilot Program At The Preferred Lot (P-Lot) For All Food And Beverage Social
Events At The Convention Center. 6) Discussion Regarding The Expansion Of The Maintenance
Agreement Between The City Of Miami Beach And UIA Management, LLC For The Maintenance Of
Lincoln Road From Lenox Avenue To Lincoln Road Street End, And The Miami Beach Soundscape
Park. 7) Discussion Of All Fees Administratively Set Or Have Been Administratively Set. (Page 123)
C6D Report Of The Finance And Citywide Projects Committee Meeting On March 24,201 1 : 1) Discussion
Regarding Recent Billing Of Parking Impact Fees And The Possibility Of A Moratorium Due To
Present Economic Market Conditions, And The Effect On Business In North Beach. 2) Status Update
Regarding The Convention Center Extension And Enhancement. 3) Discussion Regarding An
Ordinance Amending Article Ill, Division 28 Of The City Code, Entitled "Capital lmprovement Projects
Oversight Committee;" Amending Section 2-190.127, Entitled "Establishment; Purpose; Membership,"
By Adding A Non-Voting-Ex-OfTicio 4) Discussion On The Role Of The Capital lmprovement Projects
Oversight Committee. 5) Discussion Regarding A Proposed Ordinance Which Will Require Mandatory
Recycling, Via The Establishment Of A City Of Miami Beach Recycling Program, For Multifamily
Residences And Commercial Establishments In The City. 6) Discussion Regarding A Parking Solution
-"Parking App." 7) Discussion Regarding A Proposed Lease Agreement With Gigi's Restaurant For
Use Of 7,000 SF Of Space In The City-Owned Property Located At 1661 Pennsylvania Avenue. 8)
Discussion Regarding Renewal Of Agreement With Clear Channel ADSHEL, Inc. To Construct,
Operate, And Maintain Bus Shelters. (Page 129)
C7 - Resolutions
A Resolution Approving And Authorizing The City Manager Or His Designee To Submit Grant
Applications To: 1) Florida Inland Navigation District (FIND) In The Approximate Amount Of $500,000
For The loth Street Seawall Project; And, 2) The American Academy Of Dermatology, Shade
Structure Grant Program For Funding In The Approximate Amount Of $8,000 For A Shade Structure
At Fisher Park; 3) Approval To Execute An Agreement With The National Audubon Society, Inc. For
Funding In The Amount Of $10,000 For The Miami Beach Sustainability And Dune Restoration
Project; And, 4) Florida Department Of Community Affairs And The Governor's Energy Office For
Funding In The Amount Of $20,000 To Implement The Next Steps Of The City's Sustainability Plan;
Appropriating The Above Grants, As Necessary If Approved And Accepted By The City, And
Authorizing The Execution Of All Documents Related To These Applications. (Page 137)
(Budget & Performance Improvement)
vii
Consent Agenda, April 13,201 1
C7 - Resolutions (Continued)
C7B A Resolution Approving And Authorizing The Appropriation Of Funds From Fleet Management
Retained Earnings Fund 51 0, In The Amount Of $109,273, To CoverA Construction And Contingency
Funding Shortfall Associated With Additional Work Scope And Construction Management Fees For
The Fleet Management Roof Replacement Project. (Page 149)
(Capital lmprovement Projects)
C7C A Resolution Approving And Authorizing The Mayor And City Clerk To Execute An Agreement With
Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc. For Design, Bid And Award, And Construction Administration
Services, In The Negotiated Not-To-Exceed Amount Of $330,000, And $39,000 For Reimbursable
Expenses, For A Total Not To Exceed Amount Of $369,000, For The South Pointe Park Pier Project,
Pursuant To Request For Qualifications (RFQ) No. 04-1 011 1 ; With Previously Appropriated Funding
From Fund 303. (Page 155)
(Capital lmprovement Projects)
C7D A Resolution Approving And Authorizing The Mayor And City Clerk To Execute Amendment No. 2 To
The Agreement Between The City And Arquitectonica International Corp., Dated April 7th, 2009, For
Professional Architectural And Engineering (AIE) Services For The Sunset Harbor Parking Garage
Project, In The Negotiated Amount Of $50,000, For Additional Construction Administration Services
To Perform Special Inspection Services, And $3,500 For Reimbursable Expenses, For A Total Not-
To-Exceed Amount Of $53,500; With Previously Appropriated Funding From Parking Operations
Fund 480, And From 2010 Parking Bonds Fund 486. (Page 183)
(Capital lmprovement Projects)
C7E A Resolution Approving And Authorizing The Mayor And The City Clerk To Execute Amendment No.
9 To The Agreement Between The City And EAC Consulting, Inc., Dated July 27, 2005, For
Professional Architectural And Engineering Services Pursuant To Request For Qualifications No. 42-
03/04 For The Biscayne Point Neighborhood Right-of-way lmprovement Project; Said Amendment
For Value Engineering Services, Additional Construction Administration Services, And Resident
Project Representation (RPR) Services (For A Period Of Up To Twenty-Four Months), In The
Negotiated Lump Sum Amount Of $358,684, Plus An Additional Not-To-Exceed Amount Of $9,246
For Reimbursable Expenses, For A Total Not-To-Exceed Amount Of $367,930; With Previously
Appropriated Funding, In The Amount Of $97,362, From Fund 376, And Funding, In The Amount Of
$90,648, From Fund 420; And Further Appropriating Funding, In The Amount Of $179,920, From
Fund 429, Storm Water Projects Line Of Credit, With Such Funds To Be Repaid From Proposed
Future Storm Water Bonds. (Page 191)
(Capital lmprovement Projects)
C7F A Resolution Authorizing The Donation Of Three (3) Ford Crown Victoria Police Pursuit Vehicles In
"As Is" Condition To The Miami-Dade College School Of Justice. (Page 209)
(Fleet Management)
C7G A Resolution Authorizing The City Administration To Enter Into Agreements For The City's Voluntary
Benefits Program Pursuant To The Request For Proposals Issued By Gallagher Benefit Services,
Inc., The City's Consultant Of Record, And Referring The Discussion Of A New Voluntary Benefit To
The Finance And Citywide Projects Committee. (Page 21 3)
(Human Resources)
viii
Consent Agenda, April 13,201 1
C7 - Resolutions (Continued)
C7H A Resolution Waiving, By 517th This Vote, The Competitive Bidding Requirement, Finding Such
Waiver To Be In The Best Interest Of The City, And Approving And Authorizing The Purchase Of Ten
(I 0) Apple lPads (Including A Security Server), For The Individual City Commissioners, City Manager,
City Clerk, And City Attorney, In The Amount Of $16,000, That Will Allow The City Commissioners To
View And Annotate The City Commission Agenda. (Page 229)
(Information Technology)
C71 A Resolution Authorizing The City Of Miami Beach To Accept Monetary Donations In Order To Fund
The City Of Miami Beach "Take Your Child To Work Day" (The "Event), And Further Approving The
Appropriation Of The Donated Funds For The Event. (Page 235)
(Police Department)
C7J A Resolution Adopting And Appropriating The Third Amendment To The Police Confiscation Trust
Fund Budget For Fiscal Year 201 011 1 In The Amount Of $40,677 To Be Funded From The Proceeds
Of State Confiscated Funds. (Page 239)
(Police Department)
C7K A Resolution Approving And Authorizing The Mayor And City Clerk To Execute A Locally Funded
Agreement With The Florida Department Of Transportation (FDOT) For The Construction Of
Stamped Asphalt Crosswalks On 41'' Street At Garden Avenue, Meridian Avenue, Mid-Block Between
Prairie Avenue And Royal Palm Avenue, And Mid-Block Between Royal Palm Avenue And Sheridan
Avenue, And A Speed Feedback Sign, As Part Of The FDOT 41'' Street Roadway Improvement
Project (Under Financial Project Number 419824-1); And Further Approving And Authorizing The
Execution Of A Maintenance Memorandum Of Agreement With FDOT For The Crosswalks And A
Speed Feedback Sign On 41" Street Between Alton Road And Garden Avenue. (Page 245)
(Public Works)
C7L A Resolution Supporting The Miami-Dade County's Resolution To Designate The Venetian
Causeway, From East San Marino Island To West Rivo Alto Island, As "Judge Irving Cypen Way"
With The Further Recommendation To The County That, When Placing The Name, The County
Install It With A Smaller Font In Order To Preserve The Historic Integrity Of The Venetian Causeway.
(Page 263)
(Public Works)
Consent Agenda, April 13,201 1
C7 - Resolutions (Continued)
C7M Home Agreements (Page 271)
1. A Resolution Approving A One-Time Only Assignment Of The FY 201011 1 Home Agreement,
Dated March 28,201 1, In The Amount Of $500,000, Between The City And Miami Beach
Community Development Corporation (MBCDC), As Assignor, To MBCDC: The Barclay, LLC,
A Not-For-Profit Created By MBCDC (And Whose Sole Member Is MBCDC), As Assignee
And As Successor In lnterest In Title Of The Barclay Apartments, Located At 1940 Park
Avenue, Miami Beach, FL.
2. A Resolution Approving A One-Time Only Assignment Of The FY 201011 1 Home Agreement,
Dated March 28, 201 1, In The Amount Of $566,257, Between The City And Miami Beach
Community Development Corporation (MBCDC), As Assignor, To MBCDC: Meridian Place,
LLC, A Not-For-Profit Entity Created By MBCDC (And Whose Sole Member Is MBCDC), As
Assignee And As Successor In lnterest In Title Of Meridian Place, Located At 530 Meridian
Avenue, Miami Beach, FL.
(Real Estate, Housing & Community Development)
C7N A Resolution Proclaiming April 25,201 1, Through April 30,201 1 "National Community Development
Week" In The City Of Miami Beach; Approving And Authorizing The Acceptance Of Those Certain
Sponsorships Made To The City For Community Development Week (As Set Forth In This
Resolution); Authorizing The City Manager To Accept Prospective Sponsorships For This Purpose,
Subject To Ratification By The Mayor And City Commission; And Authorizing The City Manager To
Make Such Expenditures AndlOr Reimbursements From The Aforestated Sponsorships, In
Furtherance Of And Consistent With The Aforestated Public Purpose Event. (Page 279)
(Real Estate, Housing & Community Development)
C70 A Resolution Approving And Authorizing The Mayor And City Clerk To Execute Amendment No. 2 To
The Management Agreement Between The City And Live Nation Worldwide, Inc., Dated June 22,
2007, For The Jackie Gleason Theater Of The Performing Arts (Now Known As The Fillmore Miami
Beach At The Jackie Gleason Theater); Said Amendment Allowing For Live Nation To Continue To
Be Permitted To Extend Hours Of Operation And Liquor Sales, Subject To Compliance With Certain
Conditions, And Further Authorizing The City Manager To Administratively Approve Future Requests
For Such Extension Of Hours And Liquor Sales, Consistent With Such Conditions. (Page 285)
(Tourism & Cultural Development)
C7P A Resolution Authorizing The City Of Miami Beach To Accept A $5,000 Donation From A Mr. Doron
Valero, A Miami Beach Resident, In Order To Pay For The Removal Of A Derelict Vessel Located In
The Navigational Portion Of Biscayne Bay Within The Jurisdiction Of The City Of Miami Beach.
(Page 295)
(Police Department)
C7Q A Resolution Approving And Authorizing The Mayor And City Clerk To Execute A Professional
Services Agreement With Gannett Fleming, Pursuant To Request For Qualifications No. 48-09110,
For The Project Development And Environment Study For The West Avenue Bridge Project (Project)
In The Amount Of $697,989.12; To Be Funded With Federal High Priority Project Funding Previously
Appropriated In The Fiscal Year (FY) 2008109 Capital Budget. (Page 299)
(Public Works)
Consent Agenda, April 13,201 1
C7 - Resolutions (Continued)
C7R Amendments To Professional Services Agreement With CH2M Hill (Page 307)
1. A Resolution Authorizing The Mayor And City Clerk To Execute Amendment No. 20 To The
Professional Services Agreement Between The City Of Miami Beach, Florida, And CH2M Hill
For The Professional Landscape Architectural And Engineering Services For The Right-Of-
Way lnfrastructure lmprovements Program For Neighborhood No. 8 Bayshore And Sunset
Islands, Dated May 16, 2001, Reallocating Funds In The Amount Of $340,069.99, From
Construction Administration To Bidding And Award Services For The Bayshore
Neighborhoods No. 8A, 8B, 8C, And 8D Packages.
2. A Resolution Authorizing The Mayor And City Clerk To Execute Amendment No. 21 To The
Professional Services Agreement Between The City Of Miami Beach, Florida, And CH2M Hill
For The Professional Landscape Architectural And Engineering Services For The Right-Of-
Way lnfrastructure lmprovements Program For Neighborhood No. 8 Bayshore And Sunset
Islands, Dated May 16, 2001, To Provide Additional Design Documents And Permitting
Services To Procure The DERM Tree Removal Permits For The Bayshore And Sunset Island
Neighborhoods No. 8A, 8B, 8C, And 8D Projects, To Participate In Value Engineering,
Provide Design Modifications And Associated Re-Permitting Services To Incorporate The
Level Of Service Review Comments Requested By The City Commission, For A Not-To-
Exceed Amount Of $135,112.97, And $63,605.00, For Reimbursable Expenses; With
Previously Appropriated Funding In The Amount Of $1 13,297.1 8; Appropriating $67,046.09
From Fund 429, Stormwater Projects Line Of Credit, With Such Funds To Be Repaid From
Proposed Future Stormwater Bonds; And Further Appropriating $18,374.70 From Above
Ground Funds.
(Capital Improvement Projects)
End of Consent Agenda
Presentations and Awards
PA1 Certificate Of Appreciation To Be Presented To The Miami Beach Police Department's
Officer Of The Month For February 201 1.
(Requested by Commissioner Jorge Exposito)
PA2 Certificates Of Recognition To Be Presented To The Participants In The 10th Annual
Tour Of Miami Beach Residential Gardens.
(Requested by Commissioner Jorge Exposito)
PA3 Certificate Of Recognition To Be Presented To Marcia Jo Zerivitz For Being A 201 1
Glass Ceiling Honoree For The Lifetime Achieving Award.
(Requested by Commissioner Jorge Exposito) *
PA4 Proclamation To Be Presented To The Miami-Dade County League Of Cities, In Honor
Of Earth Day.
(Requested by Commissioner Deede Weithorn)
PA5 Key To The City To Be Presented To Officer Eduard Alba For His Military Service.
(Requested by Commissioner Jerry Libbin)
PA6 Certificate Of Recognition To Be Presented To Las Vacas Gordas For Its 15th Year
Anniversary In Miami Beach.
(Requested by commissioner Jerry Libbin)
PA7 Donation To The City's IB Educational Program From The Miami Beach Chamber Of
Commerce Annual Golf Classic Tournament.
(Requested by Commissioner Jerry Libbin) ,
PA8 Certificates Of Appreciation To Be Presented To The Organizers Of The Miami Beach
Women's Conference.
(Requested by Mayor Matti Herrera Bower)
PA9 Proclamation To Be Presented To Voices Against Brain Cancer In Recognition Of Its
Life-Saving Mission.
(Requested by Mayor Matti Herrera Bower)
PA10 Brief Presentation On The Miami-Dade County League Of Cities By J.C. Bermudez,
MDCLC President.
(Requested by Mayor Matti Herrera Bower)
1 Date 4-13-//
I
Presentations and Awards (Continued)
PA1 1 Certificates Of Recognition To Be Presented To Miami Beach Senior High School
Students For Their Performance And Technical Assistance For The Laramie Project.
(Requested by Commissioner Michael Gongora)
PA1 2 Certificates Of Recognition To Be Presented To Robert Wennett For Top Fundraising
Efforts For AIDS Walk 201 1.
(Requested By Commissioner Michael Gongora)
PA1 3 Certificates Of Appreciation To Be Presented To The U 15 Soccer Team For Winning
The State Championship This Past Weekend And Are Now Eligible To Move On To The
Region Ill Title Competition In Alabama On June 9th.
(City Manager's Office) ,
.. .
PA14 Certificate Of Recognition To Be Presented To Neighborhood Resource Officer, Julio
Blanco, Miami Beach Police Department.
(Requested By Vice-Mayor Jonah Wolfson)
PA15 Certificate Of Recognition To Be Presented To Code Administrator, Mercedes
Carcasses, Miami Beach Code Enforcement Department.
(Requested By Vice-Mayor Jonah Wolfson)
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
Request For Approval To Issue A Request For Qualifications (RFQ) For A Construction Manager At
Risk Firm To Provide Pre-Construction Services And Construction Phase Services Via A Guaranteed
Maximum Price (GMP) Amendment For The Property Management Facility
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Ensure well-maintained infrastructure
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): The 2009 Customer Satisfaction Survey
indicated that 79% of businesses rated recently completed capital improvement projects as "excellent"
Issue: I Shall the Mayor and City Commission approve the issuance of the RFQ? I
Item SummarylRecommendation:
The relocation of the Property Management Division to a site outside of Flamingo Park has been a
longstanding goal of both Flamingo neighborhood residents and the City. After completing an extensive
evaluation, the Administration has made the determination to relocate Property Management to the City-
owned property located at 1833 Bay Road, Miami Beach Florida 33139.
The Construction Manager's (CMR) Scope of Services shall include, without limitation, all of the
Preconstruction Services set forth below and, upon approval by the City of the Guaranteed Maximum
Price (GMP), and as contemplated in any GMP Amendment or Amendments, and such other
amendment(s) as necessary to fix and describe the parties' respective rights and responsibilities with
respect to the Work and the Project, all of the Construction Services required to complete the Work in
strict accordance with the Contract Documents, and to deliver the Project to the City at or below the
GMP, when established, and within the Contract time.
The CMR shall review Project requirements, existing on-site and off-site development, surveys and
preliminary budget, and make recommendations to the City for revisions. The CMR shall prepare a
preliminary Project Schedule in accordance with the Contract Documents and in coordination with the
City and the ArchitecffEngineer, identifying all phases, critical path activities, and critical duties of each
of the Project team members. It is the intention of the City to enter into a contract with a CMR for pre-
construction services prior to the 50% design submittal. The CMR shall, at each design phase (i.e. 50%
and 90% design development and 100% construction document), review the plans and advise the City
and the ArchitecffEngineer regarding the constructability of the design and of any errors, omissions, or
conflicts it discovers. The CMR shall prepare an outline of proposed bid packages and detailed cost
estimates, and advise the City regarding trends in the construction and labor markets that may affect the
price or schedule of the Project. The CMR shall attend all Project related meetings. The CMR's
Preconstruction Services shall be provided, and the City shall compensate the CMR for such services,
based upon a fixed fee. At the conclusion of the Preconstruction Services, the CMR shall, provide the
City a proposal for a GMP Amendment for construction phase services and without assuming the duties
of the ArchitecffEngineer, warrant to the City, that the plans, specifications and other Contract
Documents are consistent, practical, feasible and constructible, and that the Project is constructible
within the contract time.
I APPROVE THE ISSUANCE OF RFQ.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
4 I NIA
Financial Information:
Account
Financial Impact Summary: NlA
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking: I Grace Escalante ext. 6447
Amount
NIA
Source of
Funds:
OBPI
I
Total
MIAMIBEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beoch, Florida 33 139, www.rniamibeochfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the Cjty Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
DATE: April 13, 201 1 a-d
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR APPROVAL TO ISSUE A REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ)
FOR A CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AT RISK FIRM TO PROVIDE PRE-
CONSTRUCTION SERVICES AND CONSTRUCTION PHASE SERVICES VIA A
GUARANNTEED MAXIMUM PRICE (GMP) AMENDMENT FOR THE PROPERTY
MANAGEMENT FACILITY
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Approve issuance of the RFQ.
ANALYSIS
The relocation of the Property Management Division to a site outside of Flamingo Park has
been a longstanding goal of both Flamingo neighborhood residents and the City. After
completing an extensive evaluation, the Administration has made the determination to relocate
Property Management to the City-owned property located at 1833 Bay Road, Miami Beach
Florida 331 39.
Lots 10,11,12; all in Block 13; Amended Plat of Block Thirteen of the Alton Beach Realty
Company; Plat Book 9, Page 146, Miami-Dade County Records, Florida.
On September 09,2009, the Mayor and City Commission approved the issuance of Request for
Qualification (RFQ) No. 10-09/10 for the Planning, Design, Bid and Award, and Construction
Administration Services for the Property Management Facility Project. On January 04, 2010,
RFQ No. 10-09/10 was issued, and on March 01, 2010, the Evaluation Committee ranked
Wolfberg Alvarez & Partners as top-ranked firm. On May 12, 2010, the Mayor and City
Commission authorized the Administration to execute an Agreement with Wolfberg Alvarez &
Partners for the Property Management Facility Project for architectural, engineering, and
landscape architecture services for the Planning, Design, Bid and Award and Construction
Administration services for the Project. On February 14, 201 1, the City issued Wolfberg Alvarez
& Partners Inc a Notice to Proceed with the Planning Services for the project. The final project
shall meet at a minimum the LEED Silver rating, with higher rating levels encouraged. The
program requirements necessitate a two story facility with a total gross square footage of
approximately 24,000 s.f. At a minimum, the new Property Management facility will include the
following functions:
Administrative offices
Workshops (Carpenter, Electrical, HVAC, Plumbing,)
Parts inventory warehouse (equipped with storage racks and accessible by forklift)
Materials storage
Hazardous materials storage
Locker rooms / restrooms
Commission Memorandum - Issuance of the Construction Management at Risk to Provide Pre-
Construction Services for the Property Management Facility
April 13, 201 1
Page 2 of I I
Loading area
Oversized vehicles parking
Emergency generator
It is important to note that it is the City's intention to enable the Property Management Division
to vacate the Flamingo Park site as quickly as possible in order to implement the Flamingo Park
Master plan that was approved by the City Commission on November 9, 201 0.
In addition, the proposed Sunset Harbor garage project will address the parking needs of the
Property Management Division, located across the Street at 1840 Bay Rd. The proposed
garage will provide approximately 104 parking spaces for Property Management Division
vehicles with a clearance height below 7'-2". Oversized vehicles will be parked at the proposed
Property Management Facility.
The Project Schedule for the Property Management Facility is as follows:
Planning Phase: February 14,201 1 to June 7,201 1
Design Phase: June 7,201 1 to February 15,2012
Construction Phase: February 15,201 2 to December 15,201 2
The Project Schedule for the Sunset Harbour Garage is as follows:
Construction Phase: AprilIJune, 201 1 to AprilIJune 2012
On April 22nd, 2009, the Mayor and City Commission passed an Ordinance amending the City
Code of the City of Miami Beach, providing for City mandatory participation in the Leadership in
Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Certification Program for new construction or
substantial renovations. The design of the facility will integrate building materials and methods
that promote environmental quality, economic vitality, and social benefit through the
construction and operation of the built environment in accordance with the US Green Building
Council LEED Standard. The final project shall meet at a minimum the USGBC LEED SILVER
certification for new construction, with higher rating levels encouraged.
CIP staff has studied the use of Construction Management at Risk (CMR) project delivery
method for this project in lieu of a standard Design-Bid-Build process, since this delivery method
will result in a LEED Silver certified facility for the best value.
It is very important that the City's first LEED certified facility exemplify the City's goals regarding
sustainable architecture and be a facility that the City's residents, developers, business
community and international visitors can look to as an example of sustainable architecture that
we can all be proud of.
Under the CMR approach, the Owner enters into an agreement with a Contractor early in the
design process which allows the facility to be designed and built-in partnership with the Design
Professional, the Contractor, the Building Commissioning Agent and the City in an environment
that fosters creativity, sustainability, innovation, constructability, frugality, quality, for the best
price possible in today's market, all working together as a team to deliver a quality product that
responds to the needs of the Client which in this case is the City's Property Management
Division.
One of the most important distinctions between the CMR project approach and the Design-Bid-
Build is that the CMR is selected based on the CMR firms qualifications which is a critical
component when deciding what Contractor will build the City's first Silver LEED certified facility.
Commission Memorandum - Issuance of the Construction Management at Risk to Provide Pre-
Construction Services for the Propetfy Management Facility
April 13, 201 1
Page 3 of I1
The CMR approach will give the City the added value of having a qualified contractor evaluate
the project documents for any inconsistencies, errors and omissions between the various design
disciplines and constructability of the project and advise on the selection of sustainable
materials, and means and methods given the current market. This becomes extremely valuable
in a LEED project.
The Project Team, consisting of the Owner (City), Design Professional and CMR work together
to produce a quality project with a design that is also buildable in an environment based on a
collaborative effort between the three parties in order to work out all the potential conflicts in the
project prior to construction.
This project delivery method also minimizes additional services to the Design Team since most
of the issues which may arise during construction are addressed during the CMR design phase
reviews. Additional costs from the Contractor, including change orders and time extensions, are
also minimized, since the GMP amendment prohibits most project cost adjustments. Under this
approach, time is of the essence to the Contractor because there will be no compensation
considered for delays.
In this particular Request for Qualifications (RFQ), the City has requested that CMR firms have
a proven track record and experience in building at a minimum a Silver LEED certified project.
Since this is the City's first Silver LEED Certified project, it would be invaluable to have a
contractor that is a leader in the construction industry and has the experience of building
sustainable architecture as evidenced through a completed LEED certified facility.
In this way, the City can gain valuable advice on the selection, quality, durability and
performance of sustainable practices as evidenced through the experience of a construction
professional.
By contracting with the CMR early in the process the City will save the time it normally takes to
bid out via the Conventional Design-Bid-Build, which is approximately three (3) to four (4)
months in advertising, bidding, and awarding the project.
To this end the CMR firm is contracted to perform pre-construction services and provide at the
City's request or option, a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) and certifies by signing the GMP
contract with the City that the CMR firm can build the project for the GMP.
The City will request Pre-Construction Services as follows:
Design Review, Constructability and Value Engineering
Review of Onsite and Offsite Conditions
Cost Estimating and Cost Controls
Scheduling
Bidding (GMP submittal & Negotiations)
The CMR is tasked to work with the Design Professional during the course of design to advise
the City of the constructability of the design and provide value engineering of the Design
Professionals documents, to check the quality of the documents and advice the Owner of the
most efficient, and economical ways to build the project pursuant to the Owners goals and
objectives for the project. Some of the building systems the CMR will be evaluating are as
follows:
Commission Memorandum - Issuance of the Construction Management at Risk to Provide Pre-
Construction Services for the Property Management Facility
April 13, 2011
Page 4 of I1
HVAC systems, including chillers, pumps, cooling towers, air distribution systems
Energy Management Systems (EMS)
Electrical power distribution systems, emergency power generators and automatic
transfer switching, uninterruptible power supply systems, lighting control systems
Fire protection (fire alarm systems, pumps & controls, water-based fire protection,
automatic fire suppression systems, smoke & fire dampers, etc.)
Telephone and intercommunications systems
Renewable Energy Systems (wind, solar, etc.
Elevators
Cable TV and CCTV systems
Water intrusion envelope (roofing, windows, doors, etc.)
Plumbing systems, water distribution, sanitary systems, domestic hot water, control
valves, re-circulating pumps
Irrigation systems
System integration (between existing and new systems)
Storm water collection and management systems
The end result is a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) from the Contractor, which is subject to
restrictions in change order requests and minimizes, or eliminates, additional costs to the City.
In order to ensure that the City is successful in negotiating the best value for this project, the
City will hire an independent Construction Estimator to provide assistance in validating the
CMR's construction costs according to the current market.
The "Best Value" Procurement process will be used to select a firm with the necessary
experience and qualifications, the ability, capacity and proven past successful performance in
providing Construction Management at Risk services.
In addition, the CMR shall provide LEED documentation as required by the US Green Building
Council LEED Standard and/ or City of Miami Beach Ordinance Section 100 whichever is most
stringent. The CM at Risk Contractor shall evaluate the design documents submitted by the
projects Architectural Team and make recommendations during design and construction that
are consistent with the City's established LEED goals for the project. The CM at Risk Contractor
will be responsible to provide all LEED required documentation required by the City, the
Architect and the City's Building Commissioning Agent in addition to the following items:
LEED documentation, application and all required submittals to achieve a USGBC LEED
SILVER certification for new construction;
Complying with the project's specifications that clearly delineate all LEED-related
Contractor responsibilities and procedures, providing the LEED required documentation
of all materials, technologies, and procedures upon which the achievement of design
intent and LEED Silver certification depend;
Coordinating with and assisting the City's Building Commissioning Agent / Consultant in
its implementation of the Building Commissioning Plan. That plan shall result in full
compliance with the LEED standard for full documentation of building commissioning. In
particular it will structure and document the full initiation, testing, operational instruction,
and record documentation of all building systems.
The Project Team will conduct periodic meetings that will result in a list of clearly defined
and clearly assigned actions and responsibilities for moving towards the achievement of
LEED Silver certification and related project goals.
Commission Memorandum - Issuance of the Construction Management at Risk to Provide Pre-
Construction Services for the Property Management Facility
April 13, 20 1 1
Page 5 of 11
The total estimated Construction Cost Budget for the project is approximately $3,500,000.
Because time is of the essence, the City may require (in order to expedite this project) the CM
at Risk Contractor to phase this project as described below:
Phase One: Demolition Phase to be developed as a separate GMP Amendment to the
CMR to be scheduled in advance of the Notice to Proceed for the construction of the
new facility by the CMR.
Phase Two: Construction of the Proposed Property Management Facility via a GMP
Amendment.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
The Construction Manager's (CMR) Scope of Services shall include, without limitation, all of the
Preconstruction Services set forth below and, upon approval by the City of the Guaranteed
Maximum Price (GMP), and as contemplated in any GMP Amendment or Amendments, and
such other amendment(s) as necessary to fix and describe the parties' respective rights and
responsibilities with respect to the Work and the Project, all of the Construction Services
required to complete the Work in strict accordance with the Contract Documents, and to deliver
the Project to the City at or below the GMP, when established, and within the Contract time.
The CMR shall review Project requirements, existing on-site and off-site development, surveys
and preliminary budget, and make recommendations to the City for revisions. The CMR shall
prepare a preliminary Project Schedule in accordance with the Contract Documents and in
coordination with the City and the ArchitecVEngineer, identifying all phases, critical path
activities, and critical duties of each of the Project team members. It is the intention of the City
to enter into a contract with a CMR for pre-construction services prior to the 50% design
submittal. The CMR shall, at each design phase (i.e. 50% and 90% design development and
100% construction document), review the plans and advise the City and the ArchitecVEngineer
regarding the constructability of the design and of any errors, omissions, or conflicts it discovers.
The CMR shall prepare an outline of proposed bid packages and detailed cost estimates, and
advise the City regarding trends in the construction and labor markets that may affect the price
or schedule of the Project. The CMR shall attend all Project related meetings. The CMR's
Preconstruction Services shall be provided, and the City shall compensate the CMR for such
services, based upon a fixed fee. At the conclusion of the Preconstruction Services, the CMR
shall, provide the City a proposal for a GMP Amendment for construction phase services and
without assuming the duties of the ArchitecVEngineer, warrant to the City, that the plans,
specifications and other Contract Documents are consistent, practical, feasible and
constructible, and that the Project is constructible within the contract time.
The successful firm will be tasked with the following duties and responsibilities:
Task 1 - Coordination with the Design Professional: In providing the CMR's services
described in this Agreement, the CMR shall maintain a working relationship with the
ArchitecVEngineer. However, nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to mean that the
CMR assumes any of the responsibilities or duties of the NE. The CMR shall be solely
responsible for construction means, methods, techniques, sequence and procedures used in
the construction of the Project and for the safety of its personnel, property, and its operations for
performing in accordance with the CMR's Agreement with the City. The NE is responsible for
the requirements of the Project as indicated in the Agreement between the City and the NE.
The CMR's services shall be rendered compatibly and in cooperation with the AIE's services
Commission Memorandum - Issuance of the Construction Management at Risk to Provide Pre-
Construction Services for the Property Management Facility
April 13, 201 1
Page 6 of 11
under the City. It is not intended that the services of the AIE and the CMR be competitive or
duplicative, but rather be complementary.
Task 2 - Design Phase: Review of Design Documents, Scheduling, Estimating, and Cost
Control: The CMR shall meet with the ArchitecVEngineer and City representatives to review the
most current Architect/Engineerls Agreement. The CMR shall ensure that the parties jointly
review, modify as necessary, and agree to a single design schedule, to be called the revised
most current Architect/EngineerYs contract.
The CMR, as a result of the above-noted review of the design documents and
recommendations provided to the City, shall be fully responsible for the coordination of the
drawings with the written specifications. This includes but is not limited to, the CMR's review of
the construction documents in coordination of the drawings and specifications themselves, with
the existing buildings and sites to ensure proper coordination and constructability and lack of
conflict, and to minimize unforeseen conditions. The CMR shall, during this phase, be
responsible for the proper identification and location of all utilities, services, and other
underground facilities which may impact the Project. The CMR agrees specifically that no
Contract Amendments shall be requested by the CMR or considered by the City for reasons
involving conflicts in the documents; questions of clarity with regard to the documents; and
incompatibility, or conflicts between the documents and the existing conditions, utilities, code
issues and unforeseen underground conditions.
Task 3 - Bid and Award Phase: The CMR shall prepare a Subcontractor's Prequalification
Plan in compliance with the requirements currently determined by the City. The CMR shall
submit to the City the CMR's list of pre-approved sub-contractors for each element of the Work
to be sub-contracted by the CMR. This list shall be developed by the execution by the CMR of
the sub-contractor's Pre-qualification Plan noted above. The City reserves the right to reject
any sub-contractor proposed for any bid to be considered by the CMR. Any claims, objections
or disputes arising out of the Pre-qualification Plan or list, are the responsibility of the CMR.
The CMR shall hold harmless, indemnify, and defend the City, its employees, agents, and
representatives in any matter arising out of the pre-qualification plan andlor the sub-contractor's
list, except where the sole cause of the matter is a City directed decision.
Task 4 - Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP): After taking, reviewing and identifying the
proposals from the responsive and responsible sub-contractors, the CMR shall propose to the
City, a GMP, which shall be the sum of the proposed sub-contracts and the CMR's General
Conditions (including any fee, profit, overhead and all like amounts) and the agreed upon
Contingency amount. The GMP shall be the full and complete amount for which the CMR
agrees to go forward from the receipt of sub-contract bids to the full completion of the Project.
Prior to acceptance and execution of the GMP, the CMR shall submit a Best Value quality
control plan that identifies risks and potential risks that the CMR does not control, or risk that is
impacted by factors that the CMR does not control, and includes the CMR's plan to minimize
that risk. A risk would be any existing or potential condition, situation or event that could
negatively impact the project's cost, schedule, quality and the City's expectations.
Upon acceptance and execution of the GMP proposal, by the City, the CMR shall enter into sub-
contract agreements with the sub-contractors selected for the amounts included in the GMP
Proposal for that sub-contract work, and shall function as a General Contractor and comply with
the Contract Documents accordingly with regard to the Project as well as a CMR with regard to
other services required by the Contract Documents.
Commission Memorandum - Issuance of the Construction Management at Risk to Provide Pre-
Construction Services for the Property Management Facility
April 13, 20 1 1
Page 7 of I I
Task 5 - Construction Phase: Once the City has accepted the GMP, the City will issue a GMP
Amendment which will include the Contract for Construction. CMR activities shall include, but
are not limited to:
Coordinating site construction management services including but not limited to: regular
job site meetings, maintaining daily on-site project log and schedule report, overseeing
quality assurance, testing and inspection programs, monitoring construction
management staff and sub-contractor work performance for deficiencies, maintaining
record copies of all contract documents, change orders and other documentation on site,
overseeing construction management staff and subcontractor safety programs.
Staffing each assigned project in a satisfactory manner. As a minimum, the CMR site
personnel during the construction phase will include: a project manager, a full- time
project superintendent and project administrative personnel. The CMR shall provide site
personnel that are competent, English-speaking and able to communicate effectively.
Updating and maintaining master project schedules, detailed construction schedules,
submittal schedules, inspection schedules and occupancy schedules.
Preparing a schedule of values associated with the bid package identified and submitting
it for approval by the Architect and City's representative(s). All payment requests must
be in accordance with the schedule of values approved.
Processing payment requests for approval by the Architect and the City's
representative(s).
Processing any change orders due to scope and modifications and shall submit it for
approval by the Architect and the City's representative(s), including a cost estimate of
the proposed change.
Processing requests for information and coordinate with the Architect.
Providing construction program accounting and reporting to the City as required.
Monitoring for the presence of existing asbestos containing building materials and certify
to the City that no asbestos containing material has been used.
Providing monthly progress reports to the City.
Submitting exception-based status reports, associated with the Best Value Quality
Control Plan, addressing conditions, situations, and events that introduce risk to the
project, in terms of cost, schedule, quality, and City's expectations, and including the
CMR's plan to mitigate the risk (s).
Coordinating with the Architect and City representative(s) the substantial and final
inspections, prior to the Architect's approval and issuance of the Certificate of
Substantial Completion.
Task 6 - Post-Construction Phase: The CMR will coordinate project closeout, start-up and
transition to operation, per the contract for Construction. Activities include but are not limited to:
The CMR shall coordinate project close-out, start-up and transition to operation.
The CMR will coordinate with the Architect to provide a complete project record including
project manual and CADD drawings to show all construction changes, additions, and
deletions compared to the Construction Document (CADD disks will be provided to the
CMR by the Architect).
The CMR will coordinate with the City to prepare the Certificate of Final Inspection.
The CMR will obtain and review for completeness, have corrected if necessary, and
submit to the City, following the Architect's approval, all Warranties, Operations and
Maintenance Manuals, and other such documents.
The CMR is responsible to the City for Warranties and Guaranties.
Commission Memorandum - Issuance of the Construction Management at Risk to Provide Pre-
Construction Services for the Property Management Facility
April 13, 20 1 1
Page 8 of I1
The CMR will complete all punch-list items generated by Contractor during their
inspections.
The CMR will coordinate and conduct the Occupancy Evaluation and Warranty
Inspection.
MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
For purposes of compliance with this minimum experience requirement, the term "Proposer" is
hereby defined to mean the firm andlor business entity which is submitting a proposal pursuant
to this RFQ. Accordingly, the firm andlor business entity must meet the minimum requirements
listed below in order to be deemed responsive. Non-responsive bids will be disqualified from
consideration.
For the purposes of this RFQ a LEED project is defined as a project that has followed the US
Green Building Council LEED Standard for achieving at a minimum the USGBC LEED SILVER
certification for new construction, with higher rating levels encouraged and has achieved at a
minimum a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy (TCO).
Interested Firms shall address the following items in the RFQ response:
1. Team's Experience
Indicate the firm's number of years of experience in providing CMR Services
or Design Build services for projects of the same size and complexity as
required by this RFQ.
The firm must demonstrate an ability to provide multi-disciplinary
management in the areas of facility assessment, scope definitionlvalidation,
planning, public engagement, cost estimating, scheduling, quality control and
assurance plan, building code reviewlinspection, design, construction,
closeout, and warranty services.
List all successfully completed projects comparable in design, scope, size
and complexity, undertaken in the past five (5) years. Describe the scope of
each project in physical terms and by cost, describe the respondent's
responsibilities, and provide the name and contact telephone number of an
individual in a position of responsibility who can attest to respondent's
activities in relation to the project. An SF254 can suffice this request.
List the firm's successfully completed projects comparable in design, scope,
size and complexity, undertaken in the past five (5) years that achieved a
USGBC LEED Silver certification for new construction or greater;
List the firm's personnel that have achieved LEED Accreditation.
Provide the name(s) of the person, within your organization who was most
actively concerned with managing each project;
List and describe all legal claims against any member of the team alleging
errors andlor omissions, or any breach of professional ethics, including those
settled out of court, during in the past five (5) years.
Describe the firm's experience in LEED certified projects and how this
experience will be invaluable in navigating the City through the LEED
certification process from design through construction and warranty period to
achieve the certification it requires. In addition, describe sustainible materials,
practices and building systems which the firm has successfully used in other
LEED certified projects.
Commission Memorandum - Issuance of the Construction Management at Risk to Provide Pre-
Construction Services for the Property Management Facility
April 13, 20 1 1
Page 9 of 1 1
Project Manager's Experience: Provide a comprehensive summary of the experience
and qualifications of the individual who will be selected to serve as the Project Manager.
This individual must have a minimum of five (5) years' experience in the management of
construction projects, participated on a LEED certified project and possess extensive
knowledge in the management of construction projects, value engineering, working in a
team environment, is well versed in project schedules and budgeting. Furthermore, this
individual should have served as Project Manager on projects having the same size (i.e.,
construction budget of $3.5 million or greater) and complexity, one of which is required
to have achieved a USGBC LEED Silver certification as required by this RFQ.
3. Previous Similar Projects: Provide a list of a minimum of ten (10) projects which
demonstrates the Team's experience in providing the services one of which is required
to have achieved a USGBC LEED Silver certification as required under this RFQ and in
the scope of services for this project. Please provide the following information for each
sample project.
Client name, address, phone number, email
Consultant name, address, phone number, fax andlor e-Mail address
Description of the scope of the work
Role of the firm and the responsibilities
Month and Year the project was started and completed
Total cost andlor fees paid to your firm
Total cost of the construction, estimated and actual
4. Qualifications of Project Team: Provide a list of the personnel to be used on this
project and their qualifications. A resume of each individual, including education,
experience, and any other pertinent information shall be included for each team member
to be assigned to this project. Provide a list of firm's personnel that have achieved LEED
Accreditation.
5. Risk-Assessment Plan (RAP): All Consultants must submit a Risk-Assessment Plan.
The RAP must not be longer than two (2) pages front side of page only should be
included within the RFQ response. The RAP should address the following items in a
clear and generic language:
Potential project risks. (Areas that may cause the Contractor not to finish on
time, not finish with budget, cause any change orders, or be a source of
dissatisfaction with the owner)
Explanation of how the risks can be avoidedlminimized
Propose any options that could increase the value of this project
Explain the benefits of the RAP. Address the quality and performance
differences in terms of risk minimization that the City can understand and
what benefits the option will provide to the user. No brochures or marketing
pieces please.
RFQ PROCESS
The procedure for response evaluation and selection is as follows:
I. Request for Qualifications issued.
2. Receipt of responses.
Commission Memorandum - Issuance of the Construction Management at Risk to Provide Pre-
Construction Services for the Property Management Facility
April 13, 20 1 1
Page 10 of I1
3. Opening of responses and determination if they meet the minimum standards of
responsiveness.
4. An Evaluation Committee, appointed by the City Manager, shall meet to evaluate each
response in accordance with the requirements of this RFQ. If further information is
desired, consultants may be requested to make additional written submissions or oral
presentations to the Evaluation Committee.
5. The Evaluation Committee will recommend to the City Manager the response or
responses acceptance of which the Evaluation Committee deems to be in the best
interest of the City. The following criteria shall be utilized by the Evaluation Committee
for the selection of the Consultant:
(20 points) - The experience, qualifications, quality control and assurance plan,
and portfolio of the Principal Firm in particular as it addresses the firm's approach
to LEED certified projects
(20 points) - The experience, qualifications and portfolio of the Project Manager,
as well as hislher familiarity with this project and a thorough understanding of the
methodology and design approach to be used in this assignment
(20 points) - The experience and qualifications of the professional personnel
assigned to the Project Team as well as their familiarity with this project and a
thorough understanding of the methodology and design approach to be used in
this assignment in particular as it addresses the firm's approach to LEED certified
projects
(20 points) - Experience with an integrated design approach, sustainability
experience, innovative technolgies, and LEED certified buildings
(5 points) - Risk Assessment Plan that reflects a clear understanding of project
objectives; a thorough review of existing conditions; familiarity with the project
site; a thorough understanding of all permitting and regulatory requirements and
impacts; and other considerations that may impact the design and construction of
the proposed improvements
(Spoints) - Willingness to meet time and budget requirements as demonstrated
by past performance, methodology and approach
(IOpoints) - Past performance based on quality of the Performance Evaluation
Surveys and the Administration's due dilligence based upon reference checks
performed of the Firm(s) clients
The City may request, accept and consider proposals for the compensation to be paid under the
contract only during competitive negotiations.
6. After considering the recommendation(s) of the Evaluation Committee, the City Manager
shall recommend to the City Commission the response or responses acceptance of
which the City Manager deems to be in the best interest of the City.
7. The City Commission shall consider the City Manager's recommendation(s) in light of
the recommendation(s) and evaluation of the Evaluation Committee and, if appropriate,
approve the City Manager's recommendation(s). The City Commission may reject City
Manager's recommendation(s) and select another response or responses. In any case,
City Commission shall select the response or responses acceptance of which the City
Commission deems to be in the best interest of the City. The City Commission may also
reject all proposals.
8. Negotiations between the selected respondent and the City Manager will take place to
arrive at a contract. If the City Commission has so directed, the City Manager may
proceed to negotiate a contract with a respondent other than the top ranked respondent
Commission Memorandum - Issuance of the Construction Management at Risk to Provide Pre-
Construction Services for the Property Management Facility
April 13, 201 I
Page 11 of 11
if the negotiations with the top ranked respondent fail to produce a mutually acceptable
contract within a reasonable period of time.
9. A proposed contract or contracts are presented to the City Commission for approval,
modification and approval, or rejection.
10. If and when a contract or contracts acceptable to the respective parties is approved by
the City Commission, the Mayor and City Clerk sign the contract(s) after the selected
respondent(s) has (or have) done so.
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends that the Mayor and the City Commission authorize the
issuance of a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for a Construction Manager at Risk to provide
pre-construction services and Construction Phase services via a Guaranteed Maximum Price
(GMP) Amendment for the Property Management facility.
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
Request for Retroactive Approval to Issue a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) For Resident Project
Representative Services For Right-of-way lmprovements To Neighborhood No.8, Central Bayshore
(Package A), Lower North Bay Road (Package B), And Lake Pancoast (Package C).
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Ensure Value and Timely Delivery of Quality Capital Projects.
Maintain City's Infrastructure.
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): 44% of the respondents of the 2009
Miami Beach Community Satisfactory Survey rated storm drainage as excellent and good. The 2007
Miami Beach Community Satisfactory Survey indicates that 84% of residents and 86% of businesses
rated the services as good or excellent for recently completed capital improvement projects.
Issue: I Shall the Mayor and City Commission approve the issuance of the RFQ?
Item SummarylRecommendation:
The City desires to independently contract with an NE firm to provide full-time RPR to observe the
construction of the work associated with the Bayshore Neighborhoods Right-of-way Improvements Projects
for the Central Bayshore (8A), Lower North Bay Road (8B), and Lake Pancoast (8C) Neighborhoods.
The RPR shall be qualified, meet all the requirements referenced herein, and have adequate understanding
of the Project, and be able to address, process, evaluate, recommend, respond to, and review construction
related correspondence. In general, RPRs will conduct onsite observations of the Contractor's work to assist
the City in determining if the provisions of the respective Contract Documents and permit conditions are
being fulfilled and to reasonably protect the CITY against defects and deficiencies in the Work of the
Contractor.
The RPR shall review materials and evaluate, on a daily basis, the workmanship of the Contractor on each of
the projects, report as to the progress, and report to City any deviations from the respective Contract
Documents. It is the City's intent for the RPR to be present onsite to provide general oversight and direction.
The means and methods of construction shall be the responsibility of each Contractor. As such, the RPR will
not be expected to advise on or suggest methods of construction to the Contractor.
RPR's services shall based upon a construction duration period of approximately twenty-six (26) months for
Bayshore Package 8N8C and sixteen (16) months for package B. Construction Contracts for packages 8A
and 8C have been combined into one single contract and awarded to only one Contractor. The construction
phase of both construction contracts, Packages 8N8C and 8B, are currently scheduled to run concurrently.
Construction activities are currently scheduled to commence in the 3rd quarter of 201 1 with estimated
completion in the 3rd quarter of 2013.
APPROVE THE ISSUANCE OF RFQ.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
I
u I OBPl 1 Total I I I
Financial Information:
I I I
Financial Impact Summary:
I I
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking:
I Gus Lopez, Ext. 6641
Account
AFEWDA ETEU c 28
DATE ,Y-/3-ll,
Amount Source of
Funds:
m
1
2
MIAMIBEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 331 39, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
DATE: April 13, 201 1
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR RETROACTIVE APPROVAL TO ISSUE A REQUEST FOR
QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ) FOR RESIDENT PROJECT REPRESENTATIVE
SERVICES FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY IMPROVEMENTS TO NEIGHBORHOOD N0.8,
CENTRAL BAYSHORE (PACKAGE A), LOWER NORTH BAY ROAD (PACKAGE
B), AND LAKE PANCOAST (PACKAGE C).
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Approve issuance of the RFQ.
ANALYSIS
In accordance with Section 287.055, Florida Statutes, known as the "Consultants' Competitive
Negotiation Act", the City may enter into a "continuing contract" for professional architectural
and engineering services for projects in which construction costs do not exceed $2 Million or
for study activities for which the fee does not exceed $200,000.
The City may request, accept, and consider proposals for the compensation to be paid under
the contract only during competitive negotiations, which will take place after the selection of
the firms deemed to be the most qualified to perform the required services. If the City is not
able to negotiate a mutually satisfactory compensation schedule with the top-ranked firms
which is determined to be fair, competitive and reasonable, additional firms in the order of their
competence and qualifications may be selected, and negotiations may continue until an
agreement is reached.
The City desires to independently contract with an A/E firm to provide full-time RPR to observe
the construction of the work associated with the Bayshore Neighborhoods Right-of-way
Improvements Projects for the Central Bayshore (8A), Lower North Bay Road (8B), and Lake
Pancoast (8C) Neighborhoods.
The RPR shall be qualified, meet all the requirements referenced herein, and have adequate
understanding of the Project, and be able to address, process, evaluate, recommend, respond
to, and review construction related correspondence. In general, RPRs will conduct onsite
observations of the Contractor's work to assist the City in determining if the provisions of the
respective Contract Documents and permit conditions are being fulfilled and to reasonably
protect the CITY against defects and deficiencies in the Work of the Contractor.
Commission Memorandum - RFQ For RPR Services for ROW Improvements.
April 13, 201 1
Page 2 of 10
The RPR shall review materials and evaluate, on a daily basis, the workmanship of the
Contractor on each of the projects, report as to the progress, and report to City any deviations
from the respective Contract Documents. It is the City's intent for the RPR to be present
onsite to provide general oversight and direction. The means and methods of construction
shall be the responsibility of each Contractor. As such, the RPR will not be expected to advise
on or suggest methods of construction to the Contractor.
The City of Miami Beach is commencing construction on the Bayshore Neighborhoods Right-
of-Way lmprovements Projects which provides for water, storm water, and neighborhood
improvements within the Central Bayshore (8A), Lower North Bay Road (8B), and Lake
Pancoast (8C) Neighborhoods. Construction associated with these projects include the
installation of water mains, storm water infrastructure, and storm water pump station with
associated pressurized well systems; milling and resurfacing of existing roadways; sidewalk
replacements; landscape installations and associated irrigation systems; and lighting.
On December 8, 2010, the Mayor and City Commission awarded the Bayshore Neighborhood
No. 88 Right-of-way lnfrastructure lmprovements project to Trans Florida Development
Corporation and on January 19, 201 1 they awarded the Bayshore Neighborhoods No. 8A and
8C Right-of-way lnfrastructure lmprovements projects to Lanzo Construction.
RPR's services shall based upon a construction duration period of approximately twenty-six
(26) months for Bayshore Package 8N8C and sixteen (16) months for package B.
Construction Contracts for packages 8A and 8C have been combined into one single contract
and awarded to only one Contractor. The construction phase of both construction contracts,
Packages 8N8C and 8B, are currently scheduled to run concurrently. Construction activities
are currently scheduled to commence in the 3rd quarter of 201 1 with estimated completion in
the 3rd quarter of 201 3.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
The following outlines the Resident Project Representative's (RPR's) duties and
responsibilities:
General Coordination: The RPR will communicate daily or periodically with the CITY, the
CITY'S AIE CONSULTANT and CONTRACTOR, as needed. They will report on concerns as it
relates to the construction effort and activities. In addition, the RPR shall also coordinate with
the CONTRACTOR'S Public lnformation Officer where notifications such as utility outages,
road closures, etc. may be required. The RPR will monitor and verify that the CONTRACTOR
has made the required notifications to the utility owners, residents and businesses as may be
required.
Resident's lnformation Meetings: The RPR will be expected to attend and participate in
Resident lnformation Meetings with the CITY and NE CONSULTANT for each of the Projects.
Pre-Construction Meetings: The RPR will be expected to attend and participate in Pre-
Construction Meetings with the CITY, NE CONSULTANT and CONTRACTOR for each of the
Projects. The Pre-construction Meeting shall be scheduled once the first Notice-to-Proceed is
issued to the CONTRACTOR.
Commission Memorandum - RFQ For RPR Services for ROW Improvements.
April 13, 201 1
Page 3 of 10
Weekly Construction Progress Meetings: The RPR shall attend and participate in weekly
construction project meetings with the CITY, A/E CONSULTANT and CONTRACTOR on each
Project. These meetings will serve as forums to review the status of construction progress,
discuss construction issues, discuss schedule and/or cost concerns, discuss potential changes
or conflicts, review the status of shop drawing submittals and contract document clarifications
and interpretations, and to resolve problems before they become critical. RPR shall review
weekly meeting minutes distributed by A/E CONSULTANT and two week look ahead provided
by the CONTRACTOR and provide comments or objections to written statements within the
specified timeframe. The RPR will prepare detailed weekly reports that describe the
construction activities, progress, incidents and issues that have occurred on the construction
site and distribute to the attendees in advance of the weekly construction progress meetings.
Field Inspections: The RPR shall conduct field inspections on a daily basis throughout the
duration of construction. The RPR shall be present at the construction site daily during the
construction phase of the project and will be expected to be available, as needed, throughout
the CONTRACTOR'S work day.
Specialty AIE CONSULTANT Site Visits: The RPR will monitor the number of specialty site
visits requested by the CONTRACTOR or ClTY and conducted by the AIE CONSULTANT.
When it becomes evident that a specialty site visit from the design Engineer of Record (EOR)
will be required, the RPR will notify the EOR to discuss and schedule a mutually acceptable
time for meeting at the construction site.
Daily Reports: The RPR will prepare daily reports, on the same date as construction occurs,
to record the daily performance of the CONTRACTOR as well as other significant contract
related matters. Daily reports shall be uploaded to the CITY'S E-Builder document
management system by the RPR. At the end of each week, the RPR will forward the original
daily reports to the ClTY for review. The RPR will maintain and file paper copies of the daily
reports onsite for reference. The daily reports shall include records of when the
CONTRACTOR is on the job-site, field inspections, weather conditions, change orders,
changed conditions, list of job site visitors, daily drilling and testing activities, testing results,
testing observations, and records of the outcome of tests and inspections. At a minimum the
daily reports will contain the following information:
Weather and general site conditions
CONTRACTOR'S work force counts by category and hours worked
Description of Work performed including location
* Equipment utilized
Names of visitors to the jobsite and reason for the visit
Tests made and results
Construction difficulties encountered and remedial measures taken
Significant delays encountered and apparent reasons why
Description of (potential) disputes between the CONTRACTOR and ClTY
Description of (potential) disputes between the CONTRACTOR and residents
Summary of additional directions that may have been given to the CONTRACTOR
Detailed record of materials, equipment and labor used in connection with extra work, or
where there is reason to suspect that a claim or request for Change Order may be
submitted by the CONTRACTOR
Summary of any substantive discussions held with the CONTRACTOR andlor ClTY
Summary of nonconforming work referenced to corresponding Non-Compliance Notice
Commission Memorandum - RFQ For RPR Services for ROW Improvements.
April 13, 2011
Page 4 of 10
A log of photographs taken
Photographic Record: Provide a photographic record of the overall progress of construction,
beginning with preconstruction documentation, following with on-going construction
documentation, and ending with post-construction documentation. Photographs shall be digital
snapshot type taken to define the progress of the project and shall be filed electronically by
month in the CITY's E-BuilderTM document management system, labeled by date, time and
location. The RPR will upload all photos to the E-BuilderTM document management system on
a weekly basis.
Adherence To Contract Documents: The RPR shall review materials and workmanship of
the projects and report to the ClTY any deviations from the Contract Documents that may
come to the RPR's attention. RPR shall determine the acceptability of the work and materials
and in concert with the AIE CONSULTANT (as necessary) and make recommendations to the
ClTY to reject items not meeting the requirements of the Contract Documents.
Delivery of Unaccepted Materials to Jobsite: As new materials are delivered to the jobsite,
the RPR will check the material's certifications and samples and verify that an approved shop
drawing was submitted for the material in question. If it is determined that a submittal has not
been approved, the RPR shall immediately notify the ClTY and issue a Non-Compliance
Notice. In conjunction with the AIE CONSULTANT, the RPR will direct and supervise the
sampling and testing of materials to be performed by the CITY'S independent testing
laboratory. The RPR shall maintain test report logs which shall be submitted to the ClTY for
review on a monthly basis and uploaded to the CITY's E-BuilderTM document management
system on a weekly basis. RPR shall also review invoices submitted by the independent
testing laboratories and recommend payment by the CITY.
Shop Drawing Submittals: The RPR shall review shop drawing and product approvals
throughout the duration of the construction period for familiarity prior to delivery of materials.
RPR shall verify that CONTRACTOR is maintaining a submittal log, conducting timely
submittals, and uploading approved shop drawings to the CITY's E-BuilderTM document
management system.
Issuance of Non-compliance Notices: The RPR will be responsible for notifying the ClTY
when they become aware of a condition that is believed to be in noncompliance with Contract
Documents. Anytime the RPR notices a potential construction problem or a condition that
could result in non-complying materials, equipment or workmanship the RPR will need to
determine whether the condition poses an immediate threat to public health or safety. If a
condition does not pose a threat to public health or safety, immediate verbal notification or
"Pre-Noncompliance Notice" of the potential noncompliance should be made to the
CONTRACTOR and the CITY. This verbal notice shall be documented in the RPR's daily
report and shall advise the CONTRACTOR of potential construction problems, errors, or
deficiencies that can be promptly resolved and do not warrant a Noncompliance Notice. If the
CONTRACTOR fails to respond to the verbal notification within a reasonable timeframe, the
RPR will notify the ClTY and the CITY's Senior Capital Projects Coordinator will issue a Non-
compliance Notice. If a condition poses an immediate threat to public health or safety, the
RPR will notify the CONTRACTOR and ClTY immediately and the CITY's Senior Capital
Projects Coordinator will issue a Non-compliance Notice to the CONTRACTOR. Non-
compliance Notices will include a description of the Work that does not meet contract
requirements, along with a required timetable for corrective work to be implemented by the
Commission Memorandum - RFQ For RPR Services for ROW Improvements.
April 13, 2011
Page 5 of 10
CONTRACTOR. Other items that should be included in the Notice include a reference to the
provision of the Contract Documents that has been violated.
Damage to Existing Facilities: The RPR will identify any existing facilities damaged by the
CONTRACTOR and verify that the CONTRACTOR has notified the respective owner(s).
Include record of such occurrences in the daily reports.
Change Orders: RPR shall perform an independent review of any Change Orders submitted
by the CONTRACTOR and provide a written statement noting recommendation for approval or
denial of the Change Order to the CITY. If recommended for approval, the RPR will note if the
requested cost and schedule impacts are fair and reasonable. The RPR will be responsible for
verify that A/E CONSULTANT is maintaining a Change Order log and uploading approved
Change Orders to the CITY's E-BuilderTM document management system. The RPR shall also
participate in change request review meetings, with ClTY and CONTRACTOR to resolve
and/or negotiate the equitable resolution of request.
Requests for lnformationlContract Document Clarification (RFlsICDCs): When RFls and
CDCs involve design issue interpretations, the RPR will coordinate with the A/E
CONSULTANT, as needed, to resolve the CONTRACTOR'S Requests for Information,
Contract Document Clarifications, Field Orders, and other related correspondence. The RPR
will be also be responsible for verifying that the A/E CONSULTANT is providing a written
response to RFls and CDCs in a timely matter and that they are processing, logging, and
distribute all RFlsICDCs. RPR will verify that A/E CONSULTANT is uploading RFI and CDC
responses to the CITY's E-BuilderTM document management system.
Schedule: RPR will review and familiarize themselves with the construction schedule, monitor
the progress of construction, and ensure the CONTRACTOR'S adherence to the schedule.
The CONTRACTOR will be required to submit a detailed schedule to the RPR at the pre
construction meeting. This schedule will be reviewed and approved by the RPR and the CITY.
This schedule will be updated in by weekly basis by the CONTRACTOR; however, the RPR
will be responsible for reviewing the contactor's schedule to confirm accuracy of the work
activities completed. Analysis of the CONTRACTOR schedule will be on the basis of planned
versus actual costs for the month and contract to date.
Pay Requisitions: RPR shall verify CONTRACTOR'S pay requisition quantities and sign off
on all pay requisition quantities in the field. RPR shall be responsible for reviewing with the
CONTRACTOR the monthly payment requisition to confirm the status of completed and
uncompleted work and stored materials. The RPR shall advise the ClTY of quantities being
approved for subsequent concurrence for payment purposes. Payment Requisitions shall only
be approved by the CITY.
Equipment Tests and Systems Start-up: RPR shall be responsible for coordinating various
tests for quality control on the projects and verify that equipment tests and systems start-up
are conducted in the presence of appropriate personnel, and that the CONTRACTOR
maintains adequate records thereof; and observe, record, and report appropriate details
relative to the test procedures and start-up.
Record Drawings: RPR will monitor that record drawing mark-ups are properly maintained
by the CONTRACTOR. At a minimum, the RPR will review the record drawing mark-ups on
the 20th working day of every month, or more often, as deemed necessary by the CITY.
CONTRACTOR'S failure to maintain the record drawings in up-to-date condition may be
deemed grounds for withholding CONTRACTOR'S monthly payment requisitions until such
Commission Memorandum - RFQ For RPR Services for ROW Improvements.
April 13, 201 1
Page 6 of 10
time as the record drawings are brought up-to-date. The RPR will notify the ClTY if it
considers the mark-up documents insufficient. The ClTY will make final determination of
payment withholding.
Safety: RPRs will be expected to recognize a hazard that any reasonable non-safety
professional might be expected to recognize. In addition, those safety obligations extend only
to recognizable hazards that the RPR may note while in the normal conduct of onsite
business.
If a situation presents itself, the following procedures should be followed:
Immediately direct personnel to remove themselves from the apparent danger,
Notify the CONTRACTOR'S superintendent of the apparent condition that caused the
concern and that the affected personnel were directed to remove themselves
accordingly,
Notify the CONTRACTOR of the situation that arises concern, both in writing and
verbally,
Issue a written Notice of Noncompliance stating that the CONTRACTOR should take
immediate action as it deems necessary to correct the deficiency / condition.
Write a full report in the Daily Report on the condition found to be unsafe, all actions
taken, and correspondence written, including times and names,
Take photographs, of the concern,
If the CONTRACTOR does not make corrections, the RPR should notify the CITY,
The RPR will review the situation with the ClTY for further direction,
The condition, as well as all conversations and correspondence, will be recorded in the
RPRs Daily Report.
In the case of a construction-related accident, RPR will notify the ClTY of the accident.
RPR will direct the CONTRACTOR to prepare an accident report with a copy
forwarded to the CITY.
Quality Control: The RPR will review and monitor the CONTRACTOR'S adherence to an
acceptable quality control program submitted by the CONTRACTOR prior to the issuance of
the second Notice-to-Proceed by the CITY. This program will describe the Contactor's quality
control, organizational procedures, documentation controls and processes for each phase of
the work. Quality control during construction will be the responsibility of the CONTRACTOR;
however, oversight and ensuring the CONTRACTOR complies with applicable jurisdictional
construction standards will be enforced on the CITY'S behalf by the RPR.
Proceeding with Disputed Work: In the event that an agreement cannot be reached on a
Change Order, the CONTRACTOR must carry on the work and adhere to the project schedule
in accordance with the contract general conditions. The RPR will log all forced work efforts
related to disputed change order on a Forced Work Daily Log Reports which will be signed
and dated by the RPR and the CONTRACTOR'S representative at the completion of each
workday. The RPR will forward copies of this form to the ClTY for record purposes.
Maintenance of Traffic (MOT): The CONTRACTOR shall provide the RPR, ClTY and AIE
CONSULTANT with approved copies of its MOT at the Pre-Construction Meeting for general
information purposes. It will be the RPR's responsibility to verify compliance with the MOT in
the field.
Contractor Request for Services: When the CONTRACTOR requires services from the
Commission Memorandum - RFQ For RPR Services for ROW Improvements.
April 13, 201 1
Page 7 of 10
ClTY for issues such as water main shutdowns, tie-ins to existing water mains, special
regulatory inspections, etc., a request shall be made in writing by the CONTRACTOR, and
forwarded by the RPR to the CITY, a minimum of three working days prior to when required.
Substantial Completion: When the CONTRACTOR considers that the Work has reached
Substantial Completion, the CONTRACTOR will notify the RPR who will verify that the work
has progressed to the substantial completion point in accordance the Contract Documents. If
the RPR is in agreement, the RPR will contact the ClTY to agree on a schedule for conducting
a substantial completion "walk-through" inspection of the Work. RPR shall attend and
participate in the substantial completion "walk-through", perform a substantial completion
inspection with the CONTRACTOR, A/E CONSULTANT and the CITY, and prepare a punch
list that describes items remaining to be completed. This punch list will be attached to the
certificate of substantial completion.
Final Completion and Project Closeout: When the CONTRACTOR considers that the Work
has reached Final Completion, the CONTRACTOR will notify the RPR who will verify that the
work has progressed to the Final Completion point in accordance the Contract Documents. If
the RPR is in agreement, the RPR will contact the ClTY to agree on a schedule for conducting
a Final Completion "walk-through" inspection of the Work. RPR shall attend and participate in
the Final Completion "walk-through" and perform a Final Completion inspection with the
CONTRACTOR, A/E CONSULTANT and the CITY. If the work is determined to be incomplete,
RPR and other attendees will each develop a punch list of items requiring completion or
correction prior to consideration of final acceptance of each project which shall be forwarded to
the CONTRACTOR by the RPR for each project. Once all parties determine the work is
complete and the CONTRACTOR has delivered all close-out documentation to the CITY, the
RPR will prepare a Final Certificate for Payment. RPR will complete all necessary close-out
and construction completion forms and documentation in coordination with the ClTY for the
projects. The RPR will work with the A/E CONSULTANT and the CONTRACTOR to ascertain
materials required for the closeout binder, as required by the CITY, and review the Operation
and Maintenance manuals for each project for completeness prior to forwarding
documentation to the CITY.
MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS
ALL FIRMS THAT SUBMIT A PROPOSAL FOR CONSIDERATION MUST MEET THE MINIMUM
QUALIFICATIONS AS PROVIDED BELOW. IF THE MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS ARE NOT MET,
THE CONSULTANT'S SUBMITTAL WlLL BE DEEMED NON-RESPONSIVE. QUALIFICATIONS
WlLL BE CONSIDERED ONLY FROM PROPOSERS THAT ARE REGULARLY ENGAGED IN THE
BUSINESS OF PROVIDING THE PROFESSIONAL SPECIALIZATION SERVICES AS DESCRIBED
IN THIS RFQ.
Proposer: For purposes of compliance with this minimum experience requirement, the term
"Proposer" is hereby defined to mean the firm and/or business entity which is submitting a
proposal pursuant to this RFQ. Accordingly, the firm and/or business entity must meet the
minimum requirements listed below in order to be deemed responsive. Non-responsive bids
will be disqualified from consideration.
Interested Firms shall address the following items in the RFQ response:
Item I. Team Experience:
* List all projects undertaken in the past five (5) years, describe the scope of each
project in physical terms and by cost, describe the respondent's responsibilities,
and provide the name and contact telephone number of an individual in a position
Commission Memorandum - RFQ For RPR Services for ROW Improvements.
April 13, 2011
Page 8 of 10
of responsibility who can attest to respondent's activities in relation to the project.
An SF254 can suffice this request.
Provide the name(s) of the person, within your organization who was most actively
concerned with managing each project;
List and describe all legal claims against any member of the team alleging errors
and/or omissions, or any breach of professional ethics, including those settled out
of court, during in the past five (5) years.
The team must demonstrate through sample projects, firm philosophy, and design
approach their commitment to Green Building andlor environmental quality and
long-term operational efficiency of design products.
Provide the name(s) of the person, or person within your organization who was
most actively involved with managing each project.
ltem 2. Project Manager's Experience:
Provide a comprehensive summary of the experience and qualifications of the individual who
will be selected to serve as the Project Manager. This individual must have a minimum of five
(5) years experience in similar public or private projects and should have served as Project
Manager on a minimum of three (3) previous projects having similar sizes and scopes.
ltem 3. Previous Similar Projects:
Please provide a list of a minimum of ten (10) projects which demonstrates the Team's
experience in providing the services as required under this RFQ and in the scope of services
for this project. Please provide the following information for each sample project:
Client name, address, phone number and e-mail address.
Consultant (Architect or Engineer) name, address, phone number, fax andlor e-mail
address.
Description of the scope of the work.
Month and year the project was started and completed.
Total cost and/or fees paid to your firm.
Total cost of the construction, estimated and actual.
Role of the firm and the responsibilities.
ltem 4. Qualification of Project Team:
Provide a list of the personnellsub-consultants to be used on this project and their
qualifications as it relates to project scope. A resume of each individual, including education,
experience, and any other pertinent information shall be included for each team member
including any subconsultants, to be assigned to this project.
ltem 5. Project Approach:
a Organizational structure of project team
Project specific approach to this project
EVALUATION PROCESS
The procedure for response, evaluation and selection will be as follows:
RFQ issued
Receipt of responses.
Opening and listing of all responses received.
Commission Memorandum - RFQ For RPR Services for ROW Improvements.
April 13, 201 1
Page 9 of 10
An evaluation committee, appointed by the City Manager, shall meet to evaluate each
response in accordance with the requirements of this RFQ. If further information is
desired, proposers may be requested to make additional written submissions or oral
presentations to the evaluation committee.
The evaluation committee will recommend to the City Manager the proposer(s) that the
evaluation committee deems to be in the best interest of the City by using the following
criteria for selection:
The City may request, accept, and consider proposals for the compensation to be paid
under the contract only during competitive negotiations.
After considering the recommendation(s) of the Evaluation Committee, the City
Manager shall recommend to the City Commission the response or responses
acceptance of which the City Manager deems to be in the best interest of the City.
The City Commission shall consider the City Manager's recommendation(s) in light of
the recommendation(s) and evaluation of the Evaluation Committee and, if appropriate,
approve the City Manager's recommendation(s). The City Commission may reject the
City Manager's recommendation(s) and select another response or responses. In any
case, City Commission shall select the response or responses, acceptance of which
Commission Memorandum - RFQ For RPR Services for ROW Improvements.
April 13, 201 1
Page 10 of 10
the City Commission deems to be in the best interest of the City. The City Commission
may also reject all proposals.
Negotiations between the selected proposer(s) and the City take place to arrive at
agreement terms. If the City Commission has so directed, the City may proceed to
negotiate an agreement with a proposer other than the top ranked proposer if the
negotiations with the top ranked proposer ail to produce a mutually acceptable
agreement within a reasonable period of time.
A proposed contract or contracts are presented to the City Commission for approval,
modification and approval, or rejection.
If and when a contract or contracts acceptable to the respective parties is approved by
the City Commission, the Mayor and City Clerk sign the contract(s) after the selected
proposer(s) has (or have) done so.
Should the Mayor and Commission authorize the issuance of this RFQ, all procurement rules
(i.e. Cone of Silence, etc.) will apply.
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends that the City Commission retroactively approve the issuance
of a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for Resident Project Representative Services for Right-
of-Way Improvements to Neighborhood No. 8, Central Bayshore (Package A), Lower North
Bay Road (Package B), and Lake Pancoast (Package C).
T:\AGENDAEOlI \4-13-11\RFQ#22-10-11 RPR Services for ROW - Memo.doc
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
Request For Approval To Award A Contract, Pursuant To lnvitation To Bid No. 15-10/11, For The Purchase And
Installation Of Video Monitoring Equipment For The Miami Beach Convention Center; Authorizing The Mayor And City
Clerk To Execute An Agreement With ASE Telecom & Data, Ins., At The Not-To-Exceed Amount Of $600,000 From
Convention Center Fund 440; Further Authorizing The Administration To Engage In Value Engineering To Further
Reduce The Cost And Time For Completion Of Said Project.
Key Intended Outcome Supported: I Ensure well-maintained infrastructure
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.):
The 2007 Community Satisfaction Survey noted 89% of residents Citywide rated recent capital projects completed as
"excellent" or "good."
Issue: 1 Shall the City Commission approve the award of the contract? I
Item SummarylRecommendation:
I The current securitv camera system at the Miami Beach Convention Center (MBCC) was installed in 1994. It is 1
antiquated and ope;ating at 50% capacity with only fifty (50) analog cameras c$rently in operation and is inadequate
to monitor the MBCC properly. The new camera system, with over 200 cameras installed, would utilize the latest
technology available and significantly increase the ability to properly monitor all activities within and around the facility.
lnvitation to Bid (ITB) No. 15-10/11 was issued on January 27, 2011, with an opening date of February 17, 201 1. The
pre-bid conference was held on February 4, 201 1, in addition to a walkthrough of the entire facility on February 9,
201 1. During both meetings, prospective bidders were instructed on the procurement process and the information
their respective proposals should contain. Bidsync issued bid notices to 3,534 prospective bidders which resulted in
the receipt of the following five (5) bids:
Advanced Control Corp.
ASE Telecom & Data, Inc.
Gisnet Telecom, Inc.
Protect Video, Inc.
Waveguide Communications, Inc.
On March 1, 2011, Gisnet Telecom, Inc., the lowest bidder, notified the Procurement Division that there were
significant errors in their estimating and withdrew its proposal. As a result, the following table provides the proposed
lump sum bid prices of the four (4) responsive bids:
On March 21, 201 1, the TRP convened to evaluate, score, and rank the bidders and discussed their individual
observations of each prospective bidder's qualifications, experience, and competence to score and rank the firms
accordingly. ASE Telecom & Data, Inc. received all three first-place votes for contract award as noted below:
ASE Telecom & Data, Inc. was established in 1984 and specializes in design, turnkey installation, certification and
documentation of Premise and Outside Plant Cabling Systems in both copper and optical fiber media for Local Area
Network (LAN) and Wide Area Network (WAN) markets, in addition to, the sales, design, and implementation of CCTV
and access control systems. ASE is licensed as a State of Florida low voltage electrical contractor and certified as a
Pelco system designer. Previous notable clients include Bacardi USA, Carnival Cruise Lines, FP&L Turkey Point
Nuclear Power Plant, Jackson Memorial Hospital, and Mount Sinai Medical Center.
After considering the review and recommendation of City staff, the City Manager exercised his due diligence and
carefully considered the specifics of this IT6 process. As a result, the City Manager recommends to the Mayor and
City Commission to award the contract to ASE Telecom & Data, Inc.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
MIAMIBEACH
Financial Information:
Approved
Total $600,000.00
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking: I Max Sklar, ext. 61 16
Source of
Funds:
OBPI
1
Amount
$600,000.00
Account
Convention Center Fund 440
MIAMIBEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 331 39, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
DATE: April 13, 201 1
w
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR APPROVAL TO AWARD A CONTRACT, PURSUANT TO
INVITATION TO BID NO. 15-10111, FOR THE PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION OF
VIDEO MONITORING EQUIPMENT FOR THE MIAMI BEACH CONVENTION
CENTER; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AN
AGREEMENT WITH ASE TELECOM & DATA, INC., AT THE NOT-TO-EXCEED
AMOUNT OF $600,000 FROM CONVENTION CENTER FUND 440; FURTHER
AUTHORIZING THE ADMINISTRATION TO ENGAGE IN VALUE ENGINEERING TO
FURTHER REDUCE THE COST AND TIME FOR COMPLETION OF SAID
PROJECT.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Approve the award of contract.
KEY INTENDED OUTCOMES SUPPORTED
Ensure well-maintained facilities.
FUNDING
$600,000 Funding is available from the Convention Center Fund 440, previously
appropriated in the FY 201 011 1 Capital Budget.
ANALYSIS
The current security camera system at the Miami Beach Convention Center (MBCC) was
installed in 1994. It is antiquated and operating at 50% capacity with only fifty (50) analog
cameras currently in operation and is inadequate to monitor the MBCC properly. The new
camera system, with over 200 cameras installed, would utilize the latest technology available
and significantly increase the ability to properly monitor all activities within and around the
facility.
Attachment A provides conceptual drawings of the Miami Beach Convention Center and camera
locations. These conceptual drawings for this work are diagrammatic, intended to convey the
extent, general arrangement and locations of the cameras. Bidders are to include all items where
required by code, other sections, and for proper installation of the work.
Commission Memorandum - I TB- 15- 10/1 I -Convention Center Security Cameras
April 13, 201 1
Page 2 of 3
SCOPE OF SERVICES
The work specified in this bid consists of furnishing all labor, machinery, tools, means of
transportation, supplies, equipment, materials, and services necessary, to include permits, to furnish
and install video monitoring equipment in the Miami Beach Convention Center.
BID PROCESS
Invitation to Bid (ITB) No. 15-1011 1 was issued on January 27, 201 1, with an opening date of
February 17, 201 1. The pre-bid conference was held on February 4, 201 1, in addition to a
walkthrough of the entire facility on February 9, 201 1. During both meetings, prospective
bidders were instructed on the procurement process and the information their respective
proposals should contain.
Bidsync issued bid notices to 3,534 prospective bidders which resulted in the receipt of the
following five (5) bids:
Advanced Control Corp.
ASE Telecom & Data, Inc.
Gisnet Telecom, Inc.
Protect Video, Inc.
Waveguide Communications, Inc.
On March 1, 201 1, Gisnet Telecom, Inc., the lowest bidder, notified the Procurement Division
that there were significant errors in their estimating and withdrew its proposal. As a result, the
following table provides the proposed lump sum bid prices of the four (4) responsive bids. While
the project's estimated budget is $600,000, the ITB noted that the City reserves the right to
modify item quantities andlor the project's scope of work to not exceed the budgeted amount.
The Technical Review Panel (TRP) consisted of the following individuals:
Coq party *:.
ASE Telecom & Data, Inc.
Protect Video, Inc.
Advanced Control Corp.
Waveguide Communications, Inc.
Gerald Cunningham, Senior Network Adminsitrator, IT Department
Angelo Grande, Director of Operations, Miami Beach Convention Center
Det. Vincent Tuzeo, Technology Coordinator, Police Department
Grand Total
Base Bid Price
$618,671.70
$658,000.00
$750,000.00
$998,743.1 1
On March 21, 201 1, the TRP convened to evaluate, score, and rank the bidders based on the
following criteria:
60 Points - Grand Total Base Bid Amount
15 Points - Qualifications of Bidder
15 Points - Project Methodology
10 Points - Past Performance Evaluation Surveys
Commission Memorandum - 17-6- 15- 10/11 -Convention Center Security Cameras
April 13, 201 1
Page 3 of 3
The TRP discussed their individual perceptions of each prospective bidder's qualifications,
experience, and competence to score and rank the firms accordingly. ASE Telecom & Data,
Inc. received all three first-place votes for contract award as noted below:
ASE Telecom & Data, Inc.
ASE Telecom & Data, Inc. was established in 1984 and specializes in design, turnkey
installation, certification and documentation of Premise and Outside Plant Cabling Systems in
both copper and optical fiber media for Local Area Network (LAN) and Wide Area Network
(WAN) markets, in addition to, the sales, design, and implementation of CCTV and access
control systems. ASE is licensed as a State of Florida low voltage electrical contractor and
certified as a Pelco system designer. Previous notable clients include Bacardi USA, Carnival
Cruise Lines, FP&L Turkey Point Nuclear Power Plant, Jackson Memorial Hospital, and Mount
Sinai Medical Center.
CITY MANAGER'S REVIEW
Tuzeo
l(80)
2 (75)
3 (60)
4 (35)
Grande
l(88)
2 (85)
3 (55)
4 (42)
Company
ASE Telecom & Data, Inc.
Protect Video, Inc.
Advanced Control Corp.
Waveguide Communications, Inc.
After considering the review and recommendation of City staff, the City Manager exercised his
due diligence and carefully considered the specifics of this ITB process. As a result, the City
Manager recommends to the Mayor and City Commission to award the contract to ASE
Telecom & Data, Inc.
Total
3 (262)
6 (251)
9 (189)
12 (115)
Cunningham
1 (94)
2 (91)
3 (74)
4 (38)
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends the award of the contract to ASE Telecom & Data, Inc. as the
lowest and best responsive bidder, pursuant to Invitation to Bid 15-1 0/11, for the purchase and
installation of video monitoring equipment for the Miami Beach Convention Center, based on a
total not-to-exceed lump sum of $600,000 from Convention Center Fund 440, further authorizing
the Administration to engage in value engineering to further reduce the cost and time for
completion of said project.
T:WGENDA\2011Wpril 13\Consent\lTB 15-1 0-1 1 - MBCC Security Cameras - MEMO.docx
ATTACHMENT A - CONCEPTUAL DRAWINGS
[PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
BID NO: 15-10/11
DATE: February 17,2011
CITYOF MIAMI BEACH
55
f MIAMI BEACH CONVENTION CENTER 7
1901 Convention Center Drive
1 Miami Beach, FL 33 139-1820 /
MIAMI BEACH CONVENTION CENTER
1901 Convention Center Drive
Miami Beach, FL 33139-1820
37
Business enter \r d =,$ =fl !A Vi*o~onf~~enc~ center
OPEN ABOVE
EXHIBIT
HALLA
OPEN ABOVE
EXHIBIT
WB
OPEN ABOV6"
EXHIBIT
HAU D
OPEN ABOVE
EXHIBIT
HALL C
EXECUTNE OFFICES ON 4M FLOOR
MIAMI BEACH CONVENTION CENTER
1901 Convention Center Drive
0 Miami Beach, FL 33139-1820
MIAMI BEACH CONVENTION CENTER \
1901 Convention Center Drive
Miami Beach, FL 33 139- 1820
39 J
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
Request For Approval To Award Contracts To Aegis Rapidtext, Inc., As Primary Vendor, And National
Captioning Institute Inc., As Secondary Vendor Pursuant To lnvitation To Bid (ITB) No.08-10/11 For Real-
Time Closed Captioning Services Of All City Of Miami Beach Commission Meetings, And Other Televised
Meetings, As Required, To Include Real-Time Spanish Closed Captioning And Translation Services, In the
[ Estimated Annual Amount of $75,000. I
Key Intended Outcome Supported: I Increase Community Satisfaction With City Services.
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.):
In 2009, 17.7% of all respondents indicated they most often get their information for Cable Channel MB77.
Issue:
Shall the Mayor and City Commission approve the award a contract?
Item SummarylRecommendation:
bhe Purpose of lnvitation to Bid No. 08-1011 1 (the "Bid") is to establish a contract, by means of competitive I
ealed bids, for real-time closed captioning service of all City of Miami Beach Commission meetings and
ther televised meetings, as required, from a source that provides prompt and efficient service with
ccuracy generally better than 90%.
he real-time closed captioning services provide English and Spanish of all City Commission meetings, and
televised meetings, as required. The City will receive one (1) file in time sequence order. A Microsoft
ord compatible or other ASCII, unedited, uncertified, via e-mail before 9:30 a.m. Eastern Time the
orning following a meeting.
he awarded contract shall remain in effect for two (2) years from date of contract execution by the Mayor
nd City Clerk, and may be renewed for three (3) additional years, on a year-to-year basis, providing the
bidder will agree to maintain the same terms and conditions of the current contract.
ased on the analysis of the bids received, it is recommended that the City award contracts to Aegis
apidtext, Inc., as primary vendor and National Captioning Institute, Inc., as secondary vendor.
( APPROVE THE AWARD OF CONTRACT. I
Advisory Board Recommendation: I NIA
Financial Information:
I I I
OBPl I ~otall $75.000 annually I
Source of
Funds:
$20,000 annually
I Financial Impact Summary: I
021 0-00031 2
ADA Compliance Grant - 199-6953-00031 2
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking: I Gus Lopez Procurement Division Director @ 6641
1
AMI BEACH
Amount
$55,000 annually
Account
City Clerk Office Professional Services Account No. 01 1-
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33 139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the Cit Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
DATE: April 13, 201 1 7%
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR APPROVAL TO AWARD CONTRACTS TO AEGIS
RAPIDTEXT, INC. AS PRIMARY VENDOR, AND NATIONAL CAPTIONING
INSTITUTE INC. AS SECONDARY VENDOR, PURSUANT TO INVITATION
TO BID (ITB) NO. 08-10111 FOR REAL-TIME CLOSED CAPTIONING
SERVICES OF ALL CITY OF MIAMI BEACH COMMISSION MEETINGS,
AND OTHER TELEVISED MEETINGS, AS REQUIRED, TO INCLUDE REAL-
TIME SPANISH CLOSED CAPTIONING AND TRANSLATION SERVICES, IN
THE ESTIMATED ANNUAL AMOUNT OF $75,000.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Approve the Award of contracts
KEY INTENDED OUTCOME SUPPORTED
Increase community satisfaction with City services.
FUNDING
$55,000.00 FY 201 01201 1 City Clerk's Professional Services Account # 01 1-021 0-000312
$20,000.00 FY 201 011 01 1 ADA Compliance Grant Account No. 199-6953-00031 2
ANALYSIS
In 2005, the City issued ITB No. 31-04/05 for the purpose of establishing a contract for
real-time closed captioning services of all City of Miami Beach Commission meetings
and other televised meetings as required. The City awarded the bid to National
Captioning Institute, Inc. (NCI) with a bid at a rate of $135 an hour. In 2006, the City
determined that the community would be better served by providing Spanish real-time
translation and closed captioning services for City Commission meetings. At the
Commission meeting held on September 6. 2006, the City Commission approved an
amendment to the professional services agreement with NCI at a rate of $400 per hour.
This rate included: I) Interpreter at $150 per program hour and Spanish real-time
captioning at $250 per program hour.
The real-time closed captioning services provide English and Spanish of all City
Commission meetings, and other televised meetings, as required. The City will receive
Commission Memo
April 13,201 1
ITB-08-10111 Real-Time Closed Captioning
one (1) file in time sequence order. A Microsoft Word compatible, or other ASCII,
unedited, uncertified, via e-mail before 9:30 a.m. Eastern Time the morning following a
meeting.
The City Commission has determined that the community would be better served by
providing English to Spanish translation and real-time closed captioning services for the
City Commission meetings, in addition to English real-time closed captioning services.
The purpose of Invitation to Bid No. 08-1011 1 (the "Bid") is to establish a contract, by
means of competitive sealed bids, for real-time closed captioning service of all City of
Miami Beach Commission meetings and other televised meetings, as required, from a
source that provides prompt and efficient service with accuracy generally better than
90%.
The awarded contract shall remain in effect for two (2) years from date of contract
execution by the Mayor and City Clerk, and may be renewed for three (3) additional
years, on a year-to-year basis, providing the successful bidder will agree to maintain the
same terms and conditions of the current contract.
The secondary vendor will be awarded the real-time closed captioning services should
the primary vendor fail to comply with the terms and conditions of the contract. The City
reserves the right to award to the secondary vendor, provided the secondary vendor will
extend the pricing submitted under the bid proposal.
BID PROCESS
The Bid was issued on December 7,2010 with an opening date January 6,201 1. Bidnet
issued bid notices to 19 prospective bidders, and BidSync issued bid notices to 58
prospective bidders, Additionally, the Procurement Division sent the notices to five (5)
prospective bidders. The notices resulted in the receipt of four (4) bids from the following
firms: Aegis Rapidtext, Inc., Caption Colorado, LLC, National Captioning Institute, Inc.,
and Caption IT, LLC, of which three (3) were deemed responsive. The bid from Caption
IT, LLC bid did meet the bidder qualifications, and was therefore deemed non-
responsive.
On January 10, 201 1, the Procurement Division sent the bids received to the following
individuals for evaluation.
Robert Parcher, City Clerk
Jeffrey Singer, Media Specialist
EVALUATION PROCESS
In an effort to ensure the lowest possible cost, and obtain a comparison of the vendors'
products and services, Procurement requested additional information from Aegis
RapidText, Inc.
As Aegis' bid for real-time closed captioning, for its English to Spanish translation
appeared quite low, $90 per hour when compared to other bids received, $165 per hour;
$320 per hour; and $330 per hour. The Procurement requested Aegis confirm that their
Commission Memo
April 13,201 1
ITB-08-10/11 Real-Time Closed Captioning
Bid included real-time translation from English to Spanish, and then real-time captioning,
and also provided and opportunity to Aegis to confirm their pricing for Spanish captioning
or withdraw their Bid.
Aegis stated they do have the resources to provide the English to Spanish Captioning
real-time closed captioning, and that they will honor the rates as provided in their bid.
Considering the low rate, the Administration decided to include a secondary vendor who
the City's current vendor, National Captioning Institute, Inc.
On March 31, 2011, the City performed a connectivity test to confirm if the two lowest
bidders could dial in and send the City text, and also listen in to verify that the bidder
could hear the City's audio.
Aegis RapidTest, Inc. had submitted the lowest bid and successfully completed the
connectivity test.
Caption Colorado, LLC was initially recommended as the secondary vendor, but they
failed the connectivity test. Therefore, National Captioning Institute, Inc. was the third
lowest bid. Upon review of NCl's current contract with the City, the City concluded that
NCI was best suited for the secondary vendor, and didn't need to performing a
connectivity test, as they are presently perform the captioning services.
BID RESULTS
The bid results are tabulated and attached.
CONCLUSION
Based on the analysis of the bids received, the Administration recommends that the City
award contracts to Aegis RapidText, Inc. as primary vendor and National Captioning
Institute as secondary vendor pursuant to ITB 08-1 011 1 for Real-Time Closed Captioning
for English and translate English to Spanish closed captioning.
B
Model
Description
Real-time CC
English
Real-time CC
Spanish
Total
Caption encoding
hardware
original in ~n~lish $ 78.00
Certified transcript 1
Aegis Rapid
Text, Inc.
$ 80.00
$ 90.00
$ 170.00
NIA
original in Spanish $ 450.00
Total $ 528.00 I Webcast option I Charge
1 TABULATION
Caption Colorado, I National I Caption IT,
Calendar days
LLC
2 days
- ( Captioning LLC
$ 260.00
$ 4,000.00
5 days
Immediately under
Link PDR-895 HD9084 Link PDA-895
with Internal
$ 418.00
$ 6,850.00
TO
$8,905
$ 415.00
$ 3,500.00
$ 140.00 English
$360.00 Spanish
Immediately 5 days
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
MIAMIBEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 331 39, www.rniarnibeachfl.gov
TO:
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
DATE: April 13, 201 1
SUBJECT. A REFERRAL TO THE NEIGHBORHOODS COMMITTEE OF A DISCUSSION
REGARDING ALTOS DEL MAR SCULPTURE PARK'S (ADMSP) REQUEST FOR AN
EXTENSION OF TIME OF ADMSP'S DEADLINE TO OBTAIN A BUILDING PERMIT
FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE SCULPTURE PARK IMPROVEMENTS, SAID
EXTENSION FROM MAY 13,201 1, TO FEBRUARY 13,2012.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Refer Altos Del Mar Sculpture Park's request to the Neighborhoods and Community Affairs Committee
for consideration.
BACKGROUND
On October 17, 2007, the Mayor and City Commission approved the issuance of Request for Proposals
No. 02-07/08 to establish a Cultural Arts Themed and/or Other Passive Recreational Activities Program
in Altos Del Mar Park, located on Collins Avenue, between 76th and 77th Streets (the RFP). On July 16,
2008, the Mayor and City Commission accepted the recommendation of the City Manager and
authorized the Administration to enter into negotiations with the successful proposer, Altos Del Mar
Sculpture Park, Inc, a not-for-profit Florida corporation (ADMSP). The Administration negotiated a
Management Agreement with ADMSP whereby they would design, develop, operate and maintain a
sculpture park within a portion of Altos Del Mar Park (to be known as the Altos Del Mar Sculpture Park),
in accordance with its response to the RFP. On June 3, 2009, the City Commission adopted Resolution
No. 2009-27100 which approved and authorized the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Management
Agreement with ADMSP.
The Agreement has an initial term of ten (I 0) years, with two (2) additional five (5) year renewal options,
at the City's sole and absolute discretion. The initial term of the Agreement commenced on June 3,
2009, and expires on June 3,2019.
ADMSP's proposal includes the design, development, construction and, thereafter, operation and
maintenance, of a public sculpture park (hereinafter referred to as the Sculpture Park). The Sculpture
Park would display, in changing exhibitions, major works of sculpture from internationally established
sculptors of the 19th, 20th, and 21st centuries. The artwork would be displayed in three (3) distinct
landscaped areas--referred to, respectively, in ADMSP's proposal as the 1) "Dunefields;" 2) Maritime
Garden; and, 3) "Tree Allees." These are intended to serve as natural "outdoor galleries," and would
enable visitors to navigate freely through exhibits, enjoying the natural beauty created by the landscaped
areas, as well as the beauty of the works of art themselves.
ADMSP would be responsible for all costs associated with design, development, construction, operation,
and maintenance of the Sculpture Park--including, without limitation, construction of all Proposed
Agenda Item CYA
Date 4-/3-//
Altos Del Mar Sculpture Park
April 13, 201 1
City Commission Meeting
Page 2 of 2
Improvements. ADMSP retained the services of ArquitectonicaGEO to create the proposed Sculpture
Park Design. ADMSP confirmed that a capital investment of $2.5 million is needed upfront and $1.7
million is needed for operating costs yearly. They are currently still meeting with potential
sponsorsldonors to fund these expenses. Under the terms of the Agreement, ADMSP would be
responsible for all ongoing maintenance of the Sculpture Park, including the Proposed Improvements. It
would also be responsible for operation and management of the Park for its intended purposes.
On April 14, 2010, the City Commission approved Amendment No. 1 of the Management Agreement by
adopted Resolution No. 2010-27371. The Amendment defined the "Possession Date" and further
provided that ADMSP's obligations under the agreement with respect to maintenance and general
liability coverage shall not commence until the possession date.
On March 5, 201 1, the City received a letter from ADMPS (see attached) advising the City that it would
not be able to obtain a Full Building Permit for the Proposed Improvements by May 13, 2011, as
stipulated in the Agreement. The letter requests that the deadline within which to pull a Full Building
Permit be extended to February 13, 2012, and provides an explanation for the request.
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends that the Mayor and Commission refer this request to the Neighborhoods
and Community Affairs Committee for consideration.
Attachments
JMGIHMFlmas
T:MGENDAEOI 1 W-13-1 I\ADMSP Mgmt Referral Memo.doc.RTF
PETER SAILE
Chairman of the Board of Directors
ALTOS DEL MAR SCULPTURE PARK, INC.
a Florida not-for-profit Public Charity
East of Collins Ave. between 76& and 77& Streets, Miami Beach
Phone 786-290-7109
peter@altosdelmarsculpturepark.com
www.altosdelmarsculpturepark.com
www.admsp.com
ADMSP. 7701 Collins Avenue. Miami Beach. FL 33141
City Manager of Miami Beach
Mr. Jorge M. Gonzalez
City Hall
1700 Convention Center
Miami Beach, FL 33139
March 05, 201 1
Altos Del Mar Sculpture Park - management agreement
Dear City Manager,
Reference is made to the management agreement between the City of Miami Beach and
Altos del Mar Sculpture Park ('ADMSP') dated June 18, 2009. We are pleased that
ADMSP has observed all benchmarks in a timely manner to date. However, we are now
forced to request a first extension of time (from May 13, 201 1 to February 13, 2012) to
meet the upcoming building-permit benchmark. We are expecting a construction period
of nine months, so we would expect that, even with this revised schedule, we should be
able to open the Altos Del Mar Sculpture Park to the public on December 9, 2012.
Reasons for the Extension
ADMSP has not yet applied for our building permit because the engineering has not
been completed and parts of the architectural planning needs to be finalized. ADMSP
has been faced with delays by previously-committed and, therefore, expected pro bono
planning services which, due to the economic slow-down, are no longer available. Our
architect and coordinator of all technical planning jobs, Les Beilinson, has informed us
that an amount of $115,779.52 needs to be made available, so that the engineering
plans for the building-permit application can be completed (see attached e-mail from Les
Beilinson). Therefore, ADMSP needs the additional time to now raise this amount, since
the engineers cannot do the service pro bono at this time. ADMSP expects to come up
with this previously-unexpected capital requirement latest by May 15, 201 1. The raising
of this capital is being handled by the professional public charity developer, Ms. Karen
Kintner. Once the capital is in place, it will take a maximum of three months to finalize
the building-permit application and approximately another six months to obtain the
permits. We trust that our engineers may be a little faster than three months to finalize
the otherwise-well-advanced plans.
Construction Funding
In the past month, ADMSP has explored the possibility of obtaining the unexpected
required funding for the engineering from our expected donors for the construction
funding. However, the facilitators for the construction funding of $5 million, Lennox
Securities, Inc., and American Trust (Switzerland), Inc., have advised us not to request
engineering costs from our potential construction funding sponsors, since this would
mean changing our ongoing application process for construction funding, which calls for
construction funding within four weeks from the date of obtaining the building permit.
Among our intended corporate sponsors for construction funding are companies such as
Verizon, Coca Cola, Adidas, Arttrust Invest, Wilmington Trust, CMI, BMW and
Mercedes.
We would appreciate your decision in favor of this first request by ADMSP for an
extension of time .Should you have any question, I am always available to you. I thank
you for your cooperation, and can assure you that we will realize ADMSP as planned.
I am sorry that our development is currently slower than expected, but we, as many
others, were not immune to the economic slow-down and the taxation benefit changes in
regards to donations, both of which we have experienced since we signed the
management agreement.
We are well on our way and are excited to develop ADMSP as planned.
Best regards,
Peter Saile
MIAMIBEACH
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR AND COMMISSION
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
Ed Tobin, Commissioner A
March 23,201 1
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Agenda item for April 13'~ Commission Meeting - Referral of Item for Discussion
to Neighborhood/Community Affairs Committee.
Please place on the April 13'~, 2011 City Commission meeting agenda a referral to the
Neighborhood/Community Affairs Committee to discuss the lack of accessibility of the City's
website to the disabled.
Should you have any questions, please contact Yanette Bravo at ext. 6274.
We are commrticd to provrdrng exceller~~ pubic senlrce arld sofen/ to all who hvc hark and play rn 01
Agenda Item C4/0
Date 9-/.-/I
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
MIAMIBEACH
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR AND COMMISSION
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
Ed Tobin, Commissioner
March 28th, 201 1
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Agenda item for April 13th Commission Meeting - Referral of ltem for Discussion
to Neighborhood/Community Affairs Committee
Please place on the April 13, 2011 City Commission meeting agenda a referral to the
Neighborhood/Community Affairs Committee a discussion on the status of Sunrise Plaza.
Should you have any questions, please contact Yanette Bravo at ext. 6274.
i Agenda ltem C (IC
We ore cornrn~ited to providtng excellenl publ~c sen/lce ond soiefy b all who live, work, ond play rn our \1
I Date q-13-11
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
MIAMI BEACH
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR AND COMMISSION
TO: Jorge Gonzalez, City Manager
FROM: Michael Gongora, Commissione
DATE: April 5, 201 1
SUBJECT: Referral ltem for April 13 Commission Meeting
Please place on the April 13, 201 1 Commission meeting consent agenda a referral to
the Neighborhoods /Community Affairs Committee for discussion concerning the
attached document: Flamingo: Becoming Florida's Most Pedestrian Friendly
Neighborhood. If you have any questions please feel free to contact my aide Diana
Fontani at ext 6087.
Agenda ltem C YD
Date q-0-//
FLAMINGO:
BECOMING FLORIDA'S MOST PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY NIEGHBORHOOD
Purpose:
FPNA is seeking the City Commission to adopt the following recommendations, by
means of Resolution or other parliamentary process, and direct the Administration
to take the steps necessary for Flamingo to become Florida's Most Pedestrian
Friendly Neighborhood.
The neighborhood's1 demographics represent among the lowest per-capita income
of any neighborhood in the City, the smallest residential unit size of any zip code in
the US, and the lowest car to resident ratio in the State.
All these factors lead to a highly pedestrian intensive neighborhood that is also
heavily trafficked by cyclists, and other non-motorized vehicles. However, the
current state of the street-scapes and traffic facilities do not reflect the unique
pedestrian-centric nature of this neighborhood. Instead, the street-scapes and
traffic facilities are motorized vehicle centric and therefore pedestrian unfriendly
and dangerous (see Attachment B).
Background:
In 2010, the Flamingo Park Neighborhood Association (FPNA) participated in a
special program sponsored by the Highway Safety Research Center at the
University of North Carolina to "Create Livable Communities -- Safer and More
Walkable". The program's goal is to increase community awareness, public
education and effective advocacy to build and sustain a more walkable community,
safer for pedestrians. Supporting Partner Organizations working on the project,
include: Miami Beach Community Development Corporation; Miami-Dade
Metropolitan Planning Organization / Bicycle / Pedestrian; City of Miami Beach
Department of Public Works, Transportation Division; and Miami Beach Police
Department. As a result of the program, its process, and analysis, FPNA identified
a goal of being Florida's most-pedestrian friendly neighborhood.
The City, through the issuance of a General Obligation (GO) bond and the execution
of Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) is beginning to transform the street-scapes
to be more pedestrian friendly.
The Flamingo Park neighborhood is bordered by 5th Street to the south, Lincoln
Lane to the north, Washington Avenue to the east, and Alton Road to the west.
The neighborhood is home to three schools, four community centers, the Miami
Beach Police Department, Old City Hall, and Flamingo Park - Miami Beach's
principle urban park. In addition to these facilities and organizations acting as
magnets, the neighborhood is surrounded by commercial and entertainment activity
and transportation corridors. These geographic factors attract residents to this
neighborhood for its pedestrian access to these features.
Page 1
November 15th 2010, FPNA adopted a Pedestrian Initiative (Attachment A). This
initiative is a central priority for FPNA.
Current Status:
The attached Analysis of Current Conditions and Recommendations have been
provided to and discussed with the Public Works Departments of both the City of
Miami Beach, Transportation Division and Miami Dade County, Traffic Engineering
Division. These organizations have agreed to work together and with FNPA to
address the Recommendations within their purview and abilities, including creating
a neighborhood speed limit zone of 25 MPH or less and beginning the process of
examining and creating all-way stops at all intersections (where feasible).
However, these organizations need approval and direction from the Commission to
proceed.
Additionally, the CIP neighborhood street improvements (below and above ground)
will address a number of the Recommendations, such as:
Add sidewalk bump-outs
Thicken green space
Widen sidewalks to 6 feet and remove obstacles
Level bumps, improve night lighting and plant more shade trees
Major Recommendation:
FPNA would like to take this opportunity to communicate areas where improvement
is still needed to achieve a street design that I) reflects the neighborhood's
pedestrian-centric culture and 2) provides the needed safety requirements
necessitated by this culture; which, in turn, will help achieve the goal of being
Florida's most pedestrian-friendly neighborhood.
The following chart outlines the initiative's recommendations.
The high priority recommendations are:
Maintain committed progress on General Obligation Bond Initiatives for the
neighborhood
Continued departments' support for ongoing priorities
Neighborhood speed limit reduced to 25 MPH maximum
All-way stops at all intersections
Install large welcome signs emphasizing pedestrian culture
Establish City vehicle "Pace Car" Program
Page 2
C - City Commission
CC - Code Compliance
FPNA - Flamingo Park Neighborhood Association & partners (e. g., CDC, MDPL)
GOB - GO Bond Street Scapes Project
MBP - Miami Beach Police
PW - City and County Public Works
Page 3
Action
Needed
C
C
PW
CC, PW,
MBP
C
PW
PW
PW
C
On-going
MBP
PW
PW
FPNA
C
C
In
Process
GOB
GOB
GOB
GOB
GOB
GOB
GOB
z "2 0,
KJg2.E gp e.g
KJ E-CJ
UJI
-Y g >
mmr:5
% zZu.g
2%b-
u n
" 2 > - g a, z
iz
UJ
a~ a~ $5 g
t; .: H
u
-CJ
0,'G
b.5~
L7Ei E ' " "
2"
Recommendations
Neighborhood speed limit
to 25 MPH or less
Provide constrained and
visual-rich environment
Narrow auto lanes
Add sidewalk bump-outs
Enforce traffic laws
Install all-way Stop signs
intersections
Standardize and paint
crosswalks
Recalibrate intersection
signals for pedestrians
Add sidewalk bump-outs
Widen sidewalks and
remove obstacles
Improve sidewalk
structure
Improve lighting and
shade
Improve dog-owner
behavior
Large welcome signs
emphasizing ped culture
"Yield to Pedestrians,
$112 fine" signs
Noise-abatement
Combine siqnage
Install speed-humps
Encourage walking
programs
Pace cars
South Beach Local bus
improvements
Increase park and ride
ATTACHMENT A
FPNA PEDISTRIAN INITIATIVE
Analysis of Current Conditions:
1. Rampant aggressive driving puts all pedestrians at risk
2. Street signage is deficient
a. No signage warning visiting drivers of pedestrian-oriented
culture unique to South Beach
b. The dozen or so "Yield to Pedestrian, $83 fine" signs are small
and many drivers are unaware of the signs and/or the Florida
law
c. No signage warns noisy drivers of residential neighborhood
(spill-over streets, such as 6th, and corridor streets, such as
16th, suffer)
3. Pedestrian-friendly crosswalks are rare
a. Many residential intersections are without crosswalk stripes at
all
b. Most street crossing lights are pedestrian-unfriendly, which
incentivizes people to ignore them
i. Many pedestrian-intensive intersections (llth and
Meridian) give priority to turning cars (i. e., instead of
automatically giving white-walk light, they stay red-stop),
forcing pedestrians to ignore or activate crosswalk and
wait a full signal cycle
ii. Pedestrian activation, with the exception of a few actual
on-demand crosswalks, is very slow or car-friendly (e. g.,
crossing button pressed less than 7-8 seconds before turn
or lights does not activate, and pedestrian must wait
another full cycle of light changing to safely corss).
4. Many sidewalks are unsafe and/or unpleasant
a. Many residential sidewalks are unsafe for seniors, strollers, and
the disabled due to buckling, cracks, and bike riding
b. Most sidewalks are too narrow for walking 2-abreast or
accommodating multiple use (e. g., bike + pedestrian)
c. Many sidewalks are without shade trees
Recommendations:
1. Calm and reduce aggressive driving
a. Reduce neighborhood speed limit from 30 MPH to a maximum of
25 MPH or less
b. Calm driving and speeding by providing constrained and visual-
rich environment
i. Narrow auto lanes on residential streets to 10 feet
ii. Add sidewalk bump-outs
iii. Thicken green space (is e., plant more trees)
c. Enforce traffic laws
2. Improve street signage
Page 4
a. Large welcome signs to South Beach, such as "Welcome to
South Beach, Florida's most pedestrian-friendly neighborhood.
Please yield to pedestrians in crosswalks, it's the law!"
b. Various, smaller 25 MPH neighborhood speed limits signs
c. More "Yield to Pedestrians, $112 fine" signs, placed more
strategically
d. Stand-alone 'Yield to Pedestrian in Crosswalks" cones at hi-
volume zebra crossings
e. Noise-abatement "Quite zone, punishable by fine" signs on
spillover and corridor streets
f. Combine above signage where feasible to limit visual pollution
Make crosswalks pedestrian-friendly
a. Recalibrate all intersection lights to pedestrian-friendly
i. Automatic white-walk for pedestrians at light change
ii. Incentivize activation button use by making more on-
demand/rapid response (reduce wait time)
b. Paint (and maintain fresh) crosswalks
i. Prioritize dangerous crosswalk-less intersections
ii. Paint all-4 crosswalks at ever residential intersection
iii. Move towards crosswalk standardization
c. Install all-way Stop sign intersections at every residential block
d. Add sidewalk bump-outs
Implement further traffic calming and reducing measures
a. Install speed cushions/speed humps (currently used mid-beach)
along high-risk roads (e. g., bordering parks and schools)
b. Encourage tourist and residential walking programs
i. MDPL tourist walking maps including Flamingo Park
ii. Parks Dept. walking program
iii. City Walk to Work days
c. Encourage all city, police and other official cars to obey speed
limits (e. g ., pace cars)
d. Improve Local Shuttle Bus signage and simplify complicated
routing to encourage usage
e. Study accessible public parking for mainlanders to park and ride
Improve sidewalks
a. Widen sidewalks to 6 feet and remove obstacles
i. such as mail boxes
ii, newspaper boxes and
iii, encroachments
b. Level bumps, improve night lighting and plant more shade trees
c. Improve dog-owner behavior, including better enforcement and
incentives
i. "Clean up after your dog, it's the law" signs at eye level
attached to parking sign posts
ii. More dog bag dispensers and public trash bins
Page 5
Dramatic increase in Pedestrian/Auto accidents,
disproportionally affecting residential neighborhood
1nr.r- since '05. +74O/n
70 fl
+25%
88 PedlAuto Accidents I WashlAlton
Source: MB Police Dept., South Beach only
Attachment B
*9 months annualized
Page 6
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
MIAMIBEACH
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR AND COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
FROM: Jonah Wolfson, Commissioner
DATE: March 1 8th1 201 1
SUBJECT: Agenda Item
Please place on the April 1 3th1 201 1 Commission meeting agenda a referral to the Land Use
and Development Committee to discuss administrative determinations and a proposal to be
made by me that they be published.
If you have any questions, please contact Leonor Hernandez at extension 6437.
Agenda Item CL/E
We ore commi!fr;.d 10 proviclirig euceiienl pubirc service ond soiefV lo o!! who Irve, work ond piny ii? our: Date 4-I&//
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
MIAMIBEACH
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR AND COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
FROM: Matti Herrera Bower, Mayor FJ& fl ~6
DATE: March 28,201 1
SUBJECT: Consent Agenda Item: Referral to Land Use Committee
Please place on the April 13, 201 1 Commission meeting agenda a referral to the
Land Use Committee of a discussion regarding the rezoning of property at 1729
Lenox Avenue.
I thank you in advance for your cooperation in this matter. If you have any
questions, please do not hesitate to contact Rebecca Wakefield at extension 6157.
Thank you.
We are commitled lo providing ex cell en^ ~ublic service and sofefy lo 011 who live, work, and ploy in 7 Agenda Item CYF
I
i Date 4443-1/
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Q MIAMIBEACH
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR AND COMMISSION
TO:
FROM:
DATE :
Jorge Gonzalez, City Manager
Jerry Libbin, Commissioner
March 25, 201 1
SUBJECT: Consent agenda item for the April 1 3'h Commission meeting; a referral to the Land
Use Community and Development Committee to consider an adiustment to the permitted uses in a
CD2 District
I would like a discussion about the possibility of changing the permitted uses in a CD2 District to
allow for self storage.
Please see attached letter of request from David Sacks and Pathman Lewis, LLP with respect to their
client.
Please contact my office at ext. 71 06 if you have any questions.
Attachment
1 Agenda Item C46-
We a:e coinrni!ted !o providing excsllent public servfce and snfeiy to all who li\/e, work, and play in oud
I Date 9-/3-/I
PATHMAN
LEWIS, LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
WAYNE M. PATHMAN, P.A.
HAROLD L. LEWIS, P.A.
ROGER SLADE*
DAVID E. SACKS
LOUIS P. ARCHAMBAULT
ALAN K. FERTEL**
ANNA MARIE HERNANDEZ
LEWIS D. KUHL***
BRUCE L. BENNET****
SARA WALTERS
OLESIA Y. BELCHENKO
MARIA SOLEDAD BODERO '****
ANTHONY VICTOR DE YURRE
March 21,201 1
ONE BISCAYNE TOWER . SUITE 2400
2 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD
MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131-1803
TELEPHONE (305) 379-2425
FACSIMILE (305) 379-2420
www.pathmanlewis.com
DAVID E. SACKS
dsacks@pathmanlewis.com
' also admitted to practice in New York A Connecticut
"also admitted to practice in New Jersey
"' also admitted to oractice m Kentuckv
""Member washigton. D C Bar
' ."" also admMed to pracbce In Ecuador
Commissioner Jerry Libbin
Mayor and Commission
Miami Beach City Hall
1700 Convention Center Drive, 4'h Floor
Miami Beach, Florida 33139
RE: Alton 633 Properties, LLC - Land Development
Property: 633 Alton Road, Miami Beach, Florida
Dear Commissioner Libbin:
On behalf of our client, Alton 633 Properties, LLC, a Florida limited liability company,
owner of the above referenced Property, this letter shall serve as our client's request for a
referral to the City of Miami Beach City Commission. Specifically, we are requesting the
Commission to consider passing an ordinance that will expand the permitted uses in the
CD-2, Commercial Medium Intensity District to include self-storage facilities. At present, the
main permitted uses in the CD-2 District are as follows':
Commercial uses; apartments; apartment/hotels; hotels; and uses that
serve alcoholic beverages, bars, dance halls, or entertainment
establishments.
We have met with City staff regarding the subject request2, and staff is supportive of
the requested use for self-storage in the CD-2 District (which already permits commercial
uses generally). Further, we believe the community surrounding the Property will be well
served by providing a much needed use in the area while having a design that blends with
the fabric of the community. At present, self-storage facilities are not specifically permitted
in the CD-2 District.
1 Pursuant to Section 142-302 of the City of Miami Beach Code.
2 During our meeting with staff, we were advised that the subject request for referral for self-storage cannot be
incorporated into the currently proposed Ordinance for the Alton Road Overlay District.
.I March 21, 201 1
Page 2
Based on the foregoing, we respectfully request the subject referral to the
Commission and appropriate Committees and Boards for the adoption of an ordinance
permitting self-storage intended to benefit the area and City of Miami Beach at large.
Please contact us should you have any questions regarding the foregoing.
Very truly yours,
PATHMAN LEWIS, LLP
cc: Alan H. Potamkin
/ ' Wayne M. Pathman
r:kacks davidkacks david - business development\ltrs\633 alton-commissioner jerry libbin re- expanding cd-2 zoning district uses.doc
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
MIAMIBEACH
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR AND COMMISSION
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
Ed Tobin, Commissioner A
April 1, 201 1
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Agenda item for April 13'~ Commission Meeting - Referral of Item for Discussion
to Land Use and Development Committee
Please place on the April 13,201 1 Commission Meeting Agenda a referral to the Land Use and
Development Committee for a discussion item on a possible amendment to the accessory use
regulations for RM-2 Zoning District to permit a limited number of commercial accessory uses in
an apartment building adjacent to a public baywalk to be open to the public.
If you have any questions, please contact Yanette Bravo at Extension 6274.
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
MIAMI BEACH
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR AND COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Jorge NI. Gonzalez, City Mana
FROM: Jonah Wolfson, Commissione
DATE: March 14'~, 201 1
SUBJECT: Discussion ltem for April 1 3th, 201 1 Commission ,Meeting
Please place on the April 13~~~2011, Commission meeting agenda a referral to the
Finance Committee on the attached memorandum and proposed ordinance.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Leonor Hernandez at
extension 6437.
Agenda ltem C Yx
We are commrtted to prov~dfng excellent publfc servrce and safefy to all who Irve, work, and play In our Date q-0- //
75
March 12,201 1
MEMORANDUM FOR: Commissioner Jonah Wolfson, City of Miami Beach
FROM: Frank Del Vecchio, 301 Ocean Drive, Apt. 604, Miami Beach, FL 33 139
SUBJ: Ethics Guidelines for Acceptance of Gifts, Favors or Services by City Employees
I recommend enactment by the city commission of a standard of conduct prohibiting the
city's officers and employees from accepting a gift, favor or service discounted below
fair market value from an entity doing business with the city or from a lobbyist. Section
2-449 of the Standards of Conduct "Acceptance of gifts, favors, services", is the
appropriate section of the city code for such an amendment. [Attachment 1 .]
Also attached is a reprint of the United States Department of Justice Ethics Office
Handbook on acceptance of gifts by federal employees. [Attachment 2.1
In addition, also attached are excerpts from the DOJ Handbook, applicable to "Gifts from
Outside Sources" (two pages), the focus of the recommended addition to the city's
standard of conduct.
ATTACHMENTS:
Recomniended amendment to Section 2-449, City Code ["Acceptance of gifts, favors,
services."]
U.S. Department of Justice Ethics Office Handbook on Acceptance of Gifts by Federal
Employees.
Excerpt from DOJ Handbook: Definition of Gift; Exceptions to the Gift Rule.
Amend Article VII. Standards of Conduct, of Part 11, Subpart A, Chapter 2, Miami Beach
City Code, by adding a sentence to Section 2-449; the amended subsection to read as
follows:
Sec. 2-449. Acceptance of gifts, favors, services.
No officer or employee of the city shall accept any gift, favor or service that
might reasonably tend improperly to influence him in the discharge of his official duties.
Acceptance of a gift. favor, or a service discounted below its fair market value, frolii a
business entitv doing business with the city, as defined in section 2-450(b), or from a
lobbyist, as defined in section 2-481, is deemed a violation of this section.
[Language added underlined.]
Gifts and Entertainnient
Introduction
Justice Management Division
Serving Justice - Securing Results
You may have heard it said that "public service is a public trust." This means that each Federal employee has a
responsibility to the United States Government and its citizens to place loyalty to the Constitution, laws, and
ethical principles above private gain. The public deserves and should expect no less.
This handbook was adapted from a handbook issued by the Office of Government Ethics. Its purpose is to
present an overview of the types of ethical issues that frequently arise and a summary of the laws and
regulatioizs relevant to those issues. The handbook is not intended to replace the applicable statutes, executive
orders, and regulations. You will not find here answers to all the ethical questions you are likely to confront in
connection with your work for the Government, but a careful reading of this handbook slzould help you
recognize those questions as they arise.
Once you're aware of an ethical question, your response should be determined by the unifornl Standards of
Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch. These regulations can be found in 5 C.F.R. Part 2635.
They set forth rules to be followed by executive branch employees in seven areas-
gifts from outside sources;
gifts between employees;
0 conflicting financial interests;
impartiality in performing official duties;
0 seeking other employment;
misuse of position; and
outside activities.
The Standards of Ethical Conduct are based on Executive Order 12674, as amended by Executive Order 1273 1,
and a number of ethics-related statutes. The executive order sets forth 14 principles of ethical conduct that
Federal en~ployees must follow and on which the Standards of Ethical Conduct build. The relevant statutes deal
with matters such as conflicts of interest, gifts, and post-employment restrictions.
In addition to the Standards of Ethical Conduct and the statutes, you will need to be aware of the Department's
supplemental regulations which address, among other things, outside activities and employment. Noncareer
employees appointed to their positions on or after January 20, 1993, who are eitller "senior" appointees or
involved in trade negotiations, will also need to become familiar with the post-enlployn~ent restrictions in
Executive Order 12834.
Some of the rules of conduct set forth in this handbook are very basic and obvious. Others are not. If you are
confused or have doubts about the applicability of any of these rules, consult with your agency's ethics official.
The official is there to answer your questions and help you understand what is required of you.
You should know that failure to follow the uniform Standards of Ethical Conduct or our supplemental
regulations could lead to reprimand, suspension, demotion, or even removal, depending on the circumstances. If
the conduct also involves violation of one of the civil or criminal statutes, the penalty could include a monetary
fine andlor imprisonment. Failure to adhere to the post-employment restrictions in Executive Order 12834 could
lead to debarment from lobbying andlor civil proceedings for declaratory, injunctive, or monetary relief.
Don't put everything you've worked so hard to achieve at risk. Think before you act. Become familiar with the
rules. And, if you have any concerns, talk to your agency ethics official.
Contents
Fourteen Principles of Ethical Conduct for Federal Employees
Gifts from Outside Sources
The basic rule
What is a gift?
Exceptions to the gift rule
Limits 011 use of the exceptions
Gifts between En~ployees
The basic rule
What is a gift?
Exceptions to the gift rule
Conflicting Financial Interests
What is a disqualifying financial interest?
Iillputed interests
Resolving the conflict
What is a prohibited financial interest?
Impartiality in Performing Public Duties.
What are situations raising appearance concerns?
Resolving appearance conceins
Extraordinary severance payments
Seeking Other Employmeilt
Restrictions on Former En~ployees
Permanent ban on certain activities
Two-year ban on certain activities
Additional restrictions imposed by statute
Misuse of Position
Use of public office for private gain
Use of nonpublic information
Use of Government property
Use of official time
Outside Activities
Is it all right to engage in outside activities while
work in^ as a Government employee?
Activities that would require disqualification from matters
critical to perfoi-n~ance of the employee's official duties
Representing a person or organization before a Federal
department, agency or court; servin~ as an expert witness;
and related activities
Receiving salary, contribution to, or supplementation of
salary from a source other than the United States
Teaching, speaking, and writing
Fundraising activities
High-ranking noncareer employees and Presidential appointees
Just financial obligations
Purchase of forfeited property
Restrictions In~posed 011 Certain Employees
Special Governnlent employees
En~ployees involved in procurement and contract n~anagement
Additional restrictions
Fourteen Principles of Ethical Conduct
for Federal Employees
(1) Public service is a public trust, requiring employees to place loyalty to the Constitution, the laws and ethical
principles above private gain.
(2) Employees shall not hold financial interests that conflict with the coilscientious performance of duty.
(3) En~ployees shall not engage in financial transactions using nonpublic Goveixment information or allow the
improper use of such information to further any private interest.
(4) An employee shall not, except as permitted by the Standards of Ethical Conduct, solicit or accept any gift or
other item of monetary value from any person or entity seeking official action from, doing business with, or
conducting activities regulated by the employee's agency, or whose interests may be substantially affected by
the performance or nonperformance of the employee's duties.
(5) Employees shall put forth honest effort in the performance of their duties.
(1 0) Enlployees shall not engage in outside employment or activities, including seeking or negotiating for
employment, that conflict with official Government duties and responsibilities.
(1 1) Employees shall disclose waste, fraud, abuse, and corruption to appropriate authorities.
(1 2) Employees shall satisfy in good faith their obligations as citizens, including all financial obligations,
especially those -- such as Federal, State, or local taxes -- that are imposed by law.
(13) Employees shall adhere to all laws and regulations that provide equal opportunity for all Americans
regardless of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, or handicap.
(14) Enlployees shall endeavor to avoid any actions creating the appearance that they are violating the law or
the ethical standards set forth in the Standards of Ethical Conduct. Whether particular circumstances create an
appearance that the law or these standards have been violated shall be determined from the perspective of a
reasonable person with knowledge of the relevant facts.
Gifts from Outside Sources
The basic rule
Donna works at the Environmental Protection Agency assembling data on the incidence ofpesticide poisoning
nationwide. In the course of her work she has occasionally spoken to Paul, a representative of a particular
pesticide manufacturer. They've discovered that they were both raised on farms in Kansas. One day Paul stops
by Donna's ofice and proudly presents her with an expensive signed and framed print depicting a typical
Kansas farm scene.
(6) Enlployees shall not knowingly make unauthorized commitments or promises of any kind purporting to bind
the Government.
(7) Employees shall not use public office for private gain.
(8) Employees shall act impartially and not give preferential treatment to any private organization or individual.
(9) Enlployees shall protect and conserve Federal property and shall not use it for other than authorized
activities.
May Donna accept the print? No.
A Federal employee may not accept gifts from any person or organization that --
Seeks official action by the employee's agency;"
Does business or seeks to do business with the employee's agency;*
Conducts activities regulated by the employee's agency;"
Has interests that may be substantially affected by performance or nonperformance of the employee's
official duties;
Is an organization a majority of whose members are described above; or
Gives the gift because of the employee's official position.
* Most Justice Department employees need only be concerned with persons having business with their
components.
What is a gift?
Jalce, an employee at the Fish and Wildlife Service, attends a 2:30p.m. meeting with ofJicials of a local
environmental organization that is concerned about a proposed FWS regulation. The meeting is held at the
ofices of the environmental organization, which sends out for coflee and donuts. Jalce would like to help himselJ'
to the refreshments but wonders whether they might be considered a prohibited '&gift."
May Jake accept the snacks? Yes.
The term "gift" includes almost anything of monetary value. But there are some items that won't be considered
gifts. Among these are soft drinks, coffee, donuts, and other modest refreshments offered other than as part of a
meal.
Other items that won't be considered gifts include--
Items of little intrinsic value which are intended solely for presentation, such as greeting cards, plaques,
certificates, and trophies;
Anything paid for by the Government or secured by the Government in accordance with a statute;
Anything for which the employee pays market value;
Most rewards and prizes in contests open to the public;
Commercial discounts available to the general public or to all Government or military personnel;
Loans from banks and other financial institutions on terms generally available to the public; and
Payments under pension and similar,employee benefit plans.
Exceptions to the gift rule
Niclc's job at the Federal Trade Commission is to provide economic input on issues involvirzg consumer
protection. He is given a ballpoint pen worth about $1 8 from a member of a consultingfirm that frequently
~zalces presentations before the FTC on behalf of affected clients.
May Nick accept the pen? Yes.
There are a number of exceptions to the rules against acceptance of gifts and one of these permits employees to
accept unsolicited gifts with a market value of $20 or less per occasion.
This "$20 rule" does not apply to gifts of cash or investment interests. Also, under the rule, gifts received from
any one source may not, in the aggregate, exceed $50 in a calendar year.
Jenny is employed as a researcher by the Veteran's Administration. Her cousin and close friend, Zach, works
for a phar~naceutical company that does business with the VA. Jenny's 40th birthday is approaching and Zach
and his wife have invited Jenny and her husband out to dinner to celebrate the occasion.
May Jenny accept? Yes.
Gifts are permitted where the circumstances make it clear that the gift is motivated by a family relationship or
personal friendship rather than the position of the employee. It would be improper, however, for Jenny to accept
the dinner if Zach charged the meal to his employer because then it would no longer be a gift from Zach.
Exceptions to the rule against acceptance of gifts allow enlployees to accept--
Unsolicited gifts with a value of $20 or less;
Gifts clearly given because of a family relationship or personal friendship;
Free attendance at an event on the day an employee is speaking or presenting information on behalf of
the agency;
Free attendance at certain widely-attended gatherings;
Certain discounts and similar opportunities and benefits;
Certain awards and honorary degrees; and
Certain gifts based on outside business or employment relationships.
You should be aware that there are limitations on the applicability of some of these exceptions. For
example, use of the widely-attended gathering exception would require an advance determination by
your agency that your attendance is in the interest of the agency. Also, there are more exceptions than
those listed above. When you are faced with a gift issue, it's a good idea either to get advice from your
agency ethics official or to look up the relevant provisions in the regulations.
Limits on use of the exceptions
Once you've determined that a gift falls within one of the exceptions to the gift rules, are you free to
accept it? Not necessarily. None of the exceptions may be used to--
Accept a gift in return for being influenced in the performance of an official act;
Solicit or coerce the offering of a gift;
Accept gifts so frequently as to create an appearance that you are using public office for private gain;
Accept a gift in violation of any statute.
Among the statutes you should know about are those prohibiting--
Solicitation or receipt of bribes (18 U.S.C. § 201(b)); and
Receipt of salary or any contribution to or supplementation of salary as compensation for Government
service from a source other than the United States (18 U.S.C. 5 209).
Remember also that just because you may accept a gift under one of the exceptions to the gift rule doesn't mean
that you must accept the gift. It is never wrong, and is often wise, to decline a gift offered by a person or
organization whose interests could be affected by actions of the agency where you work, or a gift offered
because of your official position. Exercising your discretion to decline a gift may be particularly smart when a
gift is offered by a person or organization whose interests could be affected by your official actions.
Gifts between Employees
The basic rule
Joe is delighted with his new boss, Dan. In a few short months Dan has brought about creative changes in the
division's work product while, at the same time, improving eficiency and boosting ofice morale. The two
wor.ker*s have also developed a friendship based on mutual respect and shared outside interests. Because of a
conflictirzg family commitment, Joe and his daughter will be unable to use their season tickets for the next
Orioles home game, so Joe thinks he'd like to give them to Dan.
May he do so? No. And it would be impermissible for Dan to accept the tickets if offered.
Ail employee may not--
Give or solicit for a gift to an official superior; or
Accept a gift from a lower-paid employee, unless the two employees are personal friends who are not in
a superior-subordinate relationship.
In this context, the words "superior" and "subordinate" refer to people in the employee's chain of command.
What is a gift?
The term "gift" has the same meaning and excludes the same items set forth in the preceding section on Gifts
fro111 Outside Sources.
Remember that if you pay market value for what is given, then it won't be considered a "gift." Joe could give
Dan the Orioles tickets if Dan paid Joe the face value of the tickets. Note also that carpooling arrangements
between employees won't be considered gifts if you bear your fair share of the expense or effort involved.
Exceptions to the gift rule
For Christmas, Samantha, a secretary at the National Park Service, gives her supervisor a plant purchased for
Eli, a claims examiner at the Department of Veterans Affairs, takes his vacation at the beach. When he returns
to work, he brings his supervisor a bag of saltwater tafapurchased on the boardwalk for $8.
Susan, a section chief in the Department oflustice, invites an attorney on her staffto a dinnerpar@ at her
home. The staffattorney brings her a $15 bottle of wine.
Are the plant, the taffy, and the wine permissible gifts? Yes. They fall within the exception for certain gifts
given on an occasional basis. This exception would allow gifts given, for example, on Christmas, a birthday, or
a return from vacation, provided that they consist of--
Items other than cash which, considered together, are worth no more than $10 for each occasion;
e Personal hospitality provided at a residence;
Gifts to a host or hostess given in connection with the receipt of personal hospitality, even if the cost of
these customary gifts is in excess of $10;
0 Food and refreshments shared in the office; or
0 Leave sharing as permitted by Office of Personnel Management regulations.
A second exception permits the giving and accepting of appropriate gifts recognizing special, infrequent events
provided that the events are--
Occasions of personal significance such as marriage, illness, or the birth or adoption of a child; or
Occasions that terminate a subordinate-official superior relationship such as retirement, resignation, or
transfer.
Jim works as the assistant to Carol, the personnel director of the Tennessee Valley Authority. Carol is in the
hospital recovering from surge y and Jim would like to send her a $30floral arrangement.
Joan is a chemist employed by the Food and Drug Administration. The lab director who is her oficial superior,
Glenn, is being promoted to a higher-grade position within the supervisory chain at the FDA. In honor of
Glenn's promotion, Joan plans to send him a fancy.fiuit basket with a card stamped "FDA approved."
Are the floral arrangement and the fruit basket permissible gifts?
The floral arrangement is fine. Although it is to be given to an official superior and to be accepted from a lower-
paid employee, it falls within the exception for infrequent occasions of personal significance. The fmit basket,
on the other hand, is not permissible, Unlike a retirement or resignation, Glenn's promotion does not terminate
his official-subordinate relationship with Joan. Neither is it an infrequent occasion of personal significance.
A third exception to the gift rule permits voluntary contributions of nominal amounts and solicitation of
voluntary contributions of nominal amounts for gifts to official superiors--
Recognizing special infrequent events as described above; and
For food and refreshments to be shared in the office.
Sonya is takirzg up a collection for a tennis racquet from everyone in her section to be presented to her section
chief on the occasion of his retirement. She tells each person that the contribution amount is $5.00.
Is this arrangement permissible? No.
The occasion is special and infrequent and, as such, would allow for a group gift made up of voluntary
contributions. Sonya's method of collection is improper, however, because it could result in contributions not
voluntarily given. Sonya may suggest a nominal amount but must indicate to all employees solicited that they
are free to contribute less or nothing at all.
Of course, even if a gift from a subordinate to his superior falls within one of the exceptions, it would still be
impermissible if it were coerced by the superior.
Conflicting Financial Interests
What is a disqualifying financial interest?
Fred, an employee at the National Institutes of Health, is responsible for reviewing proposals for a new librav
computer search system. Computer Corporation, a closely held company in which Fred owns a majority of the
stock, has submitted a proposal for the new system.
Would Fred's review of the proposals for the new library con~puter system present a problem? Yes.
Under the Standards of Ethical Conduct and by criminal statute, 18 U.S.C. 5 208(a), an employee is prohibited
from participating personally and substantially in an official capacity in particular matters in which, to his
knowledge, the employee has a financial interest. For a conflict to exist, it is not necessary that the extent of the
possible gain or loss be known. The actual amount of the gain or loss is not important. However, to trigger the
disqualification requirement, the matter in which the employee would otherwise participate must have a direct
and predictable effect on his financial interest.
Imputed interests
Suppose that Fred's wife instead of Fred owns a majority of the stock in Computer Corporation. Would her
interest in Computer Corporation disqualify Fred from reviewing the proposals for the new system? Yes.
Under the law, the financial interests of certain persons and entities, if known to the employee, will result in
disqualification of the employee just as if the interests were the employee's own. These persons and entities
include--
* The en~ployee's spouse;
The employee's minor child;
The employee's general partner;
- An organization which the employee serves as officer, director, trustee, general partner or employee;
and - A person with whom the einployee is negotiating for or has an arrangement concerning prospective
en~ployment.
Resolving the conflict
If you suspect that you may have a disqualifying financial interest, you should notify the person responsible for
giving you the conflicting assignment or consult with your agency ethics official. To do otherwise may result in
a criminal violation. With the aid of these persons, you should consider the alternatives for resolving the
conflict. They include-- - Disqualification
The usual requirement is not to participate in the particular matter. It may also be necessary to take steps
to ensure that others do not mistakenly involve you in the matter. A formal written statement of
disqualification usually is not necessary but may be desirable in order to create a record of your actions. - Divestiture
In some instances, sale or other divestiture of the asset creating the financial interest presents an
alternative to disqualification from participation in the matter. If the decision is made to divest, it may be
possible to defer the tax consequences of divestiture, but only if the asset is sold pursuant to a certificate
of divestiture issued by the Office of Government Ethics. For this reason, it's important to see your
ethics officer before selling any assets.
Waiver
In some instances a waiver of general applicability may already cover the situation. Alternatively, the specific
circumstances inay warrant the granting of an individual waiver by an authorized agency official. A waiver
permits continued participation in a matter even in the absence of divestiture.
What is a prohibited financial interest?
An employee may not acquire or hold any financial interest that the employee is prohibited from acquiring or
holding--
By statute;
By agency supplemental regulation; or
By reason of an agency determination that an individual employee's acquiring or holding of a particular
financial interest would present a substantial conflict.
When an employee holds a prohibited financial interest, divestiture or termination of the interest is required if
the employee is to continue on the job.
Impartiality in Performing Public Duties
What are situations raising appearance concerns?
Pete's work at the Food and Drug Administration requires him to participate in the process for review and
approval of certain new drugs. His mother has just taken a senior position with a biomedical research company
producing a new drug that would typically be subject to Pete's review. Pete is concerned that it might "lool'c
bad" if he participates in the review and approval process for the drug, but after doing some research he
determines that his mother's employment with the research company is not a "disqualzJjlingfinancia1 interest"
tinder
18 U.S. C. J 208(a).
Sl~ould Pete disregard his concerns and proceed to review the drug? No. Pete is right to be concerned. In
addition to the financial conflict of interest situations discussed above, there are a number of situations that raise
"appearance" concerns and, consequently, require employees to take certain steps to avoid an appearance of the
loss of impartiality.
Situations presenting some of the most significant "appearance" concerns arise when an employee is called
upon to participate in a particular matter involving specific parties and the employee knows that--
* The matter is likely to affect the financial interests of a member of the employee's household; or
One or more of the parties to the matter is or is represented by--
o A person or organization with whom the employee has or seeks a business relationship that
involves something more than a routine consumer purchase;
o A person who is a member of the employee's household, or who is a relative with whom the
employee has a close personal relationship;
o A person or organization for whom the employee's spouse, parent or dependent child is, to the
employee's knowledge, serving or seeking to serve as an officer, director, trustee, general
partner, agent, attorney, consultant, contractor or employee;
o Any person or organization for whom the employee has, within the last year, served as officer,
director, trustee, general partner, agent, attorney, consultant, contractor or employee; or
o An organization, other than certain political organizations, in which the employee is an active
participant.
The following cases are examples of situations raising appearance concerns:
Maria, who works for the General Services Administration, wants to begin an outside retail business. In her
private capacity, she has made an offer to buy a store owned by a local developer. The developer has pending
with GSA a proposal to provide Federal ofJice space and Maria expects that she will be called upon to evaluate
the bid.
Frank inspects manufacturing establishments for the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. His
brother-in-law and friend, James, has just purchased a plant that Frank is assigned to inspect.
Rebecca recently resigned her position as vice president of an electronics company in order to join the Federal
Aviation Administration. Her new boss has asked her to participate in the administration of a contract for
which her old company is a first-tier subcontractor.
Jeremy is an attorney at the Agriculture Department as well as a member of and publicity chairperson for the
private organization Stop the Gypsy Moths. Stop the Gypsy MothsJiles a law suit against USDA and Jeremy's
boss asks Jeremy for his legal analysis of the case.
Resolving appearance concerns
If you are faced with a situation that falls within one of the above categories, your first step is to decide whether
a reasonable person with knowledge of the relevant facts would question your impartiality if you participated in
the matter. In making this determination you may seek assistance from your supervisor, your agency ethics
official, or the person specifically designated by your agency to address appearance problems (the "agency
designee"). Remember that your honesty and integrity are not relevant considerations in this determination.
If you decide that a reasonable person would not question your impartiality, then you may participate in the
matter, unless the agency designee reaches a different conclusion. If you or the agency designee decide that
your impartiality would be questioned, then you may not participate unless the designee, considering all the
circumstances, determines that the interest of the Government in your participation outweighs the concern that a
reasonable person may question the integrity of the agency's programs and operations.
You should be aware that not all appearance problems fall into the above categories. The steps outlined here
also should be followed if you are concerned that other circumstances may raise a question about your
in~partiality.
Extraordinary severance payments
Appearance considerations may also require disqualification of an employee who, on departure from his prior
job, received from his former employer an extraordinary payment or other item worth more than $10,000.
Under certain circumstances, such a payment may bar the employee from participating, for two years, in matters
in which the former employer is a party or represents a party.
Seeking Other Employment
Karen serves on a panel at the National Science Foundation that reviews grant applications to fund research
relating to deterioration of the ozone layer. A representative from X university, which has an application
pending before Karen 'spanel, calls Karen to ask whether she might be interested in applying for a faculty
position with the university. They discuss generally the duties of the position and Karen's qualifications to fill it.
Karen indicates she may be interested.
May Karen participate in the review of X university's grant application? Not unless she first obtains a written
waiver under 18 U.S.C. 5 208(b).
An employee who is seeking employment may not participate in particular matters that would affect the
financial interest of the prospective employer. Where, as in Karen's case, the parties are actually engaged in
discussions regarding employment, this prohibition is imposed by a criminal statute, 18 U.S.C. 9 208, and may
be avoided only by obtaining a written waiver under section 208(b). As the example indicates, the prohibition
may be triggered even before negotiation of specific terms and conditions of employment begins.
Karen hears about a job at Y university, which also has a grant application pending before the panel on which
she serves at NSF. She mails her resume to Y universisity and is waiting to receive a reply.
Would Karen's participation in review of Y university's grant application present a problem? Yes.
Karen has not engaged in the kind of two-sided negotiation for employment that would bring her job search
within the reach of section 208. Even mailing out an unsolicited resume, however, if it were sent to an
organization that would be specifically and individually affected by Karen's performance of her official duties,
could cause a reasonable person to question Karen's impartiality. For this reason, Karen may not participate in
the review of Y university's application unless her participation is authorized in advance by the person
designated by her agency to address such matters.
Make it your business to understand the legal consequences of job-hunting and job discussions. Consult with
your agency ethics official before you begin your job search and immediately upon receiving unsolicited offers
or inquiries, if a prospective employer has a financial interest in matters that cross your desk.
Restrictions on Former Employees
Permanent ban on certain activities
Five years ago Sam left the Federal Maritime Commission to set up his own law3rin specializing in maritime
law. Recently he was asked to represent a carrier in an appeal to which the Commission is a party. Years ago,
Sam realizes, he handled the same case on behalfof the Commission.
May Sam represent the carrier in the appeal? No.
A former employee is forever barred from representing another person or organization before a Federal
department, agency, or court on certain matters in which the former employee participated personally and
substantially while working for the Government. The bar is imposed by the criminal "post-employment" statute:
18 U.S.C. 5 207, which is intended to prevent employees from "switching sides."
Two-year ban on certain activities
Shortly before Mary retired from herjob at the Defense Department last year, an accountant Mary supervised
began an audit focusing on cost overruns under a DOD contract with an electrical pads supplier. Since Mary
retired before the audit was complete, she never signed or even read the audit report. Now the supplier wants
Mary to represent him in his dealings with DOD on the contract.
May Mary represent the supplier before DOD? No.
The post-employment statute provides that, for two years after terminating Government employment, a former
employee may not represent another person or organization before a Federal department, agency, or court on
certain matters which were pending under the employee's supervision during the last year of his Government
service. In the example, it does not matter that Mary never read the audit report. If she knows or should know
that the audit was under her official responsibility, her representation of the supplier could subject her to
criminal penalties.
Additional restrictions imposed by statute
The post-employment statute prohibits all former employees, for a period of one year after leaving Government
service, from engaging in activities related to certain trade and treaty negotiations. The statute also imposes
additional one-year restrictions on the activities of former senior and very senior Government employees. These
are generally Executive Level officials and Senior Level officials or other employees whose basic pay is 86.5%
of the rate of pay for Level I1 of the Executive schedule, or greater. The restrictions are on representations by
these officials to the agencies that they served and, in the case of very senior employees, on representations to
certain high ranking officials throughout the Government. Former senior and very senior employees are also
subject to a one-year ban prohibiting certain services to foreign governments and foreign political parties.
Remember: The best time to consult with your agency ethics official regarding post-employment restrictions is
before leaving the Government. However, you may also obtain advice from your agency ethics official
whenever, after you've left the Government, you find yourself confronting a post-employment issue.
You should know that there are other sources of post-employment restrictions that could apply to your activities
after leaving Government. These include statutes specific to particular agencies or to employees performing
particular functions and, for lawyers, bar association rules.
Misuse of Position
Use of public office for private gain
Sylvia, an employee of the Securities and Exchange Commission, offers to help a friend with a consumer
complaint by calling the manufacturer of a household appliance. In the course of the conversation with the
manufacturer, Sylvia states that she works for the SEC and is responsible for reviewing the manufacturer's SEC
filings.
Tony, an employee of the Department of Education, is asked to write a letter of recommendation to a private
company for a person he knows socially. He writes the letter on ofJicial stationery and signs it using his ofJicial
title.
Calvin, a Commissioner of the Consumer Product Safety Commission, appears on a television commercial to
endorse as safe a product produced by his former employer. On the commercial he is ident2fied as a
Commissioner of the CPSC.
What do Sylvia, Tony, and Calvin have in common? They have all misused their public offices.
Employees may not use their public offices for private gain, either their own gain or that of others. In the
examples, employees used their offices to induce a benefit, to secure employment, and to suggest Government
endorsement -- all for private purposes.
Use of nonpublic information
Gail is a Navy employee who learns that her agency will award a contract to Supplier Corporation. Before the
contract is publicly announced, Gail calls her stockbroker and purchases stock in Supplier Corporation.
Har~y, a General Services Administration employee, discloses the terms of a proposal for a GSA construction
contract to a fiierzd whose company has submitted a competing proposal.
Are Gail and Harry making permissible use of nonpublic information? No.
En~ployees may not use or allow the use of nonpublic information to hrther their own private interests or the
private interests of others. In addition to violating the uniform Standards of Ethical Conduct, the actions
described in the above examples may also violate Federal statutes prohibiting the use and disclosure of
confidential and inside information.
Use of Government property
Will is a Government worker who also coaches his daughter's soccer team. On a slow day at work, he uses
Government computer and photocopy equipment to type and reproduce the game and practice schedule for the
soccer team.
Barbara works for the Government but is an avid gardening enthusiast in her spare time. She wants to have
pens and paper pads on hand for note takers at the garden club meeting 'at her house, so she "borrows" some
from her agency's supply cabinet.
Are these permissible uses of Government property? No.
An employee has a duty to protect and conserve Government property and may not use Government property,
or allow its use, for other than authorized purposes. In addition to the Standards of Ethical Conduct, there are
statutes that apply to misuse of Government property. These include statutes prohibiting theft of Government
property.
Justice Department employees are authorized to use government office and library equipment and facilities for
personal uses that involve only negligible expense (such as electricity, ink, small amounts of paper, and
ordinary wear and tear). Department employees are also authorized to make limited personal use of telephone
and facsimile machines for calls to locations within the office's commuting area or that are charged to personal
accounts. This authorization may be revoked or limited by a supervisor for any business reason. In using
government property, employees should be mindful of their responsibility to use official time in an honest effort
to perform official duties.
Use of official time
In addition to her Government job, Christine runs a catering bzlsiness. It's dijficult to reach her clients after
hours, so she discusses menus and gives bids by telephone during work hours.
Richard, a supervisor at a Government agency, has forgotten to use his lunch break to pick up the tennis
racquet he dropped offfor restringing last week. During the afternoon he remembers the racquet and his
evening tennis date, so he asks his secretary to pick the racquet up for him.
Are Christine and Richard misusing official time? Yes.
Except as otherwise authorized, an employee must use official time in an honest effort to perform official duties
and may not ask or direct a subordinate to perform activities other than those required in the performance of
official duties.
Outside Activities
Is it all right to engage in outside activities while working as a Government employee?
Most employees may engage in outside activities, which may include paid employment and civic, charitable,
religious, and community service work performed without compensation. But not all activities are permissible.
Employees should be aware of a number of restrictions and prohibitions on outside activities.
Activities that would require disqualification from matters critical to performance of the employee's
official duties
Juan's principal duty in his new position at the Environmental Protection Agency is to write regulations
relating to the disposal of hazardous waste. He has been asked to serve, however, as president of a nonprojt
environmental organization that routinely submits comments on such regulations.
May Juan serve as an officer of the environmental organization? No.
Ail employee may not engage in an outside activity if the rules dealing with conflicting financial interests or the
appearance of a loss of impartiality would require the employee's disqualification from matters so central or
critical to the performance of the employee's official duties that his ability to perform the duties of his position
would be materially impaired.
Representing a person or organization before a Federal department, agency or court; serving as an
expert witness; and related activities
Ian is an attorney at the Federal Maritime Commission who has a small outside law practice. On a matter
unrelated to his Federal service, he is thinking about accepting a fee to represent a contractor before the
General Services Administration Board of Contract Appeals, to contest the Government's termination of its
contract.
Catherine is an oficial at the Small Business Administration. From time to time she looks in on an elderly
neighbor to see fshe needs anything. On a recent visit, Catherine learned that her neighbor is upset over the
Internal Revenue Service's assessment of a penal@ against her because of a claimed overdue payment. The
neighbor is apprehensive about calling the IRS to explain the claimed IRS error, so Catherine would like to call
for her. She does not intend to take any compensation.
Are the representational services Ian and Catherine propose to provide permissible? No.
Two overlapping Federal statutes, 18 U.S.C. $5 203 and 205, prohibit an employee from making representations
-- whether for compensation or not -- before any department, agency, or court if the matter is one in which the
United States has a substantial interest. The statutes also prohibit an employee from--
Taking compensation for such representational services provided by another; and
Receiving consideration for assisting in the prosecution of a claim against the United States.
There are a number of exceptions to sections 203 and 205. An important one allows an employee, under certain
circumstances, to represent himself, his parents, his spouse, his children, and certain others for whom the
employee serves in a specific fiduciary capacity, such as a guardian.
There is also an exception in the statutes for giving testimony under oath. Use of this exception, however, is
limited by the Standards of Ethical Conduct. The Standards provide that an employee may not serve as an
expert witness for a private party in a proceeding before a court or agency of the United States in which the
United States is a party or has a direct and substantial interest. This restriction applies whether compensation is
received or not. It may be waived by the employee's agency ethics official under certain conditions.
* Please note that Department of Justice employees must obtain written approval from the Deputy Attorney
General before engaging in the compensated outside practice of law.
Receiving salary, contribution to, or supplementation of salary from a source other than the United
States
The Society for Ethical Conduct in Government, a private, nonprofit, and non-partisan organization, announces
that it is sponsoring a number of two-year fellowships for individuals of high ethical character who are willing
to serve in any policy position in the Federal Government during the pendency of the fellowship. To encourage
people to apply for the fellowship, the Society has determined that benefits of the fellowship will include
monthly payments from the Society that make up the difference between the recipient's Federal salary and
$1 50,000. The fellowship program is completely the idea of the Society and there is no statute authorizing it.
Warren, a Federal employee in a policy position, has applied for one of the fellowships.
If Warren is selected as one of the fellows, may he accept the monthly stipend? No.
Warren's.acceptance of the money would probably be considered a violation of a criminal statute, 18 U.S.C. $
209. With some limitations, this statute prohibits an employee from receiving anything other than his Federal
salary as compensation for services as a Government employee.
Teaching, speaking, and writing
Paula works in the public information ofice of the Internal Revenue Service. A private trade association offers
to pay her to teach a short course on a new taxpayer assistance program being implemented by the IRS.
-
May Paula accept the offer? No.
An employee may not receive compensation -- including travel expenses for transportation and lodging -- from
any source other than the Government for teaching, speaking or writing that relates to the employee's official
duties. For most employees, teaching, speaking, or writing is considered "related to official duties" if--
. The activity is part of the employee's official duties;
The invitation to teach, speak, or write is extended primarily because of the employee's official position; . The invitation or the offer of compensation is extended by a person whose interests may be affected
substantially by the employee's performance of his official duties;
The activity draws substantially on nonpublic information; or . The subject of the activity deals in significant part with agency programs, operations or policies or with
the employee's current or recent assignments."
* Most Justice Department employees need only consider the programs, operations or policies of their
components in applying this rule.
For certain high-ranking noncareer employees, teaching, speaking and writing will also be considered "related
to official duties" if the subject of the activity deals in a significant part with the general subject matter area,
industry, or economic sector primarily affected by the programs and operations of such an employee's agency.
There is an exception that, in certain circumstances, allows all employees to accept compensation for teaching
certain courses involving multiple presentations even if the courses relate to the employee's official duties.
Various requirements must be met, however, in order to use this exception.
Again, it's a good idea to consult with your agency ethics official before engaging in any outside teaching,
speaking, or writing.
Fundraising activities
The Standards of Ethical Conduct also contain rules governing fundraising for nonprofit organizations by an
employee in his personal capacity. There are specific rules limiting the use of official title, position, or authority
to further a fundraising effort and rules restricting solicitation of funds from subordinates and persons whose
interests may be affected by actions of the employee's agency.
High-ranking noncareer employees and Presidential appointees
Emily holds a noncareer Senior Executive Service position with a Federal agency and is paid at a rate ofpay in
excess of the GS-15 level. She also has an outside job as head of marketing for a very successful family mail
order business. This outside job provides nearly half of Emily's annual earned income.
Are Emily's outside earnings permissible? No, not in that amount.
Certain noncareer employees whose rate of basic pay is equal to or greater than the annual rate of basic pay for
positioiis classified above GS- 15 are subject to a 15 percent limitation on outside earned income. In any
calendar year, their outside earned income may not exceed 15 percent of the annual rate of basic pay for level I1
of the Executive Schedule.
William is a noncareer employee of the White House who is paid in excess of the GS-15 level. A friend offers to
pay him a small fee to draft wills for the friend and his wife.
Is the arrangement permissible? No.
Covered noncareer employees are subject to a number of restrictions on their outside activities in addition to the
15 percent limitation on outside earned income. They may not receive any compensation for --
Practicing a profession, such as law, which involves a fiduciary relationship;
Affiliating with or being employed by a firm or other entity which provides professional services
involving a fiduciary relationship;
Serving as an officer or member of the board of any association, corporation or other entity; or
Teaching without prior approval from the designated agency ethics official.
In addition, and regardless of whether they receive any compensation, such employees also may not permit use
of their names by any firm or other entity which provides professional services involving a fiduciary
relationship. Note that for purposes of the "fiduciary relationship" restrictions, covered professions and
professional services include law, medicine, insurance, architecture, financial services, accounting and the like.
Subject to certain exclusions, Presidential appointees to full-time noncareer positions may not receive any
outside earned income during their Presidential appointments.
A Justice Department employee is prohibited from practicing law unless it is uncompensated and in the nature
of con~munity service, or on behalf of himself, his parents, spouse or children. Employees are also prohibited
from engaging in outside employment that involves any criminal matter or a matter in which the Department is
or represents a party. The Deputy Attorney General may waive these prohibitions in unusual cases.
A Justice Department employee must obtain written approval before engaging in outside employment that
involves the practice of law or a subject matter that is in his component's area of responsibility.
An employee of a component dedicated to law enforcement must consult the internal manual of his component
in addition to consulting the Standards of Ethical Conduct for additional restrictions that may be imposed on his
outside activities. Those components include the Bureau of Prisons, Drug Enforcement Administration, Federal
Bureau of Investigation, Immigration and Naturalization Service, Office of the Inspector General, Offices of the
United States Attorneys, and the United States Marshals Service.
Just financial obligations
An employee must satisfy in good faith all his obligations as a citizen, including his just financial obligations.
These include Federal, state, and local taxes imposed by law.
Purchase of forfeited property
A Justice Department employee shall not purchase, directly or indirectly, from the Department or its agents,
property forfeited to the United States nor use such property that was purchased by the employee's spouse or
child. In unusual cases, an employee may receive approval to purchase or use forfeited property provided that
the employee has not used nonpublic information or his official position in making the purchase.
Restrictions Imposed on Certain Employees
Special Government employees
The term "special Government employee" is defined in 18 U.S.C. 8 202(a). With some exceptions, it applies to
employees who are retained, designated, appointed, or employed to perform temporary duties, either on a full-
time or intermittent basis, with or without compensation, for a period not to exceed 130 days during any
consecutive 365-day period. Special Government employees are subject to many of the ethics statutes and to
i~lost of the Standards of Ethical Conduct. However, parts of some of the statutes and certain Standards do not
apply at all to these employees and some impose reduced standards.
Employees involved in procurement and contract management
Certain employees involved in procurement and contract management, while subject to the ethics statutes and
the Standards, are also subject to 41 U.S.C. § 423. This statute is implemented at part 3.104 of the Federal
Acquisition Regulation and imposes more rigorous standards relating to employment discussions, post-
employment activities, and disclosure of procurement-sensitive information.
This handbook does not attempt to address all of the rules unique to special Government employees and those
involved in procurement and contract management. Employees who fall within one of these groups should ask
their agency ethics officials for information on the ethics rules specific to them.
Additional restrictions
There are a number of additional restrictions on the activities of Federal employees. These include--
The Emoluments Clause of the United States Constitution, article I, section 9, clause 8, which prohibits
acceptance of gifts and compensation from foreign governments;
e 18 U.S.C. 5 219, which prohibits acting as an agent of a foreign principal under specified circumstances;
and
The Hatch Act, 5 U.S.C. $9 7321 through 7328, which applies to political activities of Federal
employees.
EXCERPTS FROM U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ETHICS OFFICE
HANDBOOK ON FEDERAL EMPLOYEES' ACCEPTANCE OF GIFTS
Gifts from Outside Sources
The basic rule
A Federal employee may not accept gifts from any person or organization that --
Seeks official action by the employee's agency;"
Does business or seeks to do business with the employee's agency;"
Conducts activities regulated by the employee's agency;"
Has interests that may be substantially affected by performance or
nonperformance of the employee's official duties;
Is an organization a majority of whose members are described above; or
Gives the gift because of the employee's official position.
What is a gift?
The term "gift" includes almost anything of monetary value. But there are some items
that won't be considered gifts. Among these are soft drinks, coffee, donuts, and other
modest refreshments offered other than-as part of a meal.
Other items that won't be considered gifts include--
Items of little intrinsic value which are intended solely for presentation, such as greeting
cards, plaques, certificates, and trophies;
Anything paid for by the Government or secured by the Government in accordance with a
statute;
Anything for which the employee pays nlarket value;
Most rewards and prizes in contests open to the public; - Comn~ercial discounts available to the general public or to all Government or
military personnel;
Loans from banks and other financial institutions on tenns generally available to
the public; and
Payments under pension and similar enlployee benefit plans.
Exceptions to the gift rule
Gifts are permitted where the circumstances make it clear that the gift is motivated by a
family relationship or personal friendship rather than the position of the employee. . . .
Exceptions to the rule against acceptance of gifts allow employees to accept--
* Unsolicited gifts with a value of $20 or less;
Gifts clearly given because of a family relationship or personal friendship;
Free attendance at an event on the day an en~ployee is speaking or presenting
information on behalf of the agency;
Free attendance at certain widely-attended gatherings;
Certain discounts and similar opportunities and benefits;
Certain awards and honorary degrees; and
Certain gifts based on outside business or employment relationships.
[Tlhere are limitations on the applicability of some of these exceptions. For
example, use of the widely-attended gathering exception would require an
advance determination by your agency that your attendance is in the interest of
the agency. Also, there are more exceptions than those listed above. . . .
Limits on use of the exceptions
. . . None of the exceptions may be used to--
Accept a gift in return for being influenced in the performance of an official act;
Solicit or coerce the offering of a gift;
Accept gifts so frequently as to create an appearance that you are using public
office for private gain;
Accept a gift in violation of any statute.
Among the statutes . . .are those prohibiting--
* Solicitation or receipt of bribes (18 U.S.C. § 20l(b)); and
Receipt of salary or any contribution to or supplementation of salary as
conlpensation for Government service fro111 a source other than the United States
(18 U.S.C. § 209).
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
MIAMIBEACH
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR AND COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
FROM: Jonah Wolfson, Commissioner
DATE: March 3oth, 201 1
SUBJECT: Referral ltem for April 13th, 201 1 Commission Meeting
Please place on the April 13', 201 1, Commission meeting agenda a referral to the
Finance Committee for a discussion on the attached articles regarding Security
Alliance.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Leonor Hernandez at
extension 6437.
I
, Agenda ltem C qr
Wc ore omrnlfted lo providrng exceilenl publ~c service ond sofew fo oil who irve work, orld ploy m our vj Date 9-/3-// I
Nlslre 'lBi.3 7oor ]-lome F.'ay$!.! I !;iil')scr~h? l Mar!a$jt:, Ar;r:t I Advsrltsi? VVrtli IJs
e You Made
pi.-. ,t:.$jji; tFjF$-f1..tER CC)p.&MVl'?l$?'Y EN'TERI'AIFlfb4Eldl' SP(:)R?'S Li:FESTYI.ES 'I'OIji-5 .jobs A~llo
.-> %
ALL1 KEYW0RC)SI bIEW,C;I $HOPI PHD'1'01 E?/ENTS] VlDEOl AUDIOIWEHI MORE
Search: Er.!i<+! SI?~!~;$ ''r~i.;> or i<$jywr,,l (i yn~m[ :r; l; 3, R ,: n Submit Query
Monday, March 14, 2091 Tartipa 65.0" Mostly Cloudy
Ex-Rooms To Go worker charged
TAMPA - Another former security official for Rooms To Go is accused of
scarnrnir~g the corriparly out of more than $800,000 through kickbacks
from vendors, hiding the cash in phony invoices and consulting
contracts.
Brian W. Ouellette, 49, of Valrico, a former liillsboro~igh County sheriff's
detective, was charged Tuesday with f~deral mail fraud and conspiracy
charges. He co~~fd face tiis to 20 years in prison.
Ouellette's alleged partner in the scheme, James B. Loftus Jr., former
security director of the Tampa-based furniture chain, agreed it3
November to plead guilty, authorities said.
According to court documents, Loftus arld Ouellelte, the chain's former
vice president of corporate security, created companies in order to
receive kickbacks from Security Alliarice, a vendor that hired and
managed security guards for Rooms To Go.
Security Alliance created another compariy to make the kickbacks to
l...oftus and Ouellette, docurner~ts states. In exchange, Quellette and
Loft~~s gave Security Alliarice favorable treatment.
Shere this:
**..---.
Xictised l)elective C'fiargcd in Florida for IZolc in Mail I?aud Scl~c~ne
. . . - . . .. . .- .. ... .. .. . -~ ~. ... -. . . ---
Ratrrcii.! 0etccll.ve f:llar.gsci if1 F;loril,ie for Rbie III F6iril I:rilud Sctlcrrre
TAMPA, 1%-United Stales Attornny Robert E O'Nwll today anriouncecl the
f111ny of forrniil clin~'ges against Brian W O~~llelte (49, Varico, I:loicclo), $&~,g[&&&$~~~~;;,.g!j~,
altlfllrrllrlg barn a niail lra~~(l sche113e Oudlelle conducted with .Isn.lw B I.oftus. Find Sot::urily Trainlr~g Program6
Jr (SO, 1.llbum. Goorgla), while Ihr~ two ocnrpial triyh-lovel sewrily panltiarw ut Near You -Apply lo .a School
Roorns-To-Go9umilurrt (RTG). 1.0ftus has pib-oded guilty b hls involvenwr~l In Now1
this rrlail lreud wriepimcy anti is schecluied lo bo xlfltenced on &rc:li 3. 201 1. ~sm~i1~Comar.co1Wtif~~.1)r1ly
AcwrrSiny lo murl docurr~nls. Outillello and t.oRus were uniployml as
13lrccctors ol wurily tor KT(; 'ffom itw late l WS IIirouVh Moftdl 2007. ioIIuvtlr~)
ttlelr relif%ifnw~I as IUIIeclives from lhe I-lillstmrough Counly SlicrifPs I)mCn Irl !=@!!'~~L%?L!&!!
these dilsclors of secorlty pailior~s hr R'TG, Oueilettn antl Ldtvs w@ru Start Your S~hwrriy Guard Carwer
~cwKI~~~ subgtantial ctCcr@Uon In Wiir ttimdliryl of lho liccurily-mlalod rnnUer8 'roclay aclcl Don't VWt Any
orP~wslt?d 10 lhem by HHT. I.onger.
ChoulelCUCwll13llngr cwn/&~~~ntlyGui~rtY
In roturn, tile two were prohibited from mgaylng In certain icctivitiis that
vinl~letl their fidubaly ohligotiws to Ihe company, including acceplirg hip by C;f.me$r.
kickbacks front outsirfe ven(iors ~ccasionally employed to perforrr~ various
sercrrilpfelitted swnrims. Wrlhout RTCG's hrawladge and npprowl. i~owevcr, TJ~~cllette and I.dlus alle~~dly cnsted two
sflam campi~rilea in the mrly 2000'9, enabling tlwl lo smlly receive kickbacks honi an wtside security vendor--
Sc!culily Allhn~x?, which RTG had retained b trsannge its security gwrds. To conwat lhese kickbacks from RIG. OuelleHe
and t-oRus allegt~lly prepared fake invoices addresmd to Security Alliance, \4licr1 fraudulently tiwght payment for
"cansulling" scrriws, orid wliicli ~eyuired that such poyrnents k tmde indirectly to Ouelleltc and 1-aftus thmrgh their sham
mmpatiies. Ail lowl. O~relletle ant1 L~?lttrs wi1~u;trvelg received over 3835.000 in kibacks froin Sc%urity Alliance between
the inll ol 2002 and March 2097.
In addition lo this hlcltbach s~he~tie, Ouekttu rtllcgeclly devlssd arrother soherrle by himself lo detrautl RTG, beginning In or
around ltle surnnler 2003. Unlike Ihc wirspifaay wilti I..oflus, this Second scheme centered around Ouelletli?.'~ 11se of
oulsiclo vwlors lo collect ir~fonwtion from R'TG employees wtio Ouellatte had rw,ruited BI nct a8 confidential infomionto
[CIS) v~ltilhin the oompBny. To carry 01.11 !ills s~he~ns, Ocrellette solicited ~ricl rer:ei@rl kickbackti ironr the oulsirkt CI ve~ldwti
'New ACCr;cJr:i
Iiex!liot?s
Medical News
.lob Uslings
Fsrnily Zone
AIJdifl!Vlclko Ch$lI
HIJS~I~OSS Arva
Entortainmerrl
Online Gwmos
MP3 Lk~wnlor~ds
Scrjpi Dimdory
Online Shopping (US)
Online Shopping (UK)
Sotblare Dirmory
Webmaster Tools
Web %11r~lory
which wele bas@ on R prcerltege 01 the monies RTG wns poylrlg Ihe vcnrlors lor llidr podici~balion in the CI proycarn (y*;, .~\C'-CUSIO(II Bnil~cli
C)uellelt~ concoilletl Iheee kickbacks frvflr H7G bv serldina tno oulsicle GI vendors fake invokes w111clr lrt~udulontlv ~ouohl
paymortl lor "mnbuItlnZjY s:rvi~es. 8110 vthiCh reqbir~d tha~ljuct~ payments be made irlriirectly lo 0u6llelte tlirot~~liliis a6a;ii
company.
Alllolal. LS~WRBII in ur arollnd tho surnmer of 2009 afd m oraround Mali31 2007. 0uel)elIe rccdveci over a ouarter ol a
nllllion dollars in krcklwcks Iron1 the outside CI varidofci. As a rasull of his rvolvernent ill lhe above o~a~we:;,~o~~lelle has
bCt?ll charged wit11 honest serviceti niail fraud and conspiracy to wlrrrrrll tlonost services nlail fmurl. Elotll of these crimes
carry 0 maxifnurn (~t?lt&Ilty of 20 years irr fetkral Drison and a moxlnlum fino of $250.000. or twice the oross auirr wusd bv
Ihe oAnses or twice Ihu gross (0% mused by the ollonses, wldchever turns out to be iwaler. This rim w& invefitigale6
by tile f:e&ral Huraau of Jnvestigatiun.
It is l~eing prosecuted by Asislarlt United Staled Altorriey Christopher P Tuile
Llmiled wjvrlgilt Is granted lor you lo use arrrVor republiqh any story on this slto lor any @Nimele rliedia purpose ns
long as you refemnca 7thSpace and ally sourco rnelilioned ~ri llie story abovn. Please rnake sitm to ralld our rJ&&!,rt!$~
prior to contndlng 7thSf.w:~ Inlflmclive. Tn contact our edilom, visit our $r&~g_&&&. If you wlsh submit your nwn
press rerwa?ass, g1th-g.
Social Bookmarking
F~EI'WEETTIIIS! I Digg lliirl I Post to del.ic1o.us I Post to Furl I Add io Nekc~pe I Add O Yahuoi I Hojo
....*.--.- ..". '.. .. "-..""" ^"..-," "
~,~l&,,l,:c~!:i: ;;:A):! i: !.d :; 1 L-,-.-..- ..-..-.,.-.--.....-...,.-...-.-..-,-..-..-....-_.. -. . .- "-.
There ore cunerrlly 0 comments to display.
Corporate Cltfiu,
Find I.otmliorl:,
GECIP 9E0 Compny
Ruainoss CJireclory
Collegt? Addrars
Advertise on 7lhijpace
(3fJicial In plead guilly to kaud
ORicial to plead guilty to fraud
By ELAINE S3LVESTR3NI j The Tan~pa 'Trib~.~r~e
"PAMPA .- A former security offjcial for Rcsorns lo Go has agreed to plead guilty to a f@dr;cal
fraud charge, adtnitting i21e schemed with analher corporate sec~nrity official to get rnnre tf?an
$8OO,UUO ~n kickbacks.James 8. l.,oFtut; JI., forn2er director- of axscutive secur~ty for thc
"Parnpa-based chain, will plead guilty to a charge of corispiracy $0 ~otnt%it honest services
r~~ail fraud! according ts a plea ayreatrterlt fiisd Friday in U.S. District Cotrrt.
'The cftarge carries Inp to 20 years in federal prison, but \..oftus is likely to receive a Iess~r
sentence ~fnd~?~ ihe agreement..
Accordir7g 10 cou~"[ciocuments, LsRws coilspired with Brian V\/ O~lc;lIettc, the chain's former'
vice pr-estdent of corporatc ~e~urity They created companies, inclixcl~ng 1-ot 49 lix;. arid
bidtlcy Mat7ay~r?r\ent Cot p., to enable tt~ern to receive kickbacks froru? Ser:ul-ity Alliance, a
vendor that hired and managed security guatds S'ar V.oorns To Go,
!Inknown to iioorsls To Go, Security Alliarlce had a-mted another company, Ctloice
Management Soiuti~ns, to make the Itickbacfts to Loftus ancf Ouellctte, docurncnts states.
L.04"ius and O~ieiletle created sham invoices far bogus ~ons\.rltirlg services, which were sent
to Sec~~rily Alli~r~ce arid Choice Nianagernent Salt.rtions, according to court papars. Tiler]
payments were rnadt; to LoZ 49 and Wiley Managernent.
It? exctxmge for kickbacks, Or,.retteite and Luftus gave Secxrity Aljiance favorable treatrr~cnt,
~nclud~ng "il'ie r~ppnrtcrnity .to BIT~PICI~ and n-iar-~age and to continue employii7g and managing"
Raorrts "lo Go security g~.lards. the plea agreement states
A lawyer for Sec~trity Alliance said the comparly was a victim.
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR AND COMMISSION
TO: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
MEMORANDUM
DATE: March 28,2011
SUBJECT: Referral To the Sustainability Committee - Ethanol (E85) pumps
I would like to refer a discussion item to the Sustainability Committee - discussion regarding
providing motivation for local gas stations to offer or install Ethanol (E85) pumps. Ethanol is a
clean fuel on which many newer model vehicles that can use flex fuels operate. The nearest
gas station to Miami Beach that sells E85 is on 86th and Biscayne in Miami Shores.
We trust that you will find all in good order. Should you have any questions, please feel free to
get in touch with my aide, Barbie Paredes at extension 6457.
Best regards,
Agenda Item CY1(
We ore cornrnrtted to provfdfng excellent publrc senlrce and sofev to all who Ifve, work, and fn c Date 9-13-//
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
C!? - MIAMIBEACH
CITY CLERK'S OFF ICE
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR AND COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
FROM: Matti Herrera Bower, Mayor a '.' mdq
DATE: April 5,201 1
SUBJECT: Consent Agenda Item: Referral to Land Use Committee
Please place on the April 13; 201 1 Commission meeting agenda a referral to the
Land Use Committee of a discussion regarding a potential method of replacing pines
trees on historic Pine Tree Drive.
I thank you in advance for your cooperation in this matter. If you have any
questions, please do not hesitate to contact Rebecca Wakefield at extension 6157.
Thank you.
We are con~mi~ed b providii~y acdlent public service and safely lo all who hve, work. and play h out
Agenda Item C 4 L
I Date 9-13 -//
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
MIAMIBEACH
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR AND COMMISSION
TO: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
FROM: Jonah Wolfson, Commissioner
DATE: April 6th, 201 1
SUBJECT: Discussion ltem for April 13th,
MEMORANDUM
Commission Meeting % %
B
Please place on the April 13'~~ 201 1, Commission meeting agenda a referral to the
Finance Committee to discuss Bayfront to Miami Ferry and a proposal to rent the old
pilot house south of Miami Beach Marina.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Leonor Hernandez at
extension 6437.
Wc are cornm~ited 10 providrng ex cell en^ public sen/lce oild saieiy b all who live. work, and play m our 4
Agenda ltem CW
I Date 4-13-//
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
MIAMIBEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33 139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manag
DATE: April 13, 201 1
SUBJECT: REPORT OF THE MARCH 16, 2011 LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT
COMMITTEE MEETING
A meeting of the Land Use and Development Committee was held on March 16, 201 1.
Members in attendance were Commissioners Wolfson, Exposito and Gongora;
Commissioner Libbin and Mayor Bower were also in attendance. Members from the
Administration and the public were also in attendance. Please see the attached sign-in
sheet. The meeting was called to order at 3:45 pm.
OLD BUSINESS:
1. a) DISCUSSION REGARDING AN ORDINANCE REQUIRING A MAINTENANCE
BOND TO ENSURE ABONDONED CONSTRUCTION SITES MEET PROPERTY
MAINTENANCE STANDARDS.
(RETURNING FROM THE JULY 26,201 0 LUDC MEETING)
b) DISCUSSION ON VACANT OR ABANDONED BUILDINGS.
(REQUESTED BY VICE-MAYOR JONAH WOLFSON AND COMMISSIONER
JORGE EXPOSITO, ITEMS C4H AND R9C, MARCH 9, 2011 CITY COMMISSION
MEETING)
AFTER-ACTION: Jorge Gomez introduced the staff report. Commissioner Libbin
requested that the City look into a "Completion Bond" concept. Commissioner
Gongora asked what the proposed fees were based upon, and staff indicated that
they were based upon the actual cost of performing the services expected to be
required, as detailed in previous City contracts for such work. Commissioner
Gongora also asked whether this would be a cash bond, or other instrument, and
enquired as to whether these items would be left up to the Planning Director's
discretion or would there be clear, objective standards. Staff responded that they
thought that it would essentially be cash, as there would be a very high premium on
this type of performance bond given the risks historically involved. Regarding the
level of discretion contained in the ordinance, staff agreed that it should be based
upon clear objective standards so as to ensure consistency. Mayor Bower indicated
that the costs involved should be clearly delineated to the public and the
policymakers. Carla Probus, Frank DelVecchio, and Elsa Urquiza spoke. The
Mayor was concerned that there was no mechanism to compel such maintenance
bonds from existing abandoned buildings which were not seeking a development
board or building permit approval. Commissioner Exposito enquired about the
impact on staff resources, and staff responded that the actual work would be
performed by subcontractors, so no impact on existing services levels would be
created. Jack Johnson suggested exploring video surveillance options.
I
Agenda Item
Date q-u-//
City Commission Memorandum
Report of the Land Use & Development Committee Meeting of March 16,2011 .
Page 2 of 4
Commissioners Libbin and Wolfson discussed the issue of Completion Bonds.
MOTION: Gongora/Exposito (vote 3-0)
Bring back the maintenance bond proposal in Ordinance form, and continue the
discussion regarding the concept of completion bonds.
2. DISCUSSION ON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO LAND DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS AMENDING MINIMUM UNIT SIZE AND PARKING
REQUIREMENTS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS.
(DEFERRED FROM THE JANUARY 31,2011 LUDC MEETING)
AFTER-ACTION: ltem deferred.
3. DISCUSSION REGARDING TEMPORARY STOREFRONT SIGNS.
(RETURNING FROM THE JANUARY 31,201 1 LUDC MEETING)
AFTER-ACTION: ltem deferred.
4. DISCUSSION ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF A CITYWIDE TRANSPORTATION
PLAN.
(DEFERRED FROM THE FEBRUARY 23,2011 LUDC MEETING)
AFTER-ACTION: ltem deferred.
5. SHORT-TERM RENTAL ORDINANCE ENFORCEMENT.
(RETURNING FROM THE FEBRUARY 23,201 1 LUDC MEETING)
AFTER-ACTION: Jorge Gomez introduced the item, and explained that the issue
was being scheduled to be heard by the Commission's City Attorney Oversight
Committee. Fine schedules for violations were discussed. Staff discussed their
understanding that they would be henceforth using websites and other methods to
research possible violations of the short-term rental ordinance. Commissioner
Exposito requested that staff meet with Danielle Blake of the Miami Association of
Realtors to help spread the word in the realtor community about short-term rental
regulations. Commissioner Gongora discussed pending legislation in Tallahassee
that could negate the City's land use regulations and permit the expansion of
unwanted short-term rentals in residential neighborhoods, and urged members and
citizens to call their representatives and express their opposition to such efforts.
g
Direct the City Attorney's Office to include the proposed language informing buyers
of Short Term Rental regulations and limitations in the standard "No-Lien Letters"
sent out by the City, have the City pass a resolution opposing State legislation
liberalizing short term rental rules, and take the matter up again at an upcoming
Committee meetina.
City Commission Memorandum
Report of the Land Use & Development Committee Meeting of March 16,201 1
Page 3 of 4
6. DISCUSSION REGARDING AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CODE OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, BY AMENDING CHAPTER 2, "ADMINISTRATION,"
ARTICLE II, "CITY COMMISSION", BY ENACTING A NEW SECTION 2-12,
"MEETING AGENDAS," REQUIRING PROPOSED LEGISLATION OR
ORDINANCES THAT APPEAR ON A CITY COMMISSION OR COMMISSION
COMMITTEE AGENDA TO HAVE A COMMISSIONER SPONSOR IDENTIFIED;
PROVIDING FOR REPEALER; CODIFICATION; SEVERABILITY; AND AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
(DEFERRED FROM THE FEBRUARY 23,2011 LUDC MEETING)
AFTER-ACTION: Item deferred.
7. DISCUSSION REGARDING THE GALE HOTEL HEIGHT LIMITS.
(RETURNING FROM THE FEBRUARY 23,201 1 LUDC MEETING)
AFTER-ACTION: Commissioner Wolfson introduced the discussion. Richard Lorber
gave the background of the height limits for the area within the CD-3 zoning district
south of 17'~ Street between Collins Avenue and Washington Avenue, including the
site of the Gale Hotel property. William Cary spoke regarding the historic nature of
the existing buildings on the site, as well as the historic buildings in the surrounding
neighborhood. Jonathan Cardello, architect for the property owner, gave a
presentation on the property and the proposed development of a seven story
addition to the site which is proposed to include a robotic garage facility. Mayor
Bower indicated that the City's historic buildings were protected by historic
preservation ordinances that should protect the Gale Hotel building from being
demolished or compromised. Charles Urstadt and Jeff Donnelly both spoke in favor
of preserving the historic structures, and against a proposal that would add
significant additional height to the existing low-scale historic buildings. Richard
Lorber explained the difference between rooftop additions and ground-floor additions
as handled in the zoning code, indicating that the retention of the existing buildings
meant that redevelopment was limited to one-story rooftop addition. Russell Galbut
spoke in favor of the proposed project and the proposed amendment to increase the
allowable building height for the property.
MOTION: Gongora/Exposito (vote 3-0)
Allow the Planning Board and the Historic Preservation Board to review the matter as
a discussion item, prior to bringing the matter back to the Committee.
8. STATUS UPDATE ON 1-1 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT PROPOSED
AMENDMENTS.
(RETURNING FROM THE DECEMBER 13,2010 LUDC MEETING)
AFTER-ACTION: Commissioner Wolfson introduced the item and discussed the
permissibility of mechanical lifts in the 1-1 district. He expressed concern that this
issue has not been resolved and that applications for towing facilities with
mechanical lifts could be approved. He felt that these types of facilities could have a
negative impact on the area due to the increase in intensity.
City Commission Memorandum
Report of the Land Use & Development Committee Meeting of March 16,2011
Page 4 of 4
Solomon Fellig, Keith Menin, Kent Harrison Robbins, Andrew Mirmelli, Michael
Smith, Tammy Tibbles, Deirdre Mermelli, Nancy Leibman, Marilyn Freundlich and
Russell Galbut all spoke on the subject of the proposed towing yard project in Sunset
Harbour neighborhood. Jorge Gomez went through the list of items the Planning
Department was working on for the April LUDC meeting with regards to intensity of
uses in the 1-1 district.
MOTION: ExpositoIGongora (vote 3-0)
Take the entire matter of the intensity of uses in the 1-1 zoning district, including the
discussion regarding the automatic stay provisions of proceedings, resulting from
appeals of administrative decisions to the Board of Adjustment, back to the City
Commission for discussion and guidance to staff on how to proceed.
NEW BUSINESS:
9. DISCUSSION REGARDING THE PRESENT PLANS TO BUILD A CONVENTION
CENTER AND CASINO IN MIAMI-DADE COUNTY AND THE POTENTIAL
IMPACT ON MIAMI BEACH.
(REQUESTED BY COMMISSIONER EDWARD L. TOBIN,
ITEM C4F, FEBRUARY 9,201 1 CITY COMMISSION MEETING)
AFTER-ACTION: ltem deferred.
10.DISCUSSION REGARDING SCHOOLS AND DAYCARE CENTERS WITHIN
EXISTING NONCONFORMING COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS IN SINGLE FAMILY
ZONING DISTRICTS, AS A CONDITIONAL USE.
(REQUESTED BY COMMISSIONER JERRY LIBBIN,
ITEM C4G, FEBRUARY 9,2011 CIW COMMISSION MEETING)
AFTER-ACTION: Richard Lorber explained the item, and how the proposal would
allow a school or daycare facility to occupy an existing commercial building which is
currently legal nonconforming and located within a single family neighborhood. He
indicated that there was only one building he was familiar with that this would affect,
namely the existing commercial building on 51St Street.
MOTION: ExpositoIGongora (vote 2-0)
ltem referred to Planning Board for review.
Attachment
JMGI
M:\$CMB\CCUPDATES\Land Use and Development Committee\March 16,201 I\LUDC afteraction March 16,201 1 .docx
LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING March 16,201 1 @ 3:30 pm City Manager's Large Conference Room
LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING March 16,201 1 @ 3:30 pm City Manager's Large Conference Room Attendance Sheet I I I I I M:\$CMB\CCUPDATES\Land Use and Development Committee\Sign In Sheet 201 l.docx
AMIBEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 331 39, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
To: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
From: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
Date: April 13,201 1
Subject: REPORT OF THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS OVERSIGHT
COMMITTEE MEETING OF FEBRUARY 7,201 1
The meeting was called to order at 5:49PM
Please note: These minutes are not a full transcript of the meeting.
Full audio and visual record of this meeting is available online on the City's website:
http:ll www.miamibeachfl.gov/video/video.asp
1. ATTENDANCE
See attendance sheet copy attached.
2. REQUESTED REPORTS
Public Works to provide landscaping plan of Prairie Avenue, south of 23rd Street
Fernando Vazquez reported school board is prepared to cut a check for an amount of
$215,000 so the City can proceed with the landscaping. City is going to coordinate
meeting with school board being that school board may want to wait till June for
summer recess. Work will include landscaping, sidewalks, drop off zone and crossing.
Action Item: Return to March ClPOC with updated report.
Beachfront Restrooms - Construction Cost Comparison
Fernando Vazquez presented a comparative costs table showing $450 a foot for
Street Restrooms.
Action Item: Fernando Vazquez to verify numbers are correct and provide comparison of
line item costs.
Cost breakdown for South Pointe Phase II CO for Construction of 3rd Street Improvements
Fernando Vazquez presented the cost breakdown for this project. Saul Gross asked
Fernando if there is an estimator in his department. Fernando advised that there is not at
the moment, however they are in the process of interviewing estimators.
Action Item: Develop comparison and historic information. Include pricing on at least
three past project as well as their cost breakdown.
Agenda Item C69
Date 4'.-/3-//
ClPOC Committee Meeting Minutes from February 7,201 1
3. OLD BUSINESS
CIP Project Status Report - htt~://web.miamibeachfl.aov/cip/scroll.as~x?id=3990
Status Re~ort: Venetian Island Neiahborhood Improvement Project
Roberto Rodriguez reported CIP received a 100% set on the 19th of January from
Schwebke Shishkin, CIP submitted the set to Public Works on the same day for their
review. It will take 20 to 30 days for a full review. City is working on getting the
encroachment letters out. City has all permits needed. Miami Dude County is on Rivo
Alto and has found several conflicts, one of them being abandoned utilities. Project is
anticipated to bid in March.
Status Report: Sunset Islands I & II
Fernando Vazquez signed off on JOC to proceed with outfall number 1. Public Works
Department is close to receiving permitting from DERM, they hope to have it resolved in
the next couple of weeks at which point project will go out to bid. City decided to take
care of the critical outfalls before the rainy season starts. Balance of work will be done
October or November.
Status Report: Sunset Islands Ill & IV
Fernando Vazquez reported City received final input on the plans on January 21, 201 1
from FP&L. Plans were submitted to AT&T and Atlantic Broadband for the
undergrounding work. Once the plans are returned to the City we will meet with the
Engineer of Record to have their comments incorporated. Rick Saltrick reported on the
entry to Sunset Ill & IV. Public Works determined that it does not have to go to the Historic
Preservation Board or Commission for demolition of existing guard house. Will go in front
of the Design Review Board to approve it all in one shot. More money is being allocated
to the guard house than to the landscaping. Bill Goldsmith came forward and said he
would like the outfall work to be done before the rainy season. Mattie Reyes replied by
saying that the City has a report from Envirowaste. Public Works is reviewing report.
Fernando Vazquez said the City will look into it and make assessment of the structural
and hydraulic condition of the outfalls. Bill Goldsmith would like to take the report that
was created by Envirowaste and reviewed by Schwebke Shishkin and create a column
with an explanation of what is wrong and then decide what the best plan of action
would be. Parties will work together to figure out the best way to get it done. Bill
Goldsmith is also asking about the status of the CH2MHill contract. Bill Goldsmith would
also like a copy of the geotechnical report for Sunsets Ill & IV.
Action Item: Fernando Vazquez will inquire as to status of CH2MHill Contract and will also
return with a full report on the condition of the plans for the geotechnical
report and how the City is going to proceed.
Status Report: Palm & Hibiscus Island Underaroundinq
Aurelio Carmenates received plans from FP&L, plans were not complete. City
recommended meeting with FP&L, Public Works and the HOA. County is moving forward
with Hibiscus, not with Palm Island.
CIPOC Committee Meeting Minutes from February 7,2011
Status Report: FlaminaoIWest Avenue Neiahborhood ROW
This project is associated to the Stormwater Master Plan. Early up packages are out. City
is briefing each Commissioner individually on the Masterplan to understand their opinions.
What is required to meet the level of service of the Masterplan is warranting a significant
investment.
PW Verbal Status Report: Royal Palm Avenue and 44'h Street Floodina Mitiaation
Substantial Completion will be reached on February 8,201 1 with a walk-thru. Design Build
Package for park is not complete. Status Report does not have to be done on Royal
Palm for next meeting.
Action Item: Fernando will return to next meeting with update on park.
4. REQUESTED REPORTS
Status Update: Lower North Bay Road proposed aenerator
Bill Goldsmith reviewed the plans and had an update. He suggests a meeting
immediately between the City Engineer, CH2MHiII and a resident representative to go
over the issues raised in the report. Fernando Vazquez reported that the contract has
been awarded, contractor has not received a Notice to Proceed. Contract has been
awarded and is contingent on City reviewing it. Commission requested City look into
drainage on Lower North bay Road.
Action Item: Fernando Vazquez to review Bill Goldsmith's comments and develop a plan
to move forward.
5. COMMISSION ITEMS
SOUTH POINTE RDA PHASE II NEIGHBORHOOD 12C RIGHT OF WAY
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH,
FLORIDA, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND ClTY CLERK TO EXECUTE
AMENDMENT NO. 14 TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE ClTY AND WOLFBERG ALVAREZ &
PARTNERS, INC., DATED SEPTEMBER 25, 2002, FOR PROFESSIONAL ARCHITECTURAL AND
ENGINEERING (A/E) SERVICES FOR THE RIGHT OF WAY INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
PROGRAM NEIGHBORHOOD 12- SOUTH POINTE RDA PHASE II (PROJECT), IN THE
NEGOTIATED AMOUNT OF $82,134.21, FOR ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION
AND RESIDENT PROJECT REPRESENTATIVE (RPR) SERVICES, AND $4,500 FOR REIMBURSABLE
EXPENSES FOR A TOTAL NOT - TO - EXCEED AMOUNT OF $86,634.21, FOR THE PROJECT;
WITH FUNDING AVAILABLE FROM PREVIOUSLY APPROPRIATED SOUTH POINTE CAPITAL
FUND 389 IN THE AMOUNT OF $86,634.21.
MOTiON: Recommend to the Mayor and City Commission approval of Commission item
MOVED: Christina Cuervo Is! Dwight Kraai 2nd
PASSED: Unanimous
ClPOC Committee Meeting Minutes from February 7,2011
SUNSET HARBOUR STORMWATER SYSTEM
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH,
FLORIDA, APPROPRIATING FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $81,921, FOR CONSULTING SERVICES
FOR THE SUNSET HARBOR STORM WATER SYSTEM, WlTH FUNDING FROM FUND 429,
STORMWATER PROJECTS LINE OF CREDIT; WlTH SUCH FUNDS TO BE REPAID FROM
PROPOSED FUTURE STORMWATER BONDS FOR THE SUNSET HARBOR PUMP STATION
UPGRADES PROJECT.
MOTION: Get engineering work done and get a firm number established in before
construction begins.
MOVED:, Dwight Kraai 1st. Christina Cuervo 2nd
PASSED: Unanimous
6. REVIEW AND ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES
MOTION: Acceptance of Minutes of the January 10,201 1 ClPOC Meeting
MOVED: Eleanor Carney 1 st, Dwight Kraai 2"d
PASSED: Unanimous
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Greg Carney, HOA President, commented on City construction that took place in front of
his home and on his driveway. Construction crew accidently cut his phone line. Mr.
Carney would like to know how the City deals with situations like this one. Saul Gross
replied to Mr. Carney by saying that he does not believe that he should be dealing with
the contractor directly, he should allow the City to deal with the contractor. Roberto
Rodriguez, CIP, surveyed the property and the City was working in a right of way and not
on the Carney property. Fernando Vazquez believes the contractor should have
informed the homeowner. Greg Carney suggests the City require contractors to replace
sidewalks in a better condition than they find it. Roberto Rodriguez will go thru the
documents that he City has and try to add specific language.
Greg Carney had a question on the County contractor on the causeway. It appears to
be a safety issue, the bike lanes and walk-ways have gone away and there is not much
signage. Mr. Carney has been trying to reach the county and has not been successful.
Roberto Rodriguez mentioned that the maintenance of traffic has been approved.
Fernando Vazquez will have Public Works review this. Public Works will send an inspector
to see condition of M.O.T. and will issue an opinion.
Greg Carney would like to know when Belle Isle will be getting the valve repaired. Carla
Dixon, CIP, submitted a ROW permit to complete that section of the pipe. County issued
their comments on Friday. The comments were sent to the Engineer of Record, who the
City is in litigation with, so not a lot has happened. Carla will follow up with EOR.
Greg Carney would like the elevation plan for the Miami Beach Golf Course. Fernando
Vazquez will provide him the as-builts.
Meeting Adjourned: 7:32 pm
AMIBEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 331 39, www.rniamibea~hfl.~ov
COMMITTEE MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: City Manager Jorge M. Gonzale hollL4t-
DATE: April 13, 201 1 \ u u.
SUBJECT: REPORT OF THE FINANCE AND CITYWIDE PROJECTS COMMllTEE
MEETING OF February 24,2011.
OLD BUSINESS
I Discussion of Lincoln RoadNVashington Collins Median
ACTION
The Committee recommended the item be brought to the full Commission.
Chairperson Deede Weithorn asked if an agreement had been reached on the Lincoln
RoadNVashington Collins median. City Manager Jorge Gonzalez stated that there is an
agreement but that the details need to be finalized. The Committee recommended the
item be brought to the full Commission. (see CIP Construction Report dated April 13,
201 1)
NEW BUSINESS
2. Selection of Chair for Finance and Citywide Committee
The Committee elected Commissioner Deede Weithorn as Chair and
Commissioner Jorge Exposito as Vice-Chair of the Finance and Citywide Projects
Committee for a one year term ending January 2012.
3. Discussion regarding the Miami Beach Convention Center and Conference
Facility Expansion and Enhancement Plan
The Committee recommended moving forward without zoning restrictions, adding
a component to address infrastructure and the impact to the surrounding
neighborhoods and a cost analysis.
City Manager Jorge Gonzalez presented and gave a brief history of the item. City
Manager Jorge Gonzalez then introduced John Kaatz of Convention Sports & Leisure
International.
Agenda Item CG C
Date +I3 - //
Mr. Kaatz presented the Master Plan analysis and the long-range strategic facility needs.
City Manager Jorge Gonzalez then went on to introduce Bernardo Fort-Brescia of
Arquitectonica International, who is a consultant for the project. Mr. Fort-Brescia
presented the Master Plan. City Manager Jorge Gonzalez then presented the cost
estimates which total approximately $640 million, with construction costs, including a
parking garage, of approximately $517 million of hard cost and approximately $122
million in soft costs. Mr. Kaatz then presented the Economic Impact analysis for
Convention Center expansion scenarios and for ongoing operations.
Commissioner Jerry Libbin stated that he felt that this was an important project and
stated his concern about the design of the garage exit to Meridian Ave because it could
cause heavy congestion at the Dade Boulevard and Meridian Avenue intersection. City
Manager Jorge Gonzalez stated that the design is preliminary and that the traffic
analysis will continue to be evaluated. John McWilliams of Kimley-Horn and Associates,
Inc. stated that it was also a concern and that it will continue to be analyzed.
Commissioner Jorge Exposito expressed his concern with the mass of the building, how
the additional one million square feet was arrived at and asked if it had been explored
that a hotelier build the convention center hotel. City Manager Jorge Gonzalez stated
that this design was done assuming no zoning changes, however should that restriction
be changed the design could be taller and would appear to be less impactful. He feels
that there are hoteliers and private developers who would be interested in a public
private partnership. Commissioner Exposito asked what infrastructure changes are
planned, the traffic impact on the surrounding neighborhoods, and the cost of these
changes.
Commissioner Jonah Wolfson stated that he was also concerned with the mass of the
building, the impact on the neighborhoods, the cost effectiveness and square footage,
and the hotel component.
Commissioner Ed Tobin was also concerned with the traffic impact, and asked if the
Basis of Design Report (BODR) could be refined. City Manager Jorge Gonzalez stated
that the BODR could be refined at a later date. Commissioner Tobin stated that he felt
that a convention center hotel is essential to the project and that a convention center
hotel could potentially alleviate some traffic. He also stated that he was concerned with
the massing of the current design but if the building was taller, a parklgreenspace could
be added.
Chairperson Deede Weithorn stated that massing was also a concern for her and asked
if the job creation numbers presented in the analysis were full time equivalent jobs.
Isaac Petit-Frere of the Washington Economics Group, Inc. stated that they are full time
equivalent jobs. Chairperson Weithorn then asked if the jobs created after the building
was built were also full time jobs. Mr. Kaatz stated that they were also full time jobs.
Chairperson Weithorn was in favor of moving the BODR forward, that this project needs
to be done, and that the design should include a hotel which could be removed from the
design at a later date.
Commissioner Wolfson felt that the private sector should be contacted before moving
forward with the project and was concerned that what was presented was more than just
a concept.
Chairperson Weithorn opened the floor to public comment.
John Corey, President of Bayshore Home Owners Association, expressed his concern
on how the Bayshore home owners would be impacted by the project, the massing of
the building, the parking garage location and the traffic impact at the Holocaust Memorial
and the Botanical Garden, how the smaller buildings along Meridian Avenue would be
impacted by the size of Convention Center, stated that the flaw with the BODR was that
residents were not any of the committees where this project was discussed, asked for a
financial analysis on the benefit for residents real estate taxes, and that he would like to
know if the business community was driving the project. Resident Frank Del Vecchio
stated that he felt that the BODR was constraining, traffic would not be adequately
handled, and that building should be built up and not out. Robert Wennett, President of
UIA Management, stated that this report was not a BODR but rather a needs study and
favored moving the project forward without constraints.
The Committee recommended moving forward without zoning restrictions, adding a
component to address infrastructure and the impact to the surrounding neighborhoods
and a cost analysis.
4. Discussion regarding renewal options in the management agreement with
Global Spectrum for the management of the Miami Beach Convention
Center, Colony Theater, and Byron Carlyle Theater.
ACTION
The Committee recommended a renewal of the two (2) one-year renewal options.
Cultural Arts & Tourism Development Director Max Sklar presented the item.
On September 10, 2008, the City Commission approved Resolution No. 2008-2688
which approved an agreement between the City and Global Spectrum, L.P. for the
management of the Miami Beach Convention Center, Colony Theater, and Byron Carlyle
Theater. The Agreement was for an initial three (3) year term commencing on October
1, 2008, and ending on September 30, 201 1, with two (2) one-year renewal options,
exercisable with ninety (90) days prior written notice, at the sole and absolute discretion
of the City.
Mr. Sklar stated that the Convention Center Advisory Board (CCAB) has considered the
item and recommended a renewal of both one-year options. The Committee
recommended a renewal of the two (2) one-year renewal options.
5. Discussion regarding resolution of the Miami Beach Convention Center
Advisory Board urging consideration for the creation of a reduced parking
rate pilot program at the Preferred Lot (P-Lot) for all food and beverage
social events at the Convention Center
ACTION
The Committee recommended a reduced parking rate program at the Preferred Lot
(P-Lot) for all food and beverage social events at the Convention Center.
Cultural Arts & Tourism Development Director Max Sklar presented the item.
Centerplate and Global Spectrum both have been charged with increasing social event
business at the Convention Center. To that end, both entities have increased their
efforts and have been moderately successful in booking smaller pieces of business.
Parking rates have routinely been cited by potential clients as a reason for not selecting
the Convention Center for the event.
On September 21, 2010, the Convention Center Advisory Board (CCAB) was reviewing
recent social catering sales activity and discussed the City's ordained parking rates for
the Convention Center area. The CCAB discussed the matter extensively and felt the
City should consider developing a different parking rate structure for the social events in
order to increase bookings. Subsequently, a resolution of the CCAB was unanimously
passed to request the City to consider a parking program to incentivize social business.
The Transportation and Parking Committee met February 7, 201 I and considered this
matter. The Committee unanimously recommended in favor of creating the
aforementioned program to help increase social business at the Convention Center.
The Committee recommended a reduced parking rate program at the Preferred Lot (P-
Lot) for all food and beverage social events at the Convention Center.
6. Discussion regarding the expansion of the maintenance agreement
between the City of Miami Beach and UIA Management, LLC for the
maintenance of Lincoln Road from Lenox Avenue to Lincoln Road Street
end, and the Miami Beach SoundScape Park
The Committee approved moving forward with the expansion of UIA services to
the remainder of Lincoln Road and the Miami Beach SoundScape Park. UIA is to
request bids for maintenance services for Lincoln Road Mall from Collins Avenue
to Lenox Avenue and the City Manager is to enter into negotiations after the bids
are received by UIA followed approval of the City Commission to amend the
current Agreement between the City and UIA.
City Manager Jorge Gonzalez presented the item and gave a brief history of the item.
After the completion of the conversion of the 1100 block of Lincoln Road from a
vehicular street to a pedestrian mall, the City on January 11, 2010 entered into a
Maintenance Management Agreement for the I100 block of Lincoln Road with UIA
Management, LLC (UIA) for the annual amount of $158,102. Under the agreement UIA
provides complete maintenance services which include: sanitation, landscaping,
hardscape, lighting and water features. Under the terms of the agreement, the City and
UIA by mutual agreement can expand the type of services provided on the 1100 block of
Lincoln Road to other sections of Lincoln Road and the Miami Beach SoundScape Park.
The City has been in discussions with UIA to expand the services provided on the 1100
block of Lincoln Road to the remainder of Lincoln Road from Collins Avenue to the Bay.
In response to the City's request, UIA has provided a non-binding cost proposal. The
cost proposal is for approximately $2.2 million, it includes the provision of a full time
Lincoln Road Mall Manager and about $300,000 as a contingency amount. UIA's
proposal also has a separate one time set up cost of about $150,000, which includes
$100,000 for initial replanting and cleanup, uniforms, vehicle for patrolling and
management, initial inventory and warehouse transfer, training and computer. Currently,
the City's budget for the maintenance services provided by City staff on Lincoln Road is
$2.4 million. It was noted that the service items that are bid out will not have any UIA
markup. The $2.2 million proposal does not include the provision of maintenance
services for SoundScape Park. UIA would also bid the services for the Miami Beach
SoundScape Park. The bid amount can then be evaluated with current bids obtained
through Hines (SoundScape project manager). All of the amounts provided by UIA have
not yet been bid out, it is expected that the bid amount will be below the current $2.2
million cost proposal. City Administration requested approval by the Committee to move
forward with the expansion of UIA services to the remainder of Lincoln Road and the
Miami Beach SoundScape Park by requesting that UIA request bids for these services.
It also recommended the Committee approve the City Manager to enter into negotiations
after the bids are received by UIA followed by City Commission approval to an
amendment to the current Agreement between the City and UIA. Chairperson Deede
Weithorn asked if any City staff jobs will be lost. City Manager Jorge Gonzalez stated
that staff would not be laid off.
The Committee approved moving forward with the expansion of UIA services to the
remainder of Lincoln Road and the Miami Beach SoundScape Park. UIA is to request
bids for maintenance services for Lincoln Road Mall from Collins Avenue to Lenox
Avenue and the City Manager is to enter into negotiations after the bids are received by
UIA followed by approval of the City Commission to amend the current Agreement
between the City and UIA.
7. Discussion of all fees administratively set or have been administratively set
Item Deferred
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
AM1 BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 331 39, www.rniarnibeachfl.gov
COMMITTEE MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: City Manager Jorge M. Gonzalez
DATE: April 13, 201 1
MEETING OF March 24,201 1.
SUBJECT: REPORT OF THE FINANCE AND CITYWIDE PROJECTS COMMITTEE
OLD BUSINESS
1. Discussion regarding recent billing of Parking Impact Fees and the
possibility of a moratorium due to present economic market conditions,
and the effect on business in North Beach
ACTION
The Committee recommended allowing staff to bifurcate the following initiatives:
accept the modifications to the map for parking districts
reducing the percentage for the yearly fee from 3% to 2%
Staff is to provide an analysis of the available parking that hotels have and the
usage they have.
The Committee recommended that the item be sent to the Planning Board.
Acting Planning Director Richard Lorber presented the item and gave an update on the
results of the Planning Board meeting on March 22, 201 1. The Committee
recommended allowing staff to bifurcate the following initiatives:
accept the modifications to the map for parking districts
reducing the percentage for the yearly fee from 3% to 2%
The Committee discussed allowing a yearly fee to be paid for new construction.
Chairperson Deede Weithorn was concerned that allowing yearly fee may not be the
best solution for all potential situations. Mayor Matti Herrera Bower asked for an
assessment on the actual parking that hotels have now and the usage they have.
Discussion ensued. The Committee recommended that the item be sent to the Planning
Board.
2. Status update regarding the Convention Center Extension and
Enhancement Plan
ACTION
Item Deferred
, Agenda Item Cb D
1 Date &-/3-li
NEW BUSINESS
3. Discussion regarding an ordinance amending Article Ill, Division 28 of the
City Code, entitled "Capital lmprovement Projects Oversight Committee;"
amending Section 2-190.127, entitled "Establishment; Purpose;
Membership," by adding a non-voting ex-officio
ACTION
The Committee suggested that the Accessibility Committee recommend three
nominations and that the City Commission chooses from those three nominations
or they can consider any other nomination to select a non-voting ex-ofFicio
member as is also done with the CAC committee.
4. Discussion on the role of the Capital lmprovement Projects Oversight
Committee (CIPOC).
The Committee asked staff to discuss with the Capital lmprovements Projects
Committee (CIPOC) the creation of a scope of services and list of duties for
construction management services; and to put out a Request for Qualifications
(RFQ) for construction management services. Furthermore, the Committee
requested staff to provide a list of candidate projects to the April 27,201 1 Finance
& Citywide Projects Committee meeting in which construction management
services could be applied.
Capital lmprovements Projects Oversight Committee (CIPOC) member Saul Gross felt
that committee was not doing anything meaningful and asked that the duties of the
committee be defined. Mr. Gross also stated that he felt that the oversight of each
individual project should be privatized and bid out to a construction managerlowners
representative. Chairperson Deede Weithorn stated that she was in favor of moving to
an owner's rep concept. Discussion ensued. Commissioner Ed Tobin was also in favor
of moving to an owners representative. The Committee asked staff to discuss with the
Capital lmprovements Projects Committee (CIPOC) the creation of a scope of services
and list of duties for construction management services; and to put out a Request for
Qualifications (RFQ) for construction management services. Furthermore, the
Committee requested staff to provide a list of candidate projects to the April 27, 201 1
Finance & Citywide Projects Committee meeting in which construction management
services could be applied.
5. Discussion regarding a proposed ordinance which will require mandatory
recycling, via the establishment of a City of Miami Beach Recycling
Program, for multifamily residences and commercial establishments in the
City
ACTION
Item Deferred
6. Discussion regarding a parking solution - "Parking App"
The Committee recommended approval of the issuance of the Request for
Proposal (RFP) for a "Parking App".
On January 19, 2011, Commissioner Jerry Libbin suggested that the Administration
should pursue the implementation of a "parking application" available on the internet
andlor smart phones for residents, tourists, andlor visitors who are looking for a parking
space, to be able to identify municipal parking facilities, including available parking
spaces. This initiative was discussed and endorsed by the Transportation and Parking
Committee at its meeting on March 7, 201 I. Commissioner Libbin suggested that the
RFP include require an add alternate for push messages that were from retailers near
the parking space which was located. The Committee recommended approval of the
issuance of the Request for Proposal (RFP) for a "Parking App".
7. Discussion regarding a proposed lease agreement with Gigi's Restaurant
for use of 7,000 sf of space in the City-owned property located at 1661
Pennsylvania Avenue.
The Committee recommended approving the Pre-Lease Due Diligence Period, and
a lease agreement with Gigi's Restaurant.
Anna Parekh, Director of Real Estate Housing and Community Development, presented
the item and gave a brief synopsis of the memo.
The recently completed Pennsylvania Avenue Garage located at 1661 Pennsylvania
Avenue (the Garage) was built with approximately 7,000 square feet of ground floor
retail space. On February 14, 201 1, Koniver Stern provided the City with a proposed
Letter of Intent (LOI) from Mr. Amir Ben Zion, to lease the full 7,000 square feet of
available retail space at the Garage. The prospective tenant is planning to open a
second version of its highly acclaimed Gigi's Restaurant currently operation in Miami's
Wynwood district. Based on preliminary estimates, the prospective tenant's cost to build
out the shell space is anticipated to be approximately $2.5 million, which will include the
installation of a grease trap, additional sub grade plumbing and kitchen exhaust venting,
none of which were provided in the building. Typically, a build-out of this nature would
command a term in excess of ten years in order to amortize the capital investment in the
project. However, due to the City's charter of governing the leases of City-owned
properties, the prospective tenant has agreed to the maximum allowable term under the
charter of nine (9) years and three hundred and sixty four (364) days. The prospective
tenant has requested consideration of a six (6) month due diligence period to precede
the actual lease commencement date, in order to allow them to reserve leasing rights
while advancing design and plans development and consulting with the City's Planning
and Building Departments in order to ascertain the feasibility of obtaining a full building
permit prior to the lease commencement. The prospective tenant is willing to invest the
considerable sums and time necessary to develop full plans without the full benefit and
security of an executed lease, while posting a $25,000 fee with the City, which will be
refundable in the event that the prospective tenant is unable to obtain a full building
permit within six months in spite of reasonable and verifiable efforts to do so. During the
six month due diligence period, the City retains the right to continue to market the
property and accept back-up offers to lease the site.
Commissioner Jerry Libbin was concerned that about the $25,000 refundable deposit for
the "Pre-Lease Due Diligence Period". Commissioner Jorge Exposito questioned why
the rental price was $75 per square foot rather than $100 per square foot. Mr. Lyle
Stern, Koniver Stern Group, stated that $75 per square foot is in line with the market and
that there were no comparable spaces in the area that were renting at $100 per square
foot. Commissioner Exposito then asked if there would be a parking requirement for the
business. Acting Planning Director Richard Lorber stated that the property is located in
Parking District 2, where there is no parking requirement for restaurants or retail.
Chairperson Deede Weithorn asked what other offers have been made for the space
available. Mr. Stern stated that other offers have been in the range and below the $75
per square foot. Commissioner Exposito asked Mr. Stern if it was better to rent the full
7,000 square feet or to rent the spaces individually. Mr. Stern stated that the City would
benefit from renting the full 7,000 square feet because should the renter walk away the
City would be left with a built-out space. Mayor Matti Herrera Bower was concerned
about the six month Pre-Lease Due Diligence Period. Discussion ensued. Chief Deputy
City Attorney Raul Aguila suggested building milestones into the six month Pre-Lease
Due Diligence Period. The Committee recommended approving the Pre-Lease Due
Diligence Period, and a lease agreement with Gigi's Restaurant.
8. Discussion regarding renewal of agreement with Clear Channel ADSHEL,
Inc. to construct, operate, and maintain bus shelters
ACTION
The Committee asked that the item be brought back to the May 19,201 I Finance &
Citywide Projects Committee Meeting and that the Administration determine what
LED rates are, how other cities handle this and who Clear Channel Adshel, Inc.'s
competitors are.
City Manager Jorge Gonzalez presented and gave a brief history of the item. In October
2001, an agreement between the City and Clear Channel Adshel, Inc. (Adshel) was
executed for Adshel to construct, operate, and maintain bus shelter structures and other
street furniture on the public Right-of-way (ROW) throughout the City.) Under the terms
of the Agreement, the initial term of ten (10) years terminates on October 1, 201 1. At the
end of the initial term, the Agreement shall automatically renew for a five (5) year term,
provided, however, that the City, at its sole option and discretion, may, after the initial ten
(10) year term, elect not to renew the Agreement by notifying Adshel of its intent not to
renew, in writing 120 days prior to the expiration of the initial ten (10) year term.
Commissioner Jerry Libbin asked what other cities are doing and who Clear Channel
Adshel, Inc.'s competitors are. Chairperson Deede Weithorn asked what the LED rates
are and what the City's other options are. Commissioner Jonah Wolfson was concerned
that the contract has an automatic renewal. The Committee asked that the item be
brought back to the May 19, 201 1 Finance & Citywide Projects Committee Meeting and
that the Administration determine what LED rates are, how other cities handle this and
who Clear Channel Adshel, Inc.'s competitors are.
9. Discussion regarding casino gambling legislation
The Committee asked that the item be brought to the Committee of the Whole.
The Committee discussed the Legislature's consideration of several bills that would alter
or even expand gambling in Florida. Chairperson Deede Weithorn recessed the meeting
and asked that the item be brought to the Committee of the Whole.
Follow up: Discussion regarding the shift to an iPad from the printed agenda
Commissioner Jorge Exposito asked for an update regarding the shift to an iPad from
the printed agendas. City Manager Jorge Gonzalez stated that there were still some
Commissioners who have not tested it yet. Chairperson Deede Weithorn stated that she
was in favor of moving to using an iPad. City Manager Jorge Gonzalez stated that an
item regarding the lPad would be placed on the April Commission agenda.
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title: I A Resolution authorizing the City Manager to apply for and accept four (4) grants. I
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
1) and 2) Ensure value and timely delivery of quality capital projects; 3) and 4) Enhance the environmental
sustainability of the community.
Supporting Data:
2009 Community Survey: 1) 21.4% of residents stated that "improving infrastructure" was one of the areas
that the City can address to improve public safety. 2) Residents surveyed reported that they attend City parks
and recreational facilities an average of 3.5 times per month; and, when asked the question: "When thinking
about recreation programs in the City of Miami Beach, please indicate which demographic you feel should
benefit most from limited resources during tough economic times? Nearly two-fifths of all residential
respondents, 37.3%, responded that the "18 years of age and under" demographic should benefit most. 3)
and 4) 13.1 % of respondents stated that the City should strive not to reduce Environmental Initiatives if
reductions become necessary. Other Data: 2) Studies conducted by the American Academy of Dermatology
estimate that more than two million new cases of skin cancer are diagnosed each year.
Issue:
Shall the City support the following funding requests and execute the related agreements? I
The Administration requests approval to submit the following grant applications: 1) Florida Inland Navigation
District (FIND) in the approximate amount of $500,000 for the loth streetend seawall project; and, 2) The
American Academy of Dermatology, Shade Structure grant program for funding in the approximate amount
of $8,000 for a shade structure at Fisher Park; and, 3) Approval to execute an agreement with the National
Audubon Society, Inc. (Audubon) for funding in the amount of $1 0,000 for the Miami Beach Sustainability and
Dune Restoration Project; and, 4) Funding in the amount of $20,000 from the Florida Department of
Community Affairs and the Governor's Energy Office to implement the next steps of the City's Sustainability
Plan; appropriating the above grants, as necessary if approved and accepted by the City, and authorizing the
execution of all documents related to these applications.
Advisory Board Recommendation: NIA
funds
@
Financial Information:
Source
of
1
Approximate
Grant
2
Match AmountlSource #
Florida Inland Navigation District1
1 oth Streetend Seawall
3
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking:
Judy Hoanshelt, Grants Manager, Office of Budget and Performance Improvement
Grant NamelProject
American Academy of
Dermatology1 Fisher Park Shade
Structure
4
so- ^"--
Deparpe%Dire#r a 1 Assistant City Manager City Manager I
4
/
Amount
$500,000
National Audubon Society Inc.1
Sustainability and Dune
Restoration
$500,0001 Pay-As-You-Go
Funds
$8,000
Florida Department of Community
Affairs and the Governor's Energy
OfficelSustainability Plan
NIA - Match Not Required.
I
$1 0,000
$20,000
NIA - Match Not Required.
NIA - Match Not Required.
MIAMIBEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33 139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
DATE: April 13,201 1
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF
MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE ClTY
MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO SUBMIT GRANT APPLICATIONS TO: I)
FLORIDA INLAND NAVIGATION DISTRICT (FIND) IN THE APPROXIMATE
AMOUNT OF $500,000 FOR THE loTH STREETEND SEAWALL PROJECT;
AND, 2) THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF DERMATOLOGY, SHADE
STRUCTURE GRANT PROGRAM FOR FUNDING IN THE APPROXIMATE
AMOUNT OF $8,000 FOR A SHADE STRUCTURE AT FISHER PARK; 3)
APPROVAL TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE NATIONAL AUDUBON
SOCIETY, INC. FOR FUNDING IN THE AMOUNT OF $10,000 FOR THE MIAMI
BEACH SUSTAINABILITY AND DUNE RESTORATION PROJECT; AND, 4)
FUNDING IN THE AMOUNT OF $20,000 FROM THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT
OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND THE GOVERNOR'S ENERGY OFFICE TO
IMPLEMENT THE NEXT STEPS OF THE CITY'S SUSTAINABILITY PLAN;
APPROPRIATING THE ABOVE GRANTS, AS NECESSARY IF APPROVED
AND ACCEPTED BY THE CITY, AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF ALL
DOCUMENTS RELATED TO THESE APPLICATIONS
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
ANALYSIS
1. Approval to submit a grant application to Florida Inland Navigation District (FIND) in
the approximate amount of $500.000 for construction of the 1 oth Streetend Seawall
The Florida Legislature created s. 374.976, Florida Statutes in recognition of the importance
and benefits of inland navigation channels and waterways, as well as in acknowledgement
of the problems associated with the construction, continued maintenance and use of these
waterways. This law authorizes and empowers each inland navigation district to undertake
programs intended to alleviate the problems associated with its waterways. The Florida
Inland Navigation District program that provides funding for these projects is called the
Waterways Assistance Program.
The Biscayne Bay 1 oth Streetend Seawall and Waterway Access Enhancement Project was
developed to address shoreline erosion in an innovative and environmentally beneficial
manner, while simultaneously enhancing the public's access to the Biscayne Bay shoreline.
The failing seawall will be replaced with a standard sheetpile system seawall structure. This
will entail the demolition of the old seawall and the construction of new seawall.
Commission Memorandum
Page 2
The seawall improvement will also protect the bay from polluted rainwater run-off, litter and
sediment through the stormwater infrastructure improvement associated with this project. In
addition, the project will include a stormwater infrastructure upgrade that will improve the
water quality of discharge entering Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserve. A public access plaza
will also be developed on the adjacent upland area. This plaza will provide enhanced public
access to Biscayne Bay and will include a rest area and vista area. Interpretive signage will
also be incorporated into the project to educate residents and visitors about the Biscayne
Bay Aquatic Preserve and the upland area will be planted with native coastal vegetation.
This Commission item includes Attachment E-6, a Resolution for Assistance under the
Florida Inland Navigation District Wateways Assistance Program. Attachment E-6 certifies
that the City will comply with certain regulations including responsibility for maintenance,
operating and financing its share of the project, completing the project in accordance with
the terms of the agreement and in the manner described in the proposal; non discrimination
and maintaining adequate records for reimbursements and for a post-audit of expenses.
The total project cost is estimated at approximately $1,000,000. The Administration intends
to request funding in the approximate amount of $500,000. Matching funds are required for
this grant. The City has available matching funds in Pay-As-You-Go funding for this project.
This project supports the key intended outcome: ensure value and timely delivery of quality
capital projects.
2. Approval to submit a grant ap~lication to the American Academv of Dermatologv,
Shade Structure grant program for fundinq in the approximate amount of $8,000 for
a shade structure at Fisher Park
The American Academy of Dermatology's (AAD) Shade Structure Program provides grants
in the amount of $8,000 each for the purchase of permanent shade structures designed to
provide shade and ultraviolet (UV) ray protection for outdoor areas. The AAD receives
support for this program from Johnson & Johnson Consumer Products Company.
The Administration proposes applying for grant funding in the amount of $8,000 for a shade
system at Fisher Park. The Fisher Park Tot-lotlPlayground was constructed as a project in
the 1995 Parks GOB program. At the time it was constructed, shade structures were not
included in the design. During the past 3-5 years, the City has installed new shade
structures in many parks. Fisher park currently does not have a shade structure; there is
existing natural shade from trees in the park, but this is not sufficient.
The City is currently in the process of designing a new playground at the park. The design
for the new shade structure will be incorporated in the overall design of the new playground.
The intent is to preserve the tress that are currently at the park; the new design for the park
will accommodate the shade structure and playground to work with the existing trees.
This grant does not require matching funds, however, the anticipated cost of the shade
structure at Fisher Park is $60,000. The Administration has funds available to complete this
project in Quality of Life Resort Tax funding previously appropriated for this project. This
project supports the key intended outcome: ensure value and timely delivery of quality
capital projects.
Commission Memorandum
Page 3
3. Approval to execute an aqreement with the National Audubon Society, Inc. "
iAudubon) for funding in the amount of $10,000 for the Miami Beach
Sustainabilitv and Dune Restoration Proiect
"Together Green" is an innovative Audubon program funded by Toyota that aims to provide
inspiration, leadership and opportunities that inspire people to take action to improve the
health of our environment. Audubon has partnered with Toyota Motor North America, Inc. to
fund the "Together Green" program. Toyota supports programs with long-term sustainable
results and partners with numerous organizations across the country, focusing on education,
the environment and safety.
TogetherGreen Innovation Grants annually provide essential funding that enables Audubon
groups and their partners to inspire, equip, and support activities that engage new and
diverse audiences in conservation action and create healthier communities. Through
TogetherGreen Conservation Fellowships, 40 individuals are chosen for their demonstrated
leadership, as well as leadership potential, skills, and commitment to engaging people of
diverse backgrounds in conservation action. The Together Green Program has selected
Lisa Botero from the Public Works Department as a Fellow and has awarded the City with a
$10,000 grant to conduct a conservation action project.
The Administration intends to use these grant funds to further develop and implement the
City's Sustainability Plan with the intent of integrating green initiatives into everyday life.
Specifically, this fellowship will promote the Natural Resources Program Area of the City's
Sustainability Plan, including the design and implementation of a community dune
restoration event, perhaps as an Employee Day, that will serve as a vehicle for connecting
people with the natural environment through direct hands-on experience. A section of dune
habitat in Miami Beach will be restored through the removal of invasive vegetation species,
the planting of native species and the removal of litter and debris.
This grant does not require matching funds. This project supports the key intended
outcome: enhance the environmental sustainability of the community.
4. Request for funding in the approximate amount of $20,000 from the Florida
Department of Community Affairs and the Governor's Energv Office To
implement the next steps of the City's Sustainabilitv Plan
Florida Department of Community Affairs and the Governor's Energy Office are making
funds available to the Energy Economic Zone Pilot Communities to provide assistance in
implementing the Energy Economic Zone work plans. During the 2009 session, the Florida
Legislature enacted legislation authorizing the Florida Department of Community Affairs to
implement an Energy Economic Zone Pilot Program, to develop a model for use by other
communities. In September 2009, the City was selected as the only city in Florida for the
State's Energy Economic Development Zone Pilot Program
Through the Energy Economic Zone pilot community designation, the City Miami Beach is +
developing citywide sustainable programs to create policies that will link economic
development to the future environmental, economic and social sustainability of our city. The
Sustainability Plan was developed as a first step in creating a comprehensive Sustainability
Master Plan for the city. The City plans to request $20,000 in funding support from the State
Commission Memorandum
Page 4
to implement the Sustainability Plan and the Miami Beach EcoZone work plan by developing
a Baseline Report, an Implementation Plan and a Communications Strategy.
The Baseline Report will provide an understanding of the current status of the city's
sustainability-related initiatives, including current rates of natural resources consumption
(e.g. water and energy usage) and current carbon (environmental) footprint. Baseline data is
the point from which all future measurable outcomes will be compared and ultimately
assessed. Establishing baseline data for the city's sustainability programs will aid in setting
future benchmarks and will allow the city to define Targets for each of the ten Program
Areas.
The Implementation Plan will lay out a detailed guide to introduce the concepts of
sustainability both to city departments and the business community. The Plan will identify
necessary policies and procedures to support the Plan and build the necessary consensus
among the various stakeholders to execute sustainable Initiatives successfully. In addition,
the lmplementation Plan will outline technical assistance opportunities for the business
community, as well as the necessary coordination between the public and private sectors.
Obstacles to the implementation of sustainability initiatives by the business community will
also be identified.
Communication Strategy will educate and increase awareness about opportunities for
businesses to implement sustainability measures to improve their triple bottom line. In
addition, local, state and federal resources and incentives will be packaged for inclusion in
business plans. The Strategy will also brand the Miami Beach EcoZone and expand the
Business Academy to include EcoZone initiatives.
No matching funds are required from the City for this program. This program supports the
key intended outcome: enhance the environmental sustainability of the community.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the Administration requests approval to submit the following grant applications
to: I) Florida Inland Navigation District (FIND) in the approximate amount of $500,000 for
the loth street seawall project; and, 2) The American Academy of Dermatology, Shade
Structure grant program for funding in the approximate amount of $8,000 for a shade
structure at Fisher Park; 3) Approval to execute an agreement with the National Audubon
Society, Inc. (Audubon) for funding in the amount of $10,000 for the Miami Beach
Sustainability and Dune Restoration Project; and, 4) Request for funding in the approximate
amount of $20,000 from the Florida Department of Community Affairs and the Governor's
Energy Office To implement the next steps of the City's Sustainability Plan; appropriating the
above grants, as necessary if approved and accepted by the City, and authorizing the
execution of all documents related to these applications.
JMGIKGBIJMH
T:\AGENDA\2011\4-13-1 l\Grants Memo.doc
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF
THE ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING AND
AUTHORIZING THE ClTY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO
SUBMIT GRANT APPLICATIONS TO: 1) FLORIDA INLAND
NAVIGATION DISTRICT (FIND) IN THE APPROXIMATE
AMOUNT OF $500,000 FOR THE loTH STREET SEAWALL
PROJECT; AND, 2) THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF
DERMATOLOGY, SHADE STRUCTURE GRANT PROGRAM FOR
FUNDING IN THE APPROXIMATE AMOUNT OF $8,000 FOR A
SHADE STRUCTURE AT FISHER PARK; 3) APPROVAL TO
EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE NATIONAL AUDUBON
SOCIETY, INC. FOR FUNDING IN THE AMOUNT OF $10,000
FOR THE MIAMI BEACH SUSTAINABILITY AND DUNE
RESTORATION PROJECT; AND, 4) FLORIDA DEPARTMENT
OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND THE GOVERNOR'S ENERGY
OFFICE FOR FUNDING IN THE AMOUNT OF $20,000 TO
IMPLEMENT THE NEXT STEPS OF THE CITY'S
SUSTAINABILIN PLAN; APPROPRIATING THE ABOVE
GRANTS, AS NECESSARY IF APPROVED AND ACCEPTED BY
THE CITY, AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF ALL
DOCUMENTS RELATED TO THESE APPLICATIONS
WHEREAS, the Florida Legislature created s. 374.976, Florida Statutes in
recognition of the importance and benefits of inland navigation channels and waterways,
as well as in acknowledgement of the problems associated with the construction,
continued maintenance and use of these waterways and this law authorizes and
empowers each inland navigation district to undertake programs intended to alleviate the
problems associated with its waterways; and
WHEREAS, the Biscayne Bay loth Streetend Seawall and Waterway Access
Enhancement Project was developed by the city to address shoreline erosion in an
innovative and environmentally beneficial manner, while simultaneously enhancing the
public's access to the Biscayne Bay shoreline; and
WHEREAS, the Administration intends to apply to Florida Inland Navigation
District (FIND) for construction funding to replace the failing seawall with a standard
sheetpile system seawall structure, and to plant native coastal vegetation in the upland
area; and
WHEREAS, the seawall improvement will protect the bay from polluted rainwater
run-off, litter and sediment through the stormwater infrastructure improvement
associated with this project, in addition, a public access plaza will be developed on the
adjacent upland area; and
WHEREAS, the total project cost is estimated at approximately $1,000,000 and
the Administration intends to request funding from FIND in the approximate amount of
$540,000; and
WHEREAS, matching funds are required for this grant, and the city has matching
funds in the amount of $500,000 available in Pay-As-You-Go funds for this project; and
WHEREAS, this commission item includes Attachment E-6, a Resolution for
Assistance under the Florida Inland Navigation District Waterways Assistance Program.
Attachment E-6 certifies that the City will comply with certain regulations including
responsibility for maintenance, operating and financing its share of the project, the City
will complete the project in accordance with the terms of the agreement and in the
manner described in the proposal; that the City will not discriminate and will maintain the
adequate records for reimbursements and for a post-audit of expenses; and
WHEREAS, this project supports the key intended outcome: ensure value and
timely delivery of quality capital projects; and,
WHEREAS, approval is requested to submit a grant application to Florida Inland
Navigation District (FIND) in the approximate amount of $500,000 for construction of the
1 ofh Streetend Seawall; and
WHEREAS, the American Academy of Dermatology's (AAD) Shade Structure
Program awards grants in the amount of $8,000 each for the purchase of permanent
shade structures designed to provide shade and ultraviolet (UV) ray protection for
outdoor areas and the AAD receives support for this program from Johnson & Johnson
Consumer Products Company; and
WHEREAS, the Administration proposes applying for grant funding in the amount
of $8,000 for a shade system at Fisher Park; and
WHEREAS, the Fisher Park Tot-IotIPlayground was constructed as a project in
the 1995 Parks GOB program, at the time it was constructed, shade structures were not
included in the design, however, during the past 3-5 years, the City has installed new
shade structures in many parks; and
WHEREAS, Fisher Park currently does not have a shade structure, there is
existing natural shade from trees in the park, but this is not sufficient; and
WHEREAS, the Parks Department is currently in the process of designing a new
playground at the park and the design for the new shade structures will be incorporated
in the overall design of the new playground, the new design for the park will
accommodate the shade structure and playground to work with the existing trees; and
WHEREAS, this grant does not require matching funds, however, the anticipated
cost of the shade structure at Fisher Park is $60,000 and the Administration has funds
available to complete this project in Quality of Life Resort Tax Funding for this project;
and
WHEREAS, this project supports the key intended outcome: ensure value and
timely delivery of quality capital projects; and
WHEREAS, approval is requested to submit a grant application to the American
Academy of Dermatology, Shade Structure grant program for funding in the approximate
amount of $8,000 for a shade structure at Fisher Park; and
WHEREAS, "Together Green" is an innovative Audubon program funded by
Toyota that aims to provide inspiration, leadership and opportunities that inspire people
to take action to improve the health of our environment; and
WHEREAS, Toyota supports programs with long-term sustainable results and
partners with numerous organizations across the country, focusing on education, the
environment and safety; and
WHEREAS, TogetherGreen Innovation Grants annually provide essential funding
that enables Audubon groups and their partners to inspire, equip, and support activities
that engage new and diverse audiences in conservation action and create healthier
communities and through TogetherGreen Conservation Fellowships, 40 individuals are
chosen for their demonstrated leadership, as well as leadership potential, skills, and
commitment to engaging people of diverse backgrounds in conservation action and the
Together Green Program has selected Lisa Botero from the Public Works Department
as a Fellow and has awarded the City with a $10,000 grant to conduct a conservation
action project; and
WHEREAS, the Administration intends to use these grant funds to further
develop and implement the City's Sustainability Plan with the intent of integrating green
initiatives into everyday life and specifically, this fellowship will promote the Natural
Resources Program Area of the City's Sustainability Plan, including the design and
implementation of a community dune restoration event, that will serve as a vehicle for
connecting people with the natural environment through direct hands-on experience; and
WHEREAS, this grant does not require matching funds and the project supports
the key intended outcome: enhance the environmental sustainability of the community;
and
WHEREAS, approval is requested to execute an agreement with the National
Audubon Society, Inc. (Audubon) for funding in the amount of $10,000 for the Miami
Beach Sustainability and Dune Restoration Project.
WHEREAS,, Florida Department of Community Affairs and the Governor's
Energy Office are making funds available to the Energy Economic Zone Pilot
Communities to provide assistance in implementing Energy Economic Zone work plans;
and
WHEREAS, during the 2009 session, the Florida Legislature enacted legislation
authorizing the Florida Department of Community Affairs to implement an Energy
Economic Zone Pilot Program, to develop a model for use by other communities and the
Miami Beach was selected as the only city in Florida for this program; and
WHEREAS, through the Energy Economic Zone pilot community designation, the
City Miami Beach is developing citywide sustainable programs to create policies that will
link economic development to the future environmental, economic and social
sustainability of our city.
WHEREAS, the Sustainability Plan was developed as a first step in creating a
comprehensive Sustainability Master Plan for the city; and
WHEREAS, the City plans to request $20,000 in funding support from the State
to implement the Sustainability Plan and the Miami Beach EcoZone work plan by
developing a Baseline Report, an Implementation Plan and a Communications Strategy;
and
WHEREAS, no matching funds are required from the City for this program and
the program supports the key intended outcome: enhance the environmental
sustainability of the community; and
WHEREAS, the Administration requests approval to request funding in the
approximate amount of $20,000 from the Florida Department of Community Affairs and
the Governor's Energy Office to implement the next steps of the City's Sustainability
Plan.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED THAT THE MAYOR AND ClTY
COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH that the Mayor and City Commission
hereby approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to submit the following
grant applications to: I) Florida Inland Navigation District (FIND) in the approximate
amount of $500,000 for the loth street seawall project; and, 2) The American Academy
of Dermatology, Shade Structure grant program for funding in the approximate amount
of $8,000 for a shade structure at Fisher Park; 3) Approval to execute an agreement with
the National Audubon Society, Inc. (Audubon) for funding in the amount of $10,000 for
the Miami Beach Sustainability and Dune Restoration Project; and, 4) Request for
funding in the approximate amount of $20,000 from the Florida Department of
Community Affairs and the Governor's Energy Office to implement the next steps of the
City's Sustainability Plan; appropriating the above grants, as necessary if approved and
accepted by the City, and authorizing the execution of all documents related to these
applications.
PASSED and ADOPTED this day of ,2011
ATTEST:
MAYOR
ClTY CLERK
Mpf?OVED AS To
FORM & LANGUAGE-
JMGIKGBIJMH
T:\AGENDA\2011\4-13-1 I\Grants Reso.doc
ATTACHMENT E-6
RESOLUTION FOR ASSISTANCE 201 1
UNDER THE FLORIDA INLAND NAVIGATION DISTRICT
WATERWAYS ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
WHEREAS, THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH is interested in carrying out the
(Name of Agency)
following described project for the enjoyment of the citizenry of MIAMI BEACH
and the State of Florida:
Project Title Biscavne Bay loth Streetend Park with Seawall & Waterway Access
Enhancement
Total Estimated Cost $ 945,640
Brief Description of Project: To stabilize the shoreline by repairing and replacing
deteriorated seawalls and facilitate public access to the bayfi-ont shoreline through the
construction of a park/public access plazas.
AND, Florida Inland Navigation District financial assistance is required for the program
mentioned above,
NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved by the CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
(Name of Agency)
that the project described above be authorized,
AND, be it Mer resolved that said CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
(Name of Agency)
make application to the Florida Inland Navigation District in the amount of not to exceed 50% of
the actual cost of the project in behalf of said CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
(Name of Agency)
AND, be it fbrther resolved by the CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
(Name of Agency)
that it certifies to the following:
1. That it will accept the terms and conditions set forth in FIND Rule 66B-2
F.A.C. and which will be a part of the Project Agreement for any assistance awarded under
the attached proposal.
2. That it is in complete accord with the attached proposal and that it will carry out
the Program in the manner described in the proposal and any plans and specifications attached
thereto unless prior approval for any change has been received from the District.
Form No. 90-2 1 (Effective date 12-1 7-90, Rev. 10-14-92) (1)
3. That it has the ability and intention to finance its share of the cost of the project
and that the project will be operated and maintained at the expense of said
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH for public use.
(Name of Agency)
4. That it will not discriminate against any person on the basis of race, color or
national origin in the use of any property or facility acquired or developed pursuant to this
proposal, and shall comply with the terms and intent of the Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of
1964, P. L. 88-352 (1964) and design and construct all facilities to comply fully with statutes
relating to accessibility by handicapped persons as well as other federal, state and local
laws, rules and requirements.
5. That it will maintain adequate financial records on the proposed project to
substantiate claims for reimbursement.
6. That it will make available to FIND if requested, a post-audit of expenses
incurred on the project prior to, or in conjunction with, request for the final 10% of the
funding agreed to by FIND.
This is to certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of a resolution duly and
legally adopted by the CITY OF MIAMI BEACH at a legal meeting
held on this day of 20-.
Attest Signature
Title Title
Form No. 90-2 1 (Effective date 12-1 7-90, Rev. 10- 14-92) (2)
APPROVED AS TO
FORM & LANGUAGE
' &FOR EXECUTION m
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
A resolution approving and authorizing the appropriation of funds from Fleet Management Retained Earnings
Fund 510, in the amount of $109,273, to cover a construction and contingency funding shortfall associated
with additional work scope and construction management fees for the Fleet Management Roof Replacement 1 project. I
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Ensure well-maintained facilities and infrastructure.
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): Based on the City's 2009 Community Satisfaction
Survey, 87.2% of residential respondents and 85% of business respondents rated the appearance and
maintenance of the City's public buildings as excellent and good.
Issue:
Shall the Mayor and City Commission adopt the attached resolution which approves the appropriation of funds
to cover a funding shortfall for the Fleet Management Roof Replacement project?
Item Summary/Recommendation:
On September 28,2004, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No. 2004-25697 establishing a
separate reserve with a dedicated source of funding to be used exclusively for Capital Renewal and
Replacement (CRR) projects in order to ensure that funding levels would provide for major CRR costs so that
improvements to General Fund assets were not deferred many years beyond their useful life.
The Fleet Management Division's Fleet Maintenance building roof was constructed in 1945. Property
Management has reported that these roof leaks, which have been patched and repaired several times, are
creating moisture problems throughout the building. The roof has exceeded its useful life expectancy and
requires replacement.
On September 24,2009 and September 20,2010, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No.
2009-27207 and 201 0-2751 0 approving the annual Fiscal Year (FY) 200911 0 and FY 201 011 1 appropriation
for the CRR Fund budget, respectively. The FY 200911 0 budget included $1 15,000 for the Fleet Management
Roof Replacement project and the FY 201 011 1 budget included an additional $1 81,856 in funding, for a total
available funding amount of $296,856.
A Job Order Contract (JOC) was requested by the Capital Improvements Projects Office to commence
construction of the Fleet Management Roof Replacement project. The JOC proposal was negotiated for a
lump sum fee of $363,426. Including an additional $42,702 associated with project soft costs results in a total
project cost of $406,129 and funding shortfall in the amount of $1 09,273.
Fleet Management is an Internal Service department deriving its revenue from all departments that operate
vehicles through a department chargeback process. Consequently, Fleet Management's projects are funded
from the revenues collected by the department. This is in contrast to General Fund CRR projects where funds
are derived from General Fund revenues. Funding in the amount of $1 09,273 shall be appropriated from Fleet
Management Retained Earnings Fund 510. The Administration recommends that the Mayor and City
Commission adopt a Resolution approving and authorizing the appropriation of funds from Fleet Management
Retained Earnings Fund 510, in the amount of $1 09,273, to cover a construction and contingency funding
shortfall associated with additional work scope and construction management fees for the Fleet Management
Roof Replacement Project.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
Financial Information:
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking: I Janette Fernandez Arencibia, Ext. 6596
BEACH ,,,
MIAMIBEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33 139, www.rniarnibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
DATE : April 13, 201 1
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE APPROPRIATION OF
FUNDS FROM FLEET MANAGEMENT RETAINED EARNINGS FUND 510, IN THE
AMOUNT OF $109,273, TO COVER A CONSTRUCTION AND CONTINGENCY
FUNDING SHORTFALL ASSOCIATED WITH ADDITIONAL WORK SCOPE AND
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT FEES FOR THE FLEET MANAGEMENT ROOF
REPLACEMENT PROJECT.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
FUNDING
Fleet Management is an Internal Service department deriving its revenue from all departments that
operate vehicles through a department chargeback process. Consequently, as an internal-funded
organization, Fleet Management's projects are funded from the revenues collected by the department.
This is in contrast to General Fund Capital Renewal and Replacement (CRR) projects where funds are
derived from General Fund revenues. Funding in the amount of $109,273 shall be appropriated from
Fleet Management Retained Earnings Fund 510.
BACKGROUND
The City currently maintains a vast number and variety of buildings, structures and facilities; hundreds of
acres of recreational and open space; significant public art pieces; and hundreds of miles of streets,
sidewalks and alleys. As a result of the City's ongoing Capital Improvement Program and the Miami-
Dade County General Obligation Bond Program, there has been an additional increase in capital
renewal and replacement needs. In the past, the cost of maintaining these General Fund assets came
from General Funds. To deal with the increasing cost of needs, the Mayor and City Commission adopted
Resolution No. 2004-25697 on September 28, 2004 establishing a separate reserve with a dedicated
source of funding to be used exclusively for CRR projects in order to ensure that funding levels would
provide for major CRR costs so that improvements to General Fund assets were not deferred many
years beyond their useful life. Appropriations from the fund are reviewed and approved each year by the
City Commission as part of the budget process, and are used exclusively for those capital expenditures
that help to extend or replace the useful life of our facilities.
ANALYSIS
The Fleet Management Division's Fleet Maintenance building was constructed in 1945. The original roof
was constructed of metal and transite roofing materials that have deteriorated over time. The roof has
been patched and repaired several times throughout the years and still has many leaks. Property
Management has reported that these roof leaks are creating moisture problems throughout the building.
Based on information provided by the Property Management Division, the roof was scheduled for
replacement by 2008. As such, the roof replacement is currently two years overdue. The Fleet
Fleet Management - Roof Replacement - MEMO
April 13, 2011
Page 2 of 2
Maintenance building's roof has exceeded its useful life expectancy and now requires replacement.
On September 24,2009 and September 20,201 0, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution
No. 2009-27207 and 201 0-2751 0 approving the annual Fiscal Year (FY) 200911 0 and FY 201 011 1
appropriation for the CRR Fund budget, respectively. The FY 200911 0 budget included $1 15,000 for the
Fleet Management Roof Replacement project and the FY 201011 1 budget included an additional
$181,856 in funding, for a total available funding amount of $296,856.
A Job Order Contract (JOC) was requested by the Capital Improvements Projects Ofice to commence
construction of the Fleet Management Roof Replacement project. The scope of services included the
cost of replacing the existing roofing system; engineering design fees for calculations and support
documentation for the structure and roofing system; and permitting fees to obtain approvals by all
jurisdictional agencies. Based on the structural engineering design analysis it was determined that the
spacing of the existing purlins were too wide spread and did not meet current building code
requirements. Therefore, the scope of work required additional structural support, or purlins, to be added
to withstand the increased wind loads and to meet current building code requirements. The JOC
proposal was revised to incorporate the costs of providing purlins and was negotiated for a lump sum
fee of $363,426.
The supplemental request for funds in the amount of $109,273 covers the cost of the additional scope
associated with the purlins and soft costs including the Job Order Contract fee payable to the Gordian
Group, Inc., project management fees, and contingency. The following table outlines the project costs
and available funding:
CONCLUSION:
The Administration recommends that the Mayor and City Commission adopt a resolution approving and
authorizing the appropriation of funds from Fleet Management Retained Earnings Fund 510, in the
amount of $1 09,273, to cover a construction and contingency funding shortfall associated with additional
work scope and construction management fees for the Fleet Management Roof Replacement Project.
T:\AGENDA\2011\4-I 3-1 l\Fleet Management - Roof Replacement\Fleet Management - Roof Replacement - i\llEMO.doc
RESOLUTION NO. 201 1-
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE APPROPRIATION OF
FUNDS FROM FLEET MANAGEMENT RETAINED EARNINGS FUND 510, IN
THE AMOUNT OF $109,273, TO COVER A CONSTRUCTION AND
CONTINGENCY FUNDING SHORTFALL ASSOCIATED WITH ADDITIONAL
WORK SCOPE AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT FEES FOR THE
FLEET MANAGEMENT ROOF REPLACEMENT PROJECT.
WHEREAS, on September 28, 2004, the Mayor and City Commission adopted
Resolution No. 2004-25697 establishing a capital renewal and replacement reserve to provide a
dedicated source of funding for capital renewal and replacement project that extend the useful
life of General Fund assets; and
WHEREAS, on February23,2005, the Mayor and City Commission amended Resolution
No. 2004-25697 by adopting Resolution No. 2005-25832 to provide for more stringent criteria for
allowable uses of the Fund; and
WHEREAS, these criteria require that the Mayor and City Commission approve specific
projects to be funded each year; and
WHEREAS, on September 10,2009, the Mayor and City Commission tentatively adopted
the proposed millage rate of 5.6555 mills, which included 0.1083 mills dedicated for capital
renewal and replacement; and
WHEREAS, on September 24, 2009, the Mayor and City Commission approved
Resolution No. 2009-27207 adopting the FY 2009110 project-specific appropriations for the
Capital Renewal and Replacement Fund Budget which included funding in the amount of
$1 15,000 for the Fleet Management Roof Replacement project; and
WHEREAS, on September 15,201 0, the Mayor and City Commission tentatively adopted
the proposed millage rate of 6.21555 mills, which included 0.1083 mills dedicated for capital
renewal and replacement; and
WHEREAS, on September 20, 2010, the Mayor and City Commission approved
Resolution No. 201 0-2751 0 adopting the FY 201 011 1 project-specific appropriations for the
Capital Renewal and Replacement Fund Budget which included funding in the amount of
$1 81,856 for the Fleet Management Roof Replacement project, for a total amount of $296,856 in
project funding; and
WHEREAS, the Capital Improvement Projects Office has requested and negotiated a
Job Order Contract proposal in the amount of $363,426; and
WHEREAS, additional project soft costs for construction management, contingency, and
JOC System Gordian fee amount to an additional $42,702, for a total project cost of $406,129;
and
WHEREAS, there remains a resulting funding shortfall for the Fleet Management Roof
Replacement project in the amount of $1 09,273.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND THE CITY
COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA that the Mayor and City
Commission hereby approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to appropriate funds from
Fleet Management Retained Earnings Fund 510, in the amount of $109,273, to cover a
construction and contingency funding shortfall associated with additional work scope and
construction management fees for the fleet management roof replacement project.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of ,2011.
ATTEST:
ROBERT H. PARCHER, CITY CLERK MATTI HERRERA BOWER, MAYOR
T:WGENDA\2011\4-13-1 l\Fleet Management - Roof Replacement\Fleet Management - Roof Replacement - RESO.doc
APPROVED AS TO
FORM & LANGUAGE
n & FOR EXECUTION
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
A resolution of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami Beach, Florida, approving and authorizing
the Mayor and City Clerk to execute an agreement with Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc. for Design, Bid
and Award, and Construction Administration Services, in the negotiated not-to-exceed amount of $330,000, for
the South Pointe Park Pier Project, pursuant to Request for Qualifications (RFQ) No. 04-1 011 1 ; and $39,000 for
reimbursable expenses for a total not-to-exceed amount of $369,000 for the Project; with previously
appropriated funding from fund 303.
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Ensure well designed Capital Projects
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): According to the City's 2009 Community Satisfaction
Survey, 85.1% of City residents rated the maintenance of parks as "excellent" or "good."
Issue: I Shall the City Commission approve to execute the agreement for Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc.?
tem SummarylRecommendation:
The conceptual design approved on May 5, 2009, by the City's Finance and Citywide Projects Committee will be
used as the basis forthe development of the design and construction documents. The pier's superstructure shall be
replaced within the similar footprint while also improving the aesthetic appearance and user experience in a manner
that is complementary to that found in South Pointe Park. The existing pier is in poor structural condition and is
currently closed to the public. The Consultant shall provide Architectural, Structural Engineering, MEP Engineering,
Civil Engineering, FDEP Coastal Permitting Consultant, Landscape Architecture, Construction Cost Estimating,
Surveying and Geotechnical services for the Project. The work shall include, but not be limited to, conceptual
drawing(s), surveying, geotechnical, design development, estimate(s) of probable construction cost, construction
documents, permitting, bidding 1 award, and construction administration services for the Project.
On February 23,201 I, the Evaluation Committee (the Committee) convened to score and rank the proposals. The
Committee voted unanimously to recommend Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc. as the topranked firm, Bermello
Ajamil & Partners, Inc. as the second-ranked firm, and Keith and Schnars, P.A. as the third-ranked firm.
At its March 9, 2011 meeting, the City Commission approved Resolution No. 2011-27606, authorizing the
Administration to enter into negotiations with the top-ranked firm of Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc.; to
negotiate with the second-ranked firm of Bermello Ajamil & Partners, Inc. should negotiations with the top-ranked firm
be unsuccessful; and to negotiate with the third-ranked firm of the Keith and Schnars, P.A. should negotiations with
the first or second-ranked firms be unsuccessful.
Following negotiations, the City was able to reach an agreement with Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc. in the
negotiated amount of $330,000 of which $270,000 is for design, $5,000 is for bidlaward services, and $55,000 is for
construction administration services, plus an additional amount of $39,000 for approved reimbursables.
Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc. (PBS&J) is a consulting firm with core services that encompass engineering,
planning, architecture, landscape architecture, construction cost estimating, and construction administration and has
been providing these services since 1960. Similar projects include Jacksonville Beach Fishing Pier in Jacksonville,
Florida, the Four Seasons Pier Project in Orange Beach, Alabama, the Navarre Fishing Pier Reconstruction in
Navarre Beach, Florida, and the Okaloosa Island Fishing Pier Reconstruction in Fort Walton Beach, Florida. The rest
of PBS&J's project team consists of subconsultants from Kaderabek Company and Morgan & Eklund, Inc.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
I
I Financial Impact Summary: NA
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking: I Matilde Reyes Ext. 6884
Financial Information:
', <
' *Fb#&$t %, , , liiu3 L gq~aq$*;~: - 3- Vi 1 *~"i' " i MI
'
2 Source of " C> PC
Sian-Offs:
Funds: ' $ 34,913
OBPl f3pti#d8
AGENDA ITEM C~C
DATE k3-N
389-2577-067357
303-2577-061 357
389-2577-061 357
MIAMIBEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33 139, www.rniarnibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
DATE: April 13, 201 1
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE
ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING
THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WlTH
POST, BUCKLEY, SCHUH & JERNIGAN, INC. FOR DESIGN, BID AND
AWARD, AND CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION SERVICES, IN THE
NEGOTIATED NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $330,000, FOR THE
SOUTH POINTE PARK PIER PROJECT, PURSUANT TO REQUEST
FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ) NO. 04-10/11; AND $39,000 FOR
REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES FOR A TOTAL NOT-TO-EXCEED
AMOUNT OF $369,000 FOR THE PROJECT; WlTH PREVIOUSLY
APPROPRIATED FUNDING FROM FUND 303.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
FUNDING
Funding is available from previously appropriated funds, in the amount of $65,064, from
South Pointe Capital Fund for Design, Account No. 389-2577-061357; $34,913 from the
Construction Fund, Account No. 389-2577-067357, to be transferred to Design Account No.
389-2577-061 357; and $269,023 from the FIND Grant Fund, Account No.303-2577-061357.
BACKGROUND
On July 27,2005, the Mayor and City Commission approved the Basis of Design Report for
the South Pointe Park Project, pursuant to Resolution No. 2005-25978 of which the South
Pointe Park Pier was a component.
On October 25,2007, a discussion on the Pier Project was held at the Finance and Citywide
Projects Committee (FCWPC) meeting, during which, several cost options were provided by
Hargreaves &Associates (Hargreaves), along with five (5) conceptual design options. The
Committee's preferred option was Alternative Two which was to rebuild the pier within the
existing footprint. After further refinement, Hargreaves developed and presented further
conceptual design options pursuant to the request by the FCWPC on May 29,2008, and
July 10, 2008 to maintain the existing footprint on May 29, 2008, and July 10, 2008. At the
July 10,2008 FCWPC meeting, the committee further requested that the design be modified
to comply with the construction budget of $4 million.
On May 5, 2009, the City's Finance and Citywide Projects Committee approved the
conceptual design for the South Pointe Park Pier and subsequently, on July 15, 2009, the
City Commission approved and officially adopted the design concept for the South Pointe
Park Pier.
Commission Memorandum - South Pointe Park Pier - PBSJ Agreement
April 13, 201 1
Page 2 of 2
The project has several unique characteristics beyond its condition as a simple waterborne
structure. The project sits within a highly visible, narrow navigation channel used for
international shipping lines and cruise ships. All coastal maritime and navigation
requirements will need to be satisfied before as well as during construction activities.
The project site has multi-layered jurisdictional land and water rights between the City, State
and Federal government. All land and water rights may require updates which would need
to be secured prior to construction. All required permits shall be secured and the conditions
monitored, so as to complete the project with minimal environmental impact.
This is a time-sensitive project, partially funded by the Florida Inland Navigation Grant, which
requires design services completion by September 1,201 1 and this requirement has been
made a condition within the consultant's agreement.
On July 14, 2010, the Mayor and City Commission approved the issuance of Request for
Qualifications (RFQ) No. 04-10111, for the Design, Bid, Award, and Construction
Administration Services for the South Pointe Pier Project.
At its March 9, 201 1 meeting, the City Commission approved Resolution No. 201 1-27606,
authorizing the Administration to enter into negotiations with the top-ranked firm of Post,
Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc.; to negotiate with the second-ranked firm of Bermello Ajamil
& Partners, Inc. should negotiations with the top-ranked firm be unsuccessful; and to
negotiate with the third-ranked firm of the Keith and Schnars, P.A. should negotiations with
the first or second-ranked firms be unsuccessful.
Following negotiations, the City was able to reach an agreement with Post, Buckley, Schuh
& Jernigan, Inc. in the negotiated amount of $330,000 of which $270,000 is for design,
including permitting, and $5,000 is for bidlaward services, and $55,000 is for construction
administration services, plus an additional amount of $39,000 for approved reimbursables.
At its April 11, 201 1 meeting, ClPOC also recommended approval of the proposed
Agreement.
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends that the Mayor and City Commission adopt the attached
Resolution accepting the recommendation of the City Manager to execute an agreement
with Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc. in the negotiated amount of $330,000 of which
$270,000 is for design and $5,000 is for bidlaward services, and $55,000 is for construction
administration services, for the South Pointe Park Pier Project, pursuant to Request for
Qualifications (RFQ) No. 04-1 011 1 ; and $39,000 for reimbursable expenses for a total not-
to-exceed amount of $369,000 for the Project; with previously appropriated funding from
fund 303.
ATTACHMENTS
Schedule A - Scope of AIE Consulting Services
Schedule B - Consultant's Compensation Fee Schedule
Schedule C - Hourly Billing Rates Schedule
Schedule D - Construction Cost Budget
/3 Schedule E - Schedule (AIE)
T:\AGENDA\2011\4-13-1 I\South Pointe Park Pier-PBSJ Agreement - MEMO.doc
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF
MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR
AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WlTH POST, BUCKLEY,
SCHUH & JERNIGAN, INC. FOR DESIGN, BID AND AWARD, AND
CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION SERVICES, IN THE NEGOTIATED NOT-
TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $330,000, AND $39,000 FOR REIMBURSABLE
EXPENSES, FOR A TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT OF $369,000, FOR
THE SOUTH POINTE PARK PIER PROJECT, PURSUANT TO REQUEST FOR
QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ) NO. 04-1 011 1 ; WlTH PREVIOUSLY APPROPRIATED
FUNDING FROM FUND 303.
WHEREAS, on July 14, 2010, the Mayor and City Commission approved the issuance of
Request for Qualifications (RFQ) No. 04-1011 1, for the Design, Bid, Award, and Construction
Administration Services for the South Pointe Pier Project (the "RFQ"); and
WHEREAS, the RFQ was issued on November 12, 2010, with an opening date of
December 13,201 0; and
WHEREAS, at its March 9, 201 1 meeting, the City Commission approved Resolution No.
201 1-27606, authorizing the Administration to enter into negotiations with the top-ranked firm of
Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc.; to negotiate with the second-ranked firm of Bermello
Ajamil & Partners, Inc. should negotiations with the top-ranked firm be unsuccessful; and to
negotiate with the third-ranked firm of the Keith and Schnars, P.A. should negotiations with the
first or second-ranked firms be unsuccessful; and
WHEREAS, the Administration has successfully negotiated the attached Agreement with
Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc., in the amount of $330,000, of which $270,000 is for
design, $5,000 is for bidlaward services, and $55,000 is for construction administration services,
plus an additional amount of $39,000 for approved reimbursables; and
WHEREAS, at its April 11, 201 1 meeting, ClPOC also recommended approval of the
Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE
ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that the Mayor and City Commission hereby approve and
authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute an Agreement with Post, Buckley, Schuh &
Jernigan, Inc. for design, bid and award, and construction administration services, in the
negotiated amount of $330,000, and $39,000 for reimbursable expenses for a total not-to-
exceed amount of $369,000 for the South Pointe Park Pier Project, pursuant to Request for
Qualifications (RFQ) No. 04-10/11; with previously appropriated funding from fund 303.
PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS DAY OF 201 1.
ATTEST:
APPROVED AS TO
CITY CLERK MAYOR T3RM & LANGUAGE
& FOR EXECUTION
SCHEDULE A:
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH AND POST, BUCKLEY, SCHUH & JERNIGAN, INC. (ATKINS NA)
FOR THE SOUTH POINTE PARK PIER PROJECT
CONSULTANT: POST, BUCKLEY, SCHUH & JERNIGAN, INC. (ATKINS NA) (the "CONSULTANT")
BACKGROUND
On October 25, 2007, a discussion on the Pier Project was held at the Finance and Citywide Projects
Committee (Committee) meeting. At that meeting, several cost options were provided by the A/E, along with
five (5) conceptual design options. The Committee's preferred option was Alternate Two: rebuild the pier
within the existing footprint. After further refinement, the Consultant developed and presented further
conceptual design options to the Committee on May 29, 2008, and July 10, 2008. As directed by the
Committee at the July 10, 2008, meeting, the design required modification in order to maintain its construction
cost within $4 million.
On May 5, 2009, the City's Finance and Citywide Projects Committee approved the conceptual design for the
South Point Park Pier and subsequently on July 15, 2009, the City Commission approved and officially
adopted the design concept (telescope concept) for the South Pointe Park Pier.
The project has several unique characteristics beyond its condition as a simple waterborne structure. The
project sits within a highly visible, narrow navigation channel used for international shipping lines and cruise
ships. All coastal maritime and navigation requirements will need to be satisfied before and during
construction activities. The physical location also requires consideration as to how to properly engineer the
project as to anticipate limited, water-based construction access.
The project site has multi-layered jurisdictional land and water rights between the City, State and Federal
government. All land and water rights may require updates and shall be secured prior to construction as
applicable. The project is further affected by sensitive environmental conditions, including threatened species
protection and the permitting process will address all required jurisdictional permits . All required permits shall
be secured and the conditions monitored to complete the project with minimal environmental impact. This is a
time-sensitive project, partially funded by the Florida Inland Navigation Grant in the amount of $323,075.
Design services MUST be completed by September 1, 201 1 and all permitting shall be completed to allow
construction contract award within 1 year (September 2012).
SCOPE OF SERVICES
The CONSULTANT shall provide Architectural, Engineering, Landscape Architecture and Surveying, as
necessary for the Project and as delineated in the executed agreement between Post, Buckley, Schuh &
Jernigan, Inc. (Atkins NA) and the City of Miami Beach and in accordance with Exhibits A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,
attached thereto. The work shall include, but not be limited to, surveying, geotechnical, programming,
conceptual drawing(s), design development, estimate(s) of probable cost, construction documentation,
permitting, bidding / award, and construction administration services for the Project.
The City of Miami Beach (City) may, at its sole option, choose to employ conventional bids, Construction
Manager (CM) at-Risk, or Job Order Contract (JOC) for the Project. The Consultant shall cooperate fully with
the General Contractor, CM at-Risk or JOC Contractor selected by the City. All required drawings shall be
prepared utilizing CADD (vector format) in conformance with the latest City format.
South Pointe Park Pier
Schedule A
04/06/20 1 1
The CONSULTANT shall become familiar with the Project site through frequent site visits, research, and
examination of any record drawings, as applicable, and shall notify the City of any field, on-site, or off-site
conditions not shown or incorrectly shown on the record drawings, as may have been reasonably discovered.
At the Consultant's request, the City will facilitate the Consultant's access to the Project site and/or facilities
for investigative purposes. Frequent site visits and meetings shall continue through all design phases of this
Agreement until the Consultant is thoroughly familiar with the existing conditions, any problem areas, and/or
existing hazardous conditions or materials. These site visits and meetings are part of the Consultant's Basic
Services, are considered due diligence, and the Consultant shall receive no additional compensation for such
design phase site visits and meetings. Provided the Consultant has conducted a good faith investigation, the
Consultant and the Consultant's sub-consultants shall not be responsible or held liable for undiscovered
hazardous conditions or materials.
On May 5, 2009, the City's Finance and Citywide Projects Committee (FCWPC) approved the conceptual
design for the South Point Park Pier and subsequently on July 15, 2009, the City Commission approved and
officially adopted ke design concept for the South Pointe Park Pier (Telescope Concept) The approved
conceptual design will be used as the basis for the development of the design and construction documents.
The pier's superstructure shall be replaced within the similar footprint while also improving the aesthetic
appearance and user experience in a manner that is complementary to that found in South Pointe Park.
The existing pier is in poor structural condition and is currently closed to the public. The proposed
improvements will be based on the approved Conceptual Plan and include at a minimum the following
amenities:
Demolition of existing structure
Construction of a new structure
Connection to South Pointe Park
Railings
Benches
Fishing amenities
Shade shelters (as allowable by the regulatory agencies)
Lighting (as allowable by the regulatory agencies)
The CONSULTANT shall provide, Architectural, Structural Engineering, MEP Engineering, Civil Engineering,
FDEP Coastal Permitting Consultant (and other permitting as required), Landscape Architecture, Construction
Cost Estimating, Surveying and Geotechnical services for the Project. The work shall include, but not be
limited to, conceptual drawing(s), surveying, geotechnical, design development, estimate(s) of probable
construction cost, construction documents, permitting, bidding / award, and construction administration
services for the Project.
The professional services required will include scope of work involving coastal engineering and marine type
construction in a heavy marine environment. As a point of reference with respect to the Pier project's
complexities, the following represents some, but not all of the regulatory agencies and/or ordinances that will
have significant review jurisdiction:
US Army Corps of Engineers
US Coast Guard
Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP)
Marine Turtle Lighting Ordinance
Coastal Construction Control Line Program
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC)
South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD)
Miami-Dade County Department of Environmental Resources Management (DERM)
Miami-Dade County Shoreline Review Board
South Pointe Park Pier 2
Schedule A
04/06/2011
160
City of Miami Beach
The Plans submitted for permitting by the Consultant shall include the following:
Compliance with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
0 Identify temporary staging
Plans shall identify provision for contractor to assume any and all responsibilities for any water control
violations resulting from failure to eliminate and/or control turbid runoff as issued by any agency having
jurisdiction.
Plans shall provide for dredge operations plan (if required).
Plans shall illustrate a project implementation plan and schedule that maps the delivery of the project in
phases to meet established criteria related to local, state and federal marine construction.
Plans shall include all necessary drawings and technical specifications needed to construct the
improvements and shall be defining documentation of what is authorized and approved.
Prepare utility coordination, permits and advise of all fees associated with all site, utility etc. work.
Prepare presentation materials to illustrate the final design and participate in public outreach and
regulatory agency review meetings.
Obtain all required building permits as well as any other permits necessary for the construction of the
pier and attend public meetings as required by the City.
The City is interested in moving this project forward quickly and design services shall be completed prior to
September 1, 201 1. The Consultant shall be required to provide design and construction documents for:
Pier Demolition and New Pier Design I Construction Documents Phase
The CONSULTANT shall be tasked with but not limited to the following duties and responsibilities:
Task 1 - Pre-Design (Telescope Concept):
The purpose of this Task is to develop and formalize the approved conceptual design dated May 5, 2009 by
seeking the approval of the City's Design Review Board (DRB) as well as meet with the required City staff to
validate these documents, and make necessary adjustments to meet the City's functional requirements,
incorporate community input, and provide preliminary cost estimate to comply with the project budget of
$4,000,000 and develop a project schedule and implementation plan that complies with Florida Inland
Navigational Grant as well as takes into account all the required inspections by all Authorities Having
Jurisdiction (AHJ).
Task 1 will include the following major tasks: (1) Project Kick-Off Meeting; (2) Project Site Reconnaissance
Visit; (3) Project Coastal Engineering and Analysis; (3) Meetings with all Agencies Having Jurisdiction with the
Project to confirm that the conceptual design is in compliance with all State, Federal, and Local authorities: (4)
Preparation and presentation of a final Conceptual Plan to the City's Design Review Board for approval (5):
Provide Surveying and Geotechnical evaluations as required for implementation of design phase.
Task 1.1 - Proiect Kick-Off Meeting:
The CONSULTANT shall meet with the ClTY to review existing documents and receive copies of available
reference documents. ClTY shall provide general information regarding procedures and direction.
The CONSULTANT shall prepare draft meeting minutes and forward them to ClTY for review and comments.
The CONSULTANT shall finalize and distribute, accordingly.
The CONSULTANT shall prepare a list of requested background information, department interviews and any
other special area visits.
South Pointe Park Pier 3
Schedule A
04/05/20 1 1
161
The CONSULTANT shall schedule a reconnaissance visit of the Project site, to be attended by critical
CONSULTANT personnel, as well as key ClTY staff.
Deliverables: - Attend Project Kick-Off Meeting
- Prepare and distribute Meeting Minutes
Schedule: - See Schedule "En - Project Schedule
Task I .2 - Proiect Site Reconnaissance Visit:
The CONSULTANT shall attend a Site Reconnaissance Visit. This site visit shall also be attended by
applicable ClTY staff. The intent of this task is to facilitate the CONSULTANT'S understanding of the project
needs. This may include document review, department interviews and requests for additional information to
be facilitated by the CITY.
The CONSULTANT shall prepare draft meeting minutes including action items and individuals responsible for
further action, and forward them to the ClTY for review and comments. The CONSULTANT shall finalize and
distribute accordingly.
Subsequent visits (at no additional cost to the CITY) may be required to gather additional information. This
task includes further document research, exploration and documentation of existing conditions, and
discussions with particular on-site personnel to understand their current conditions, shortfalls and future
needs. The CONSULTANT shall inform the ClTY of any additional document or visitation needs so that
information can be researched in an organized and timely manner. Secondary meetings with other agencies,
code officials or utilities may also be necessary as part of this task.
The CONSULTANT shall prepare draft meeting minutes and forward them to ClTY for review and comments.
The CONSULTANT shall finalize and distribute, accordingly.
Deliverables: - Attend Site Reconnaissance Project Site Visit
- Prepare and distribute meeting minutes
Schedule: - See Schedule E - Project Schedule
Task 1.3 - Proiect Coastal Engineering and Analysis:
The CONSULTANT research existing coastal data and coastal models, including wind, waves, current and
water levels. Calculations used for the design of the pier structure, affecting the deck height, pilings and pile
cap, will be performed using the Shore Protection Manual (SPM) and Coastal Engineering Manual (CEM).
The CONSULTANT will coordinate performance of the Bathymetric Survey and use data to calculate the
incident wave height on the structure and lateralluplift forces that the incident wave imparts on the pier. The
CONSULTANT will evaluate two design storm conditions: Category 3 Hurricane event and one Synthetic 15
year return Period. Calculations will look at incident waves from three angles: northeast, east and southeast.
This task may include document review by City for analysis and decision on resistance to storm event versus
cost impact to delimit structural damage.
Deliverables: - Coordinate all Surveying and Geotechnical Services
- Submit the reports to the City and Structural Engineers
South Pointe Park Pier
Schedule A
04/05/20 1 1
- Prepare and distribute meeting minutes
4
Schedule: - See Schedule E - Project Schedule
Task I .4 - Initial Planninn Session to adopt ap~roved Conceptual Design:
The CONSULTANT shall attend an initial Planning Session to be scheduled with representatives of the CITY
and the CONSULTANT. The purpose of the session shall be to clarify Project goals to the user group(s) so
that viable conceptual alternative can be explored. At this meeting, the CONSULTANT shall review the
background information, program and site information. This planning session will establish the groundwork
for the development of the approved conceptual plan.
The CONSULTANT shall prepare draft meeting minutes and forward them to the ClTY for review and
comments. The CONSULTANT shall finalize and distribute, accordingly.
Based on the results of the site visit, materials presented at the Kickoff Meeting and during subsequent
background gathering, and discussion and conclusions made at the initial planning session, the
CONSULTANT shall develop preliminary conceptual alternatives that are responsive to the project program,
budget, and schedule. lnitial testing parameters and investigative work recommendations shall also be
identified. The CONSULTANT shall assemble graphic images identifying alternative Project design concepts,
if applicable, to allow the ClTY a full understanding of proposed alternatives.
Deliverables: - Attend review session with representatives from the CITY.
- Prepare and distribute meeting minutes
- Develop approved Project Conceptual Plan
- Develop "budget" level ROM cost estimates
- Revise approved concept and develop final materials
Task I .5 - DRB, Commission andlor Review Meetings:
The CONSULTANT shall provide for presentations to the DRB, Commission and other City Departments
meetings as necessary to gain the required City approvals in order to proceed with the Design Development
phase of the project.
In addition, to all required efforts noted above, the CONSULTANT shall note that the ClTY may, at its
discretion, substitute one of the meetings described herein for a meeting with a CITY, Committee or Agency,
as deemed necessary.
Deliverables: - Attend DRB review meeting with representatives from the CITY.
- Prepare and distribute meeting minutes
- Develop approved Project Conceptual Plan
- Submit approved concept and develop final materials
Task 2 - Design Services:
The purpose of this task is to establish requirements for the preparation of contract documents and provide
approved permits from of the regulatory agencies and/or comply with ordinances that will have significant
review jurisdiction for the Project.
The CONSULTANT will be required to prepare construction and permit documents for the demolition of the
existing pier. New Pier Design shall include, in addition to the demolition of existing pier permit documents,
the design, permitting, bid and award and construction administration for the design and construction of the
new pier. The City anticipates that demolition plans can be prepared and permitted concurrently with the
design and construction documents of the new pier.
South Pointe Park Pier 5
Schedule A
04/05/20 1 1
163
-
The purpose of this Task is to establish requirements for the preparation of contract documents for the
Project.
The CONSULTANT shall be required to perform a variety of forensic tasks to verify existing conditions
and the accuracy of any available as-built drawings, surveys and maps to be used for development of
the contract drawings;
Requirements for the preparation of contract documents, inclusive of drawings, specifications and front-
end documents;
Establishes requirements with regard to constructability and value engineering reviews;
Establishes requirements for the preparation of Statements of Probable Construction Cost by the
CONSULTANT as defined by the American Association of Cost Engineers;
Establishes requirements for the Community Design Review Meeting (CDRM);
Discusses contract document revisions based upon the input received from the residents at the
Community Design Review Meeting (CDRM);
Specifies requirements for review of contract documents with jurisdictional permitting agencies prior to
finalization;
Discusses the QNQC of Design Documents.
In addition, the CONSULTANT shall follow City standards for the preparation of contract documents, inclusive
of drawings, specifications, front-end documents and cost estimates. Presentation formats for review
submittals shall be prepared for submittal to the City's Design Review Board during the Conceptual Phase,
and at 50% (Design Development Phase), 100% (Construction Documents Phase) completion stages and a
Risk Assessment Plan (RAP). Contract documents shall be subject to Constructability and Value Engineering
reviews by City and/or others.
The CONSULTANT will work with the City to reviseladjust project scope as may be deemed necessary to
meet established budgets as design evolves through the design stages of completion.
In addition, the CONSULTANT shall extend and participate in a community design review meeting and a pre-
construction 1 kick off meeting with the residents to review the design. To facilitate the implementation of a
Public Information Program, the CONSULTANT will provide electronic files of all project documents, as
directed by the City.
The CONSULTANT shall be responsible for securing all required regulatory approvals of its contract
documents from all applicable jurisdictional agencies and boards prior to finalization, and will be responsible
for initiating submittals and reviews in a timely manner.
The CONSULTANT shall establish and maintain an in-house Quality Assurance 1 Quality Control (QNQC)
program designed to verify and ensure the quality, clarity, completeness, and constructability of its Contract
Documents.
As a point of reference with respect to the Pier project's complexities, the following represents some, but not
all of the regulatory agencies and/or ordinances that will have significant review jurisdiction:
US Army Corps of Engineers
South Pointe Park Pier
Schedule A
04/05/20 1 1
US Coast Guard
Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP)
Marine Turtle Lighting Ordinance
Coastal Construction Control Line Program
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC)
South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD)
Miami-Dade County Department of Environmental Resources Management (DERM)
Miami-Dade County Shoreline Review Board
City of Miami Beach
The total estimated Construction Cost Budget for the project is approximately $4,000,000, not including a
construction phase contingency allowance that is to be held in reserve by the ClTY for CITY'S use during
construction phase.
Task 2.1 -Design Development:
Upon completion and acceptance of the final survey, the CONSULTANT shall forward same to the following
agencies with a request to mark / identify respective utilities on the survey base map. The CONSULTANT
shall coordinate this effort with each agency in an effort to identify the location of all existing underground
utilities. The CONSULTANT shall incorporate utility owner markups / edits into its survey base map file. The
CONSULTANT shall contact the following entities and request that they each verify locations of their existing
improvements in the affected areas:
Florida Power and Light Company
BellSouth
Miami-Dade Water and Sewer Authority
Charter Communications (Atlantic Broadband)
Natural Gas provider
City of Miami Beach Public Works Department
Others as deemed necessary by the CONSULTANT
The CONSULTANT shall also request information regarding any future proposed improvements by each
agency. To facilitate tracking of the progress made in this work effort, the CONSULTANT shall copy the ClTY
on all correspondence with each agency. In addition, the CONSULTANT shall keep a readily accessible and
properly labeled / collated file of all correspondence and markups provided to it by the various agencies for
reference use by the ClTY and/or CONSULTANT, during construction.
The CONSULTANT shall become familiar with the Project site through frequent site visits, research, and
examination of any record drawings, as applicable, and shall notify the ClTY of any field, onsite, or off-site
conditions not shown or incorrectly shown on record drawings, as may have been reasonably discovered. At
the CONSULTANT'S request, the ClTY shall facilitate the CONSULTANT'S access to the Project site and or
facilities for investigative purposes. These site visits are part of the CONSULTANT'S Basic Services, are
considered due diligence, and the CONSULTANT shall receive no additional compensation for such design
phase site visits and meetings. Provided that the CONSULTANT has conducted a good faith investigation,
the CONSULTANT and CONSULTANT'S sub-consultants shall not be responsible or held liable for
undiscovered hazardous conditions or materials.
Based on the collected data, the CONSULTANT shall develop detailed design base maps for the Project. The
maps shall include an overall key map and partial plans scaled at I-inch equals 20 feet or a scale that better
South Pointe Park Pier
Schedule A
04/05/20 1 1
suits the Project requirements. CONSULTANT shall illustrate proposed improvements on the site plan and
shall prepare final site plan based on the information gathered herein. Copies of base maps shall be
distributed to CITY.
Deiiverables: Perform work as noted to develop final survey. Deliver three (3) draft and
five (5) final signed and sealed surveys to CITY.
Schedule: See Schedule E - Project Schedule
Task 2.2 - Detailed Design:
The CONSULTANT shall prepare detailed design documents consisting of architectural, structural, civil,
mechanical, electrical, landscape, and irrigation drawings, as applicable. All contract documents are to be
provided in accordance with applicable standards and with the requirements of all applicable state, local and
federal regulatory agencies having jurisdiction over the Project.
Technical specifications shall be prepared in conformance with Construction Specifications Institute (CSI)
formats. CONSULTANT must review ClTY standards and adopt and changelupdate where necessary. Any
supplier listings required by specifications shall include a minimum of two (2) named suppliers and shall meet
all applicable ClTY and State of Florida procurement codes. Specifications shall be provided to the
CONSULTANT in "Microsoft MS-Word" format. CONSULTANT shall use the same software in all Project
related work. CONSULTANT shall utilize base front-end documents provided by the CITY. CONSULTANT
shall edit accordingly to result in a Project specific document. Any requirements for Supplementary General
Conditions shall be subject to review and acceptance by the CITY.
CONSULTANT shall attend bi-weekly or monthly Design Progress Meetings as required to meet the project
schedule (see Exhibit E) with ClTY at the City's CIP offices as scheduled by ClTY staff. The CONSULTANT
shall provide, and maintain a design progress schedule. Should the City determine that the CONSULTANT
has fallen behind schedule, the CONSULTANT shall provide a recovery schedule that shall accelerate work to
get back on schedule.
For purposes of this Scope of Services, the following will be considered the minimum effort to be provided by
the CONSULTANT for establishing detail design milestone submittals:
The 50% design completion stage milestone shall consist of the completed survey, work products of the
previously outlined Tasks, with all proposed improvements identified in approved BODR, illustrated in plan
and elevation views, and with applicable sections and details. In addition, the CONSULTANT shall include
draft technical specifications and a draft schedule of unit prices bid (bid form) identifying the items, units, and
quantities to be bid by prospective contractors as part of their bid submittal. Also, this submittal shall include
the CONSULTANT'S Statement of Probable Construction Cost as defined by the American Association of
Cost Engineers to be consistent with the overall not-to-exceed Project budget.
Prior to the preparation of the 50% design completion stage drawings, the CONSULTANT shall incorporate
changes to its design based upon its existing as-built 1 existing conditions verification efforts and review
comments received, as noted in Task 2.3 below.
The 90% design completion stage milestone shall consist of a near final construction document set including
the front-end documents (general and supplemental conditions), technical specifications, and construction
drawings for all Work. The CONSULTANT shall include detailed construction sequencing restrictions for the
CITY'S review with this submittal. Prior to the preparation of the 90% design completion stage dfawings, the
CONSULTANT shall incorporate changes to its design based upon review comments received, as noted in
Task 2.3 below. In addition, the CONSULTANT shall provide its "Definitive" Statement of Probable
Construction Cost as defined by the American Association of Cost Engineers with this submittal to be
consistent with the overall not-to-exceed Project Construction Cost Budget. Prior to 90% design,
CONSULTANT shall meet with appropriate regulatory agencies to confirm that the Project design meets
regulatory requirements.
South Pointe Park Pier
Schedule A
04/05/2011
The 100% design completion stage milestone shall consist of the 90% documents updated to include all
constructability and design review comments, and regulatory agency comments. The CONSULTANT shall
provide its "Definitive" Statement of Probable Construction Cost, and unit price bid form, modified as needed,
to reflect final permit and regulatory agency comments and modifications.
Deliverables: - Furnish six (6) sets each of the 50, 90, and 100 percent design
completion stage documents and Statements of Probable Construction
Cost to CITY, as applicable (three full size and three half size for each
submittal).
- Attend design progress meetings with CITY staff at the CIP offices as
scheduled by the CITY.
Schedule: - See Schedule E - Project Schedule
- Complete gopercent document submittal within 30 calendar days after
receiving review comments from various City Departments on 50%
submittal. Permit submittal to applicable regulatory agencies will
commence upon completion of 90 percent documents. - Complete Final document submittal within 5 working days after receipt
of all comments from regulatory agencies.
Task 2.3 - Design Constructability 1 Value Engineering Review:
To verify that the CONSULTANT is in compliance with the required BODR and City's requirements, the CITY
will conduct a series of design submittal reviews on all Project design documents, inclusive of cost estimates
at the 50% and 90% completion stage submittals. Note that the 90% completion stage submittal will be
utilized to initiate the City of Miami Beach Building Department permitting reviews, and the final design
submittal stage submittal will incorporate the review comments and will be used to procure permits from
jurisdictional review agencies, and/or may be utilized to obtain pricing.
The purpose of these reviews shall be to verify that the documents are consistent with the design intent as set
forth in the approved Project Basis of Design Report (BODR). These documents shall be furnished as bound
8-112-inch by I I-inch technical specifications and full-size (24-inch by 36-inch) and half size (I I-inch by 17-
inch) drawings (as noted in the Task 2.3 deliverables). The applicable ClTY Departments shall perform
reviews on these documents and provide written comments (in "Excel" spreadsheet format) back to the
CONSULTANT.
Following receipt of comments by the CONSULTANT, a meeting may be scheduled between the ClTY and
CONSULTANT to discuss the intent and review of the comments. Subsequently, the CONSULTANT shall
address how each comment was resolved, within 5 working days after the review session and/or receipt of the
comments. The responses shall be in the spreadsheet format provided to the CONSULTANT. The
CONSULTANT shall revise its documents to address all review comments.
The City will perform constructability reviews of the design documents relative to value, construction
sequencing, and bid format. These reviews shall be based upon 50 and 90 percent design submittals
received from the CONSULTANT and shall be conducted concurrently but separately from the 50 and 90
percent design reviews noted at3ove. These constructability review meetings shall be held to discuss the
CONSULTANT'S proposed construction sequencing restrictions and bid formats.
The CITY'S review of the contract documents shall not relieve CONSULTANT from its responsibility to the
CITY with regard to the quality and completeness of its contract documents.
Deliverables: - Attend meetings with the ClTY to review and discuss design constructability and
South Pointe Park Pier
Schedule A
04/05/2011
value comments,
- Prepare written responses to comments made during reviews within 5 working
days after the review session .
Schedule: - Complete concurrently with Design Phase schedule.
Task 2.4 - Cost Opinions:
The CONSULTANT shall prepare Statements of Probable Construction Cost for the 50% and 100% design
completion stage submittals, as well as the final completion stage submittal. The accuracy of the cost
estimate associated with the 50 percent completion stage shall be +30% to -15% (i.e. 30% over I 15% under
the actual amount) "Budget" Level as defined by the American Association of Cost Engineers. The accuracy
of the cost estimate associated with the 90 percent and 100 percent completion stage submittals shall be a
+15% to -5% (i.e. 15% over I 5% under the actual amount) "Definitive" Level Estimates as defined by the
American Association of Cost Engineers. All estimates shall be submitted in Microsoft "Excel" format. All
estimates shall be furnished bound in 8-112-inch by 11-inch size. Based upon the CONSULTANT'S cost
estimate or bids, the ClTY will advise the CONSULTANT if portions of the Project need to be deleted, phased
andlor bid as alternate bid items to satisfy Construction Cost Budget (based upon CONSULTANT'S analysis
and recommendations). In this effort, the CONSULTANT may be required to attend a series of meetings and
develop alternative cost savings options for ClTY consideration, if the estimates show that the projected
Project Construction Cost will exceed the Construction Cost Budget. The CONSULTANT shall revise the
contract documents to reflect necessary revisions to meet budget parameters at no additional cost
accordingly.
Deliverables: - Furnish three (3) sets of 50, 90 and 100 percent completion stage Statements
of Probable Construction Cost to CITY, in MS-Excel electronic disc format,
concurrently with the design submittals noted in Task 2.3.
- Attend meetings with the ClTY to review and discuss cost estimates. This
Task includes development of any required cost savings alternatives, and
implementation I revision of documents to address such items, as necessary
to meet established budget parameters.
Schedule: - Complete concurrently with Design Phase schedule.
Task 2.5 - Communitv Desian Review Meeting
The CONSULTANT shall attend and participate in one (1) Community Design Review Meeting (CDRM) to
review the design progress and concept. The ClTY shall schedule, find location for, and notify residents of
said meeting. The CONSULTANT shall prepare draft meeting minutes and forward them to the CITY, who
shall review, provide comments and distribute accordingly. The CONSULTANT shall prepare for, attend and
present its documents at this meeting. Meeting shall be scheduled at the 50% design completion stage. Note
that presentation format shall consist of a brief Power Point presentation to review Project status, plus review
of actual full size plans for the project. The CONSULTANT shall provide sufficient staff at the meeting to
address concerns by residents at two (2) plan stations. It is anticipated that the CONSULTANT will attend one
Pre-CDRM meeting with ClTY staff to review the proposed format of the presentation.
Task 2.6 - Document Revisions:
South Pointe Park Pier
Schedule A
04/05/20 1 1
The CONSULTANT shall incorporate the necessary contract document revisions, as approved by the ClTY
and based upon the input provided by the residents at the CDRM.
Task 2.7 - Permittina Reviews:
The CONSULTANT shall prepare applications and such documents and design data as may be required to
procure approvals from all such governmental authorities that have jurisdiction over the Project. The ClTY will
pay all permit fees. CONSULTANT shall participate in meetings, submissions, resubmissions and
negotiations with such authorities. CONSULTANT shall respond to comments by such authorities within five
(5) working days of receipt of comments unless a different time is agreed to by CITY. It is the intent of this
scope of services that the CONSULTANT be the responsible party for formally transmitting and receiving
permits to and from the respective jurisdictional authorities. However, since the ClTY is to track and monitor
progress on the preparation and review of permits and subsequent requests for information, CONSULTANT
shall also copy the ClTY on all permit related correspondence. This includes CONSULTANT generated
minutes from meetings held with related parties. It is recognized by ClTY that the time period required for
obtaining permits is beyond the control of the CONSULTANT, except with regard to issues concerning
permittability of the proposed design and the CONSULTANT'S ability to respond to permitting agency
requests for information in a timely manner.
Notwithstanding the above, the CITY's failure to identify governmental authorities that have jurisdiction over
Project shall not relieve CONSULTANT from its sole responsibility to procure all requisite permits.
Deliverables: - Correspond with noted jurisdictional authorities to establish
permitting requirements.
- Revise documents and respond to permitting inquiries as required.
- Attend meetings with the CITY, and/or permitting agency staff as
required to review, discuss and finalize permit procurement.
Schedule: - Complete concurrently with Design Phase schedule.
Task 2.8 - The CONSULTANT'S QAlQC of Design Documents:
The CONSULTANT shall establish and maintain an in-house Quality Assurance 1 Quality Control (QAIQC)
program designed to verify and ensure the quality, clarity, completeness, constructability and biddability of its
contract documents. The CITY, at its discretion, may require that CONSULTANT attend public meetings or
meetings with City Staff to review the status and present results of its QAIQC efforts. Items to be addressed
may include, but shall not be limited to, review of specifications by respective technical experts and a "Redi-
check" type review of the documents to identify conflicts and inconsistencies between the various project
disciplines.
TASK 3 -BIDDING AND AWARD SERVICES:
Task 3.1 - Construction Contract Document Review:
The CONSULTANT shall assist the ClTY during the bid and award phase of the Project's construction
contract. The CITY, shall transmit contract documents prepared by CONSULTANT to the CITY's Legal and
Procurement Departments for verification of appropriate insurance, form and bonding requirements.
CONSULTANT shall assist ClTY in this effort by providing (1) one electronic copy of the complete contract
documents set (drawings and specifications) and participating in meetings, submissions, resubmissions and
discussions with these City departments, as necessary. CONSULTANT shall address and re-submit
South Pointe Park Pier
Schedule A
04/05/20 1 1
corrections and responses to comments to any ClTY Agency or any City Department within 5 (five) working
days of receipt of comments.
Task 3.2 - Bid Document Delivery:
The CONSULTANT shall provide the ClTY with reproducible, camera ready, sets of contract documents for
each bid package. The ClTY Procurement Department shall reproduce documents and handle the
advertising, distribution, sale, maintenance of plan holder lists and other aspects of bid document delivery to
prospective bidders.
Task 3.3 - Pre-Bid Conference and Bid Opening:
The City shall conduct one or more pre-bid conferences. CONSULTANT shall attend the pre-bid conference
and bid opening for each phase of this Project and review, and advise the City accordingly.
CONSULTANT will prepare meeting agenda and draft meeting minutes. CONSULTANT shall attend and
participate in as many pre-bid conferences and bid openings as may be required.
Task 3.4 - Addenda Issuance:
CONSULTANT shall provide the City timely responses to all inquiries received from the City from prospective
bidders by preparing written addenda. Format for addenda shall be as provided to CONSULTANT by City.
These queries and responses shall be documented and a record of each shall be transmitted to the City on a
same day basis. CONSULTANT shall prepare and distribute necessary addenda as approved by the City.
The ClTY will consolidate responses and prepare and distribute the addenda to all plan holders of record
accordingly.
Task 3.5 - Bid Evaluation and Bid Opening:
CONSULTANT shall coordinate with the City in the process for evaluation, review and acceptance of the
bidding. The Consultant shall be present with the City when the bids are opened and shall evaluate and
make recommendations to the City regarding the acceptance and award of bids to qualified responsive and
responsible contractors.
CONSULTANT shall evaluate the bids for completeness, full responsiveness and price, including alternative
prices and unit prices, and shall make a formal recommendation to City with regard to the award of contract.
Non-technical bid requirements shall be evaluated by others.
This scope of services includes no additional allowance for CONSULTANT'S time to assist the ClTY in the
event of a bid protest. To the extent CONSULTANT'S services are required in the event of a bid protest;
CONSULTANT shall participate in such activities, as a basic service, at no additional cost to the CITY.
Task 3.6 - As Bid Contract Documents:
After the contract award and prior to the pre-construction conference, the CONSULTANT shall prepare "As-
Bid" construction contract documents which, at a minimum, shall incorporate the following items into the
construction contract documents:
Contractor's bid submittals, including but not limited to, bid proposal, insurance, licenses, etc.
Amend I modify front-end documents and I or technical specifications to incorporate changes made via
contract addenda.
Revise construction contract drawings to include modifications / revisions incorporated via contract addenda.
The CONSULTANT shall prepare As-Bid construction contract documents and reproduce sets as requested,
for distribution to the ClTY within five (5) working days after City Commission approval.
South Pointe Park Pier
Schedule A
04/05/2011
Deliverables: - Attend and participate in pre-bid conferences and bid openings.
- Respond to questions from prospective bidders and prepare addenda for
distribution by others.
- Prepare recommendation of award letter
- Provide sets of contract documents for contract execution
- Prepare As-Bid contract documents, reproduce sets and forward to the CITY.
Schedule: - See Schedule E - Project Schedule
TASK 4 -CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION SERVICES
The CONSULTANT shall perform the following tasks related to the construction administration of the Project.
These tasks shall be performed during the duration of all construction.
CONSULTANT'S compensation includes construction administration for the duration (through completion and
issuance of final certification) of the Project. CONSULTANT'S construction administration services tasks shall
be required during the duration of all construction (through Project completion and final certification) at the
negotiated total amount and rates. No over-time rates will be considered.
The use of E-Builder software will be implemented during the construction phase of this Project and will be
used by ClTY staff, the Contractor, and the CONSULTANT for Project document management and tracking
purposes. CONSULTANT will be required to electronically archive into E-Builder scanned copies of:
CONSULTANT transmittals; approvedlrejected submittals and shop drawings; responses to requests for
information, contract document clarifications, requests for proposals; field orders; field measurement forms
and pay application review comments; notices of contractor non-compliance; contractor permits, notices to
proceed, inspection reports and photographs; daily work log and Daily Construction Observation Forms;
prelpost construction digital photographs; materials sampling and test results and reports; certificates of
substantial and final completion, and any and all correspondence, reports, logs and documents associated
with Project management, construction administration, and Resident Project Representative activities
associated with the construction and final certification of the Project. The E-Builder software license expense
will be a reimbursable item and the required training for this software will be facilitated by the CITY.
Task 4.1- Pre-Construction Meeting:
The CONSULTANT shall attend one (1) pre-construction meeting with ClTY and Contractor. The
CONSULTANT will prepare and distribute agenda and subsequent meeting minutes to all attendees and
other appropriate parties.
Deliverables: - Attend and participate in pre-construction meeting.
- Prepare agenda and meeting minutes.
Schedule: - As scheduled by CITY after issuance of Task 4 Notice to Proceed.
Task 4.1B: Pre-Construction Kick-off Meetins with Residents (as applicable):
The CONSULTANT shall prepare, attend and conduct one (1) pre-construction meeting with the residents.
The purpose of this meeting shall be to introduce the Contractor to the residents, as well as have the
CONSULTANT present a Power Point overview of anticipated construction sequencing, conditions to be
South Pointe Park Pier
Schedule A
04/05/2011
expected, and other issues that may be of concern to residents, as either addressed at the meeting, or the
pre-meeting with ClTY representatives (that is to be held to review the content of the presentation with the
CONSULTANT prior to the meeting).
Task 4.2 -Weekly Construction Meetings:
The CONSULTANT shall attend weekly construction meetings with the Contractor and applicable ClTY staff
for the duration of the Project. The purpose of these meetings shall be to review the status of construction
progress, shop drawing submittals, and contract document clarifications and interpretations. These meetings
shall also serve as a forum for discussion of construction issues, potential changes I conflicts and any other
applicable matters. The meetings may include site visits to visually observe I address construction related
concerns that may result from discussion during the construction meeting. These site visits shall be separate
and distinct from the "Specialty Site Visits".
The CONSULTANT will prepare meeting minutes and distribute to all attendees and other appropriate parties.
Based on field observations and other construction related activities, the CONSULTANT shall identify and
document any issues, field conditions, Contractor performance related items, and other risks/concerns that
may impact the cost and timely delivery of the Project, and the expectations of the CITY, as well as the
Contractor's plans and recovery schedule to mitigate those risks and meet contractual obligations.
Deliverables: - Attend and participate in weekly construction progress meetings.
- Prepare meeting minutes to document construction activities as stated
above.
- lssue non-compliance notices to the Contractor, and log into the E-
Builder software program, as warranted.
- Archive all relevant documents, transmittals and correspondence into E-
Builder, as previously noted.
Schedule: - Weekly throughout the Project duration.
Task 4.3 - Requests for Information I Contract Document Clarification (RFls I CDCs):
The CONSULTANT will receive, log and process all RFls 1 CDCs and requests for proposal (RFPs).
Whenever an RFI involves the interpretation of design issues or design intent, the CONSULTANT shall
prepare a written response within three (3) calendar days and return it to the CITY. In addition, should certain
items within the contract documents require clarification, the CONSULTANT may be requested by the ClTY to
prepare and forward CDCs. The ClTY will hold the CONSULTANT directly responsible for any impacts
resulting from untimely responses.
Deliverables: - Respond to those RFl's that involve design interpretations and return to
CITY. lssue CDC's as required. Respond / process RFPs as required.
- Provide RFI, CDC, RFP and other construction management logs.
- Archive all relevant documents, transmittals and correspondence into E-
South Pointe Park Pier
Schedule A
04/05/20 1 1
Builder, as previously noted.
14
Schedule: - On-going throughout Project construction duration
Task 4.4 - Requests for Changes to Construction Cost andlor Schedule:
The CONSULTANT will receive, log and evaluate all requests for Project cost and/or schedule changes from
the CM and report such to the City at the weekly progress meetings at a minimum. The CONSULTANT shall
distribute and update the Change Order log at each progress meeting. Changes may be the result of
unforeseen conditions or interferences identified by the Contractor during the routine progress of work,
inadvertent omissions (betterment) issues in the contract documents, or additional improvements requested
by the City or CONSULTANT after approval of the base bid by the City Commission. Regardless of the
source, CONSULTANT will evaluate the merit of the claim as well as the impact of the potential change in
terms of Project cost and the schedule. CONSULTANT will review claims and I or change order requests with
City. No claims assistance services are included under this task.
Deliverables: - Perform independent review of request for cost increase andlor time
extension.
- Coordinate and participate in meetings, as required, with the ClTY and
Contractor to resolve and/or negotiate the equitable resolution of
request.
- Provide written opinion and / or recommendation upon request.
- Prepare change order documentation in AIA format with supporting
documentation.
- Archive all relevant documents, transmittals and correspondence into
E-Builder, as previously noted.
Schedule: - Ongoing throughout Project duration
Task 4.5 - Processing of Shop Drawings:
The ClTY will receive, log and distribute shop drawings to the CONSULTANT for its review. The
CONSULTANT shall have five (5) calendar days from the time of receipt in its office, to review and return
shop drawings to the CITY. The ClTY will hold the CONSULTANT directly responsible for any impacts
resulting from untimely review of submittals.
Deliverables: - Review and approve, or reject, Shop Drawings and return them to the
CITY.
- Archive all relevant documents, transmittals and correspondence into
E-Builder, as previously noted.
Schedule: - Ongoing throughout Project duration.
Task 4.6 - Mandatory Specialty Site Visits
South Pointe Park Pier
Schedule A
04/05/20 1 1
The CONSULTANT shall be required to perform the following mandatory site visits that shall occur during the
following stages of construction (as applicable to the scope of work of this project) and shall be conducted by
the appropriate professional consultants.
A. Site preparation /demolition:
1. Clearing, demolition & debris removal
2. Site utilities, excavation & installation
3. Permit agency site visits
B. Structural framework: General Observations (Threshold) By Others
1. Reinforcement concrete - reinforcement sizing & spacing before pouring,
based on approved reinforcing steel shop drawings
2. Steel - connections, welds, bolts & fireproofing
3. Deck, pilings and pile caps
C. Build-out (finish):
1. Pier finishes
2. Accessories, railings, benches, lighting
3. Plumbing - fixtures, valves & drains
4. Electrical - fixtures, outlets, switch, safety switches,
5. Safety-to-Life systems (as applicable)
D. Final exterior work:
1. Paving, slope, drainage, striping, expansion joints & curbs
2. Landscaping - irrigation, planting material, grades
3. Walkways - drainage
E. Final punch-list/close-out:
1. Punch-lists
2. Project close-out
3. Instruction manuals
4. Substantial Completion
F. Warranty Phase:
1. Warranty period visit
2. Review and certify visit
G. Post-Occupancy Evaluation.
After each Site Visit, the CONSULTANT, and/or the Consultant's sub-consultants, shall complete and submit
to the City, a report ("Site Visit Report") which shall, at minimum, contain the following information:
a) Site Visit report number;
b) City, Facility name, Project title, Project number and location;
South Pointe Park Pier
Schedule A
04/05/20 1 1
c) Name of contractor/subcontractor;
d) Start & finish time of visit & weather conditions; Project site administrator sign-in & sign-out;
f ) Personnel on-site, by trade;
g) Progresslquality of work by trade;
h) Photographic record with captions (digital format); and
On the basis of Site Visit observations, the CONSULTANT shall inform the City and the Contractor
immediately, in writing, of the progress (or lack of progress) and quality of the Work, and the CONSULTANT
shall endeavor to guard the City against defects and/or deficiencies in the Work. The CONSULTANT shall
have access to the Work at all times, whether it is in preparation or progress, in order to meet its
responsibilities and obligations under the agreement.
Task 4.7 - Proiect Closeout:
Upon receiving notice from the Contractor advising the CONSULTANT that the Project is substantially
complete, CONSULTANT, in conjunction with appropriate CITY staff, shall schedule and conduct an overview
of the Project. The overview shall include CONSULTANT'S development of a "punch list" of items needing
completion or correction prior to consideration of final acceptance. The list shall be forwarded to the
Contractor.
Upon notification from Contractor that all remaining "punch list" items have been resolved, the
CONSULTANT, in conjunction with appropriate ClTY staff, shall perform a final review of the Project. Based
on successful completion of all outstanding work items by the Contractor, the CONSULTANT shall assist
ClTY in closing out the construction contract. This shall include, but not be limited to, providing
recommendations concerning acceptance of the Project and preparing / collecting necessary documentation
including, but not limited to, lien waivers, Contractor's final affidavit, close-out change orders, certificates of
substantial and final completion, consent of surety to final payment, and processing of the final payment
application.
In addition, the CONSULTANT shall coordinate with the Contractor as necessary to transfer record drawing
markups or CAD files, which the CONSULTANT shall update the corresponding CAD files for record purposes
and certify the Project as complete, in accordance with all applicable jurisdictional permitting requirements.
Deliverables: - Receive Contractor Substantial Completion notification.
- Coordinate and attend field meetings to review Substantial Completion.
- Prepare and verify that punch lists are completed.
- Certify Project completion to appropriate agencies.
- Receive from Contractor original permit set, red-lined "as-built" drawings
in a form acceptable to the CITY.
- Prepare electronic record drawings and certify Project as complete per
applicable jurisdictional requirements.
- Submit five (5) full size copies of final as-built record drawings with
applicable certifications of completion.
South Pointe Park Pier
Schedule A
04/05/20 1 1
- Submit final as-built record drawings electronically in CD format.
- Submit final Project photographs I aerials.
- CONSULTANT to provide Close-Out Book with the following information:
Permits - complete final permit inspection sign-offs; ensure
that all permits are closed
Engineer's Certification of Project Completion that Project was
built in accordance with plans and specifications..
Change orders - provide all finalized change order
information, including funding.
Punch list - provide complete list, including date item closed.
Certificate of Substantial 1 Final Completion
= Operating and Maintenance Manuals
Pay applications
Final Waiver and Releases of Lien / Consent of Surety
Material testing log
Permit fees log
= Record drawing log
Schedule: - On-going throughout duration of Project.
Task 4.8 - Warranty Administration/Post Proiect Services:
The CONSULTANT shall assist the ClTY with the coordination of requested warranty work. This assistance
shall be provided for a period of up to one (1) year following Final Completion and acceptance of the Project
by the CITY, or the issuance of the Final Payment, whichever occurs latest.
Deliverables: - Assist the CITY with warranty work completion.
Schedule: - Up to one (1) year following Final Completion and acceptance of the
Project by the CITY, or the issuance of the Final Payment, whichever
occurs latest.
TASK 5 - ADDITIONAL SERVICES
No additional services are envisioned at this time. However, if such services are required during the
performance of the Work, they shall be requested by City and negotiated in accordance with contract
requirements pursuant to the hourly rates identified in Schedule "C.
South Pointe Park Pier
Schedule A
04/05/20 1 1
Note that a separate Notice to Proceed is required prior to performance of any Work not expressly required by
this Scope of Services. If CONSULTANT, proceeds with "out of scope" work without proper authorization, it
does so at its own risk.
TASK 6 - REIMBURSABLES
Task 6.1 - Re~roduction Services:
The CONSULTANT shall be reimbursed at the usual and customary rate for reproduction of reports, contract
documents and miscellaneous items, as may be requested by the CITY. Unused amounts in this allowance
shall be credited back to the CITY at the completion of the Project.
Task 6.2 - Travel and Subsistence:
Not required at this time.
Task 6.3 - Surveving:
The CONSULTANT shall arrange for and coordinate the efforts of licensed surveyors to prepare required
surveys within the Project limits to meet the intent of the approved Project Scope. Proposals for these
services shall be submitted to the CITY for review and approval.
Task 6.4 - Geotechnical Evaluation:
The CONSULTANT shall arrange for and coordinate the efforts of a geotechnical firm to perform boring 1 test
excavations as necessary to adequately define the soil characteristics for the purposes of design. Proposals
for these services shall be submitted to the CITY for review and approval.
Task 6.5 - Underground Utilitv Verification (as needed):
The CONSULTANT shall contract the services of an underground utility location service to perform additional
vacuum extraction excavations, as needed, in an effort to better identify existing underground conditions
where work is to be performed as necessary. Actual locations shall be as directed by the CONSULTANT,
subject to CITY review and acceptance. Proposals for these services shall be submitted to the CITY for
review and approval.
Minimum Drawing Requirements
The composite set of drawings to be produced shall contain sufficient information and detail to clearly define
all proposed improvements in terms of quantity, quality and location. The CONSULTANT shall propose a
drawing list to be reviewed and approved by the CITY.
South Pointe Park Pier
Schedule A
04/05/2011
SCHEDULE B
CONSULTANT COMPENSATION
Schedule of Payments
Pre Design Sewices
Design Services
Bidding and Award Services
Construction Administration
Reimbursable Allowance
SCHEDULE C
HOURLY BILLING RATE SCHEDULE
Prepared for City of Miami Beach
Principal
Project Manager
Sr. Engineer 111
Sr. Engineer II
Engineer EI
Planner
Sr. Scientist 111
Sr. Scientist I1
Scientist
Sr. CADD
$225.00
$198.00
$180.00
$135.00
$91.00
$85.00
$140.00
$110.00
75.00
$80.00
SCHEDULE D
CONSTRUCTION BUDGET
$4,000,000 (four million dollars)
SCHEDULE E
PROJECT SCHEDULE
Notice to Proceed
Deliver Concept for Pier Entrance
Design Review Board (DRB) Presentation
Deliver 50% Construction Documents
Review comments by City
Submit preliminary Permit Documents
Deliver 100% Construction Documents
Review comments by City
Deliver Final Construction Documents
Deliver Final Permit Packages
April 20,201 1
May 09 ,201 1
May 16,201 1
July 01,201 1
July 15,201 1
July 22, , 201 1
August I, 201 1
August 5,201 1
August 22,201 1
August 26,201 1
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
A resolution of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami Beach, Florida, approving and authorizing
the Mayor and City Clerk to execute Amendment No. 2 to the agreement between the City and Arquitectonica
International Corp., dated April 7'h, 2009, for professional architectural and engineering (NE) services for the
Sunset Harbor Parking Garage project, in the negotiated amount of $50,000 for additional construction
administration services to perform special inspection services to a Threshold Building, and $3,500 for
reimbursable expenses for a total not-to-exceed amount of $53,500, for the project; with previously
appropriated funding from Parking Operations Fund 480, and from 201 0 Parking Bond Fund 486.
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Improve Parking Availability.
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): Only 21% of residents and 28% of businesses
surveyed in the 2009 Customer Satisfaction Survey rate the availability of parking in Miami Beach as being the
riaht amount.
Issue:
1 Shall the City Commission approve the additional services for Arquitectonica International, Corp.? I
Item SummarylRecommendation:
"Threshold Building" means any building which is greater than three stories or 50 feet in height, or which
has an assembly occupancy classification as defined in the Florida Building Code which exceeds 5,000
square feet in area and an occupant content of greater than 500 persons. A "special inspector" means a
licensed architect or registered engineer who is certified under chapter 471 or chapter 481 to conduct
inspections of Threshold buildings.
The additional construction administrative work warrants the extension of Construction Administration, as
special inspection services were not included in the previously contracted scope of NE Services, and
Reimbursable expenses associated with the added scope of work. It should be noted that the hourly billable
rate of $85.00 per hour for the special inspector is less than the current rates specified in the City Wide
Professional Architecture and Engineering Services Hourly Billing Rate Schedule.
Staff recommends including the special inspection services under the control of the project Architect and the
Engineer of Record in order to properly ensure that the work performed by the Contractor will fully comply with
the contract documents. Arquitectonica's proposal for special inspection services includes a unit rate of $85.00
per hour. The Threshold Inspector anticipates that 588 hours for inspections will be required (see Attachment
No. 2 for a breakdown of the anticipated hours for the project). However, the not to exceed amount for this
work is only a budget estimate and is not a lump sum agreement. Staff has reviewed the fee proposal
submitted by Arquitectonica and finds it is commensurate with the service rates paid City wide.
I THE ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDS THE APPROVAL OF THE AMENDMENT NO. 2. I
Advisory Board Recommendation:
t:\agenda\2011\4-13-1 I\Sunset Harbor Garage- Arquitectonica, C.A. addit'l services SUMMARY.doc
Financial Information:
AGENDA ITEM C7D
DATE %/?-I/
Account
480-21 91 -061 357 - Parking Operations Fund
486-2191 -061 357 - 201 0 Parking Bonds Resolution
Fund 486
Source of
Funds:
BPI
Financial Impact Summary:
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking: I Aaron Sinnes Ext. 6833
I
2
3
Total
Amount
$41,264.85
$12,235.15
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33 139, www.rniamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti H. Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: City Manager Jorge M. Gonzalez
DATE: April 13, 201 1
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF
MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND
CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY AND ARQUITECTONICA INTERNATIONAL CORP.,
DATED APRIL 7TH, 2009, FOR PROFESSIONAL ARCHITECTURAL AND
ENGINEERING (AIE) SERVICES FOR THE SUNSET HARBOR PARKING
GARAGE PROJECT, IN THE NEGOTIATED AMOUNT OF $50,000, FOR
ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION SERVICES TO PERFORM
SPECIAL INSPECTION SERVICES, AND $3,500 FOR REIMBURSABLE
EXPENSES FOR ATOTAL NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $53,500, FOR THE
PROJECT; WITH PREVIOUSLY APPROPRIATED FUNDING FROM PARKING
OPERATIONS FUND 480, AND FROM 2010 PARKING BONDS FUND 486.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
FUNDING
Funding is available in the amount of $41,264.85, previously appropriated in the Parking
Operations Fund 480 and $12,235.15, previously appropriated in the 2010 Parking Bonds
Fund 486 for Engineering and Design fees in account numbers 480-21 91-061 357 and 486-
21 91 -061 357 respectively.
BACKGROUND
On December 10,2008, the City Commission approved an agreement between the City and
Scott Robins Companies, Inc., Purdy Partners, LLC, Purdy Partners 191 9, LLC, and 1849
Purdy Partners, LLC, for the purpose of purchasing air rights and certain portions of the land
for the development of an approximately 458-space parking garage with ground floor retail.
On April 7,2009, the Mayor and City Clerk executed the agreement between the City and
Arquitectonica International Corp., for the Professional Architecture and Engineering (AIE)
Services for the Sunset Harbor Parking Garage. The scope of services included
construction administration, but did not include special inspection services.
On November 17, 2010, the City Commission accepted the recommendation of the City
Manager, pursuant to Invitation to Bid (ITB) No. 40-0911 0, for the construction of the Sunset
Harbor Parking Garage and Retail Project, authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute
an agreement with Boran Craig Barber Engel Construction Company, Inc. (BCBE), in the
amount of $9,267,556.00, for the construction of the project, plus approve a project
contingency in the amount of $926,755.60, for a grand total of $10,194,311.60.
On January 21,201 1, the General Contractor (Boran Craig Barber Engel Construction Co.,
Inc.) was issued the first Notice to Proceed (NTP I) to commence with obtaining a building
permit and scheduling activities.
City Commission Memorandum - ARQUITECTONICA INTERNATIONAL, CORP-AMENDMENT 2
April 13, 201 I
Page 2 of 2
ANALYSIS
The Sunset Harbor Parking Garage building meets the characteristics of a "Threshold
Building" as defined in the Florida Building Code (FBC). "Threshold Building" is any building
which is greater than three stories or 50 feet in height, or which has an assembly occupancy
classification as defined in the FBC which exceeds 5,000 square feet in area and an
occupant content of greater than 500 persons. A Threshold or Special lnspector needs to
be a licensed architect or registered engineer who is certified under chapter 471 or chapter
481 to conduct inspections of Threshold Buildings.
The additional threshold inspection work and associated reimbursable expenses warrant the
amendment to the agreement, as special inspection services were not included in the
previously contracted scope of A/E Services. Staff recommends including the special
inspection services under the control of the project Architect and the Engineer of Record in
order to properly ensure that the work performed by the Contractor will fully comply with the
contract documents. It should be noted that the hourly billable rate of $85.00 per hour for
the special inspector is less than the current rates specified in the Citywide Professional
Architecture and Engineering Services Hourly Billing Rate Schedule.
Arquitectonica's proposal for Special lnspection Services includes a unit rate of $85.00 per
hour. The Threshold lnspector anticipates that 588 hours for inspections will be required
(see Attachment No. 2 for a breakdown of the anticipated hours for the project). However,
the not-to-exceed amount for this work is only a budget estimate and is not a lump sum
agreement. Staff has reviewed the fee proposal submitted by Arquitectonica and finds it is
commensurate with the service rates paid City wide.
CONCLUSION:
The Administration hereby recommends the Mayor and City Commission adopt the
Resolution approving and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute Amendment No.
2 to the Agreement between the City and Arquitectonica International Corp., dated April 7,
2009, for Professional Architectural and Engineering (NE) Services for the Sunset Harbor
Parking Garage Project, in the amount of $53,500, for additional Construction Administration
Services, specifically Threshold lnspection Services for the Project; with funding available
from previously appropriated Parking Fund 480 and 486, in the amount of $53,500.
Attachment:
1. Arquitectonica International Corp. - SHG - Threshold lnspection Services Revised
2. Hourly breakdown for Threshold Inspections
JMGIDBIFVIJCICF
T:WGENDA\2011\4-13-1 IWRQUITECTONICA INTERNATIONAL, CORP. - SHG - Threshold lnspection Services.doc
185
15 February 201 1
Mr. Aaron Sinnes
City of Miami Beach
Capital Improvement Projects
1700 Convention Center Drive
Miami Beach, Florida 33139
Re: Additional Services for Threshold Inspection Services
Dear Mr. Sinnes:
Arquitectonica is pleased to submit this Additional Services Proposal for the owner-requested Threshold
Inspection Services provided by DDA Engineers, PA for the Purdy Avenue Garage and Retail Project.
The additional services as described below are outside the scope of work identified in the 28 April 2009
A-E Agreement.
Project Description
The Project is a mixed-use building consisting of 29,350 SF of ground floor retail and 141,000 SF of
parking on 4 levels above grade, accommodating a total of 435 parking spaces.
Scope of Services
Arquitectonica will contract DDA Engineers to provide the following scope of work: Inspecting all the
reinforcing steel in the foundation, columns, slabs, reinforced masonry and being present for all concrete
pours. DDA will also ensure that the delegated shoring engineer has inspected the shoring and reshoring
in the field and that he issues a letter attesting to the fact that it has been installed according to his
prepared signed and sealed shop drawings. The inspections will be provided on an on-call basis and
scheduling of inspections will be done by the contractor.
Professional Fees
The aforementioned services by DDA Engineers will be provided at an hourly rate of Eighty Five dollars
per hour ($85.00/hr), not to exceed Fifty Thousand dollars ($50,000). DDAlArquitectonica will notify the
Owner in writing prior to exceeding the budgeted amount. If the budgeted amount is exceeded
Arquitectonica will prepare a new additional services proposal for Owner's approval prior to continuing
with the work. Fees and reimbursable expenses are to be billed on a monthly basis.
Reimbursable Expenses
Reimbursable expenses, as per the terms of the executed A-E Agreement, will be invoiced at cost, not to
exceed Three Thousand Five Hundred dollars ($3,500).
Schedule
The schedule of work shall be in line with the General Contractor's construction schedule.
Contract
All terms of the 28 April 2009 A-E Agreement are applicable to this Additional Service.
Should you have any questions regarding this proposal, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely,
Anne Cotter AIA, LEED AP
Vice President
ARQUITECTONjCA International Corporation
2900 Oak Avenue
Miami . Florida 33133
T 305.372.1822 F 305.372.1175
www.arquitectonica.com
AAC000465
ATTACHMENT 2
SUNSET HARBOR PARKING GARAGE PROJECT
Special lnspection Services for a Threshold Building
Breakdown of Anticipated Inspections, Hours per lnspection and Total lnspection Hours
I Total Estimated Inspection Hours: 1588 I
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND ClTY CLERK TO EXECUTE
AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY
AND ARQUITECTONICA INTERNATIONAL CORP., DATED APRIL
7TH, 2009, FOR PROFESSIONAL ARCHITECTURAL AND
ENGINEERING (AIE) SERVICES FOR THE SUNSET HARBOR
PARKING GARAGE PROJECT, IN THE NEGOTIATED AMOUNT OF
$50,000, FOR ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION
SERVICES TO PERFORM SPECIAL INSPECTION SERVICES, AND
$3,500 FOR REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES, FOR A TOTAL NOT-
TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $53,500; WITH PREVIOUSLY
APPROPRIATED FUNDING FROM PARKING OPERATIONS FUND
480, AND FROM 2010 PARKING BONDS FUND 486.
WHEREAS, on December 10, 2008, the Mayor and City Commission adopted
Resolution No. 2008-26969, approving and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to
execute an agreement between the City and Scott Robins Companies, Inc., Purdy
Partners, LLC, Purdy Partners 1919, LLC, and 1849 Purdy Partners, LLC, for the
purpose of purchasing air rights and certain portions of the land for the development of
an approximately 458-space parking garage with ground floor retail (the Sunset Harbor
Parking Garage Project); and
WHEREAS, on April 7, 2009, the Mayor and City Clerk executed a Professional
Services Agreement between the City and Arquitectonica International Corp.
(Consultant), for architecture and engineering (A/E) services for the Sunset Harbor
Parking Garage Project; and
WHEREAS, the Agreement was executed for a not-to-exceed amount of
$414,866; and
WHEREAS, on November 23, 2010, the City approved Amendment No. 1 to the
Agreement, in the amount of $3,500, for additional services to revise the completed
mechanical, electrical, plumbing and life-safety drawings to have the life-safety,
emergency lighting powered by battery back-up, similar to other municipal parking
garages, for a total revised fee of $418,366; and
WHEREAS, the following Amendment No. 2 to the Agreement has been
negotiated, in the amount of $53,500, for special inspection services to a threshold
building and reimbursable expenses, resulting in a revised total contract fee of
$471,866.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND THE
CITYCOMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that the Mayor and
City Commission hereby approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute
Amendment No. 2 to the Agreement between the City and Arquitectonica International,
Corp., dated April 7th, 2009, for Professional Architectural and Engineering (AIE)
Services for the Sunset Harbor Parking Garage Project, in the negotiated amount of
$50,000 for additional construction administrative services to perform special inspection
services, and $3,500 for reimbursable expenses, for a total not-to-exceed amount of
$53,500, with previously appropriated funding, from Parking Operations Fund 480, and
from 2010 Parking Bonds Fund 486.
PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 201 1
ATTEST:
ROBERT H. PARCHER, CITY CLERK MATTI HERREA BOWER, MAYOR
T:WGENDA\2011\4-13-1 I\ARQUITECTONICA INTERNATIONAL, CORP. - SHG - Threshold Inspection Services.doc
APPROVED AS TO
FORM & LANGUAGE
& FOR EXECUTION
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
iondensed Title:
A Resolution of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami Beach, Florida, approving and authorizing the
Mayor and City Clerk to execute Amendment No. 9 to the agreement between the City and EAC Consulting, Inc.,
dated July 27,2005, for Professional Architectural and Engineering Services Pursuant to Request for Qualifications
No. 42-03/04 for the Biscayne Point Neighborhood Right-of-way lmprovement Project; said amendment for value
engineering services, additional construction administration services, and Resident Project Representation (RPR)
services (for a period of up to twenty-four months), in the lump sum amount of $358,684, plus an additional not-to-
exceed amount of $9,246 for reimbursable expenses, for a total not-to-exceed amount of $367,930; with previously
appropriated funding, in the amount of $97,362, from Fund 376, and funding in the amount of $90,648, from Fund
420; and further appropriating funding, in the amount of $1 79,920, from Fund 429, Storm Water Projects Line of
Credit, with such funds to be repaid from proposed future storm water bonds.
<ey Intended Outcome Supported:
Ensure well designed quality capital projects.
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.):
Completed Capital lmprovement Projects are a key positive driver in resident perceptions on overall quality of life.
The 2009 Customer Satisfaction Survey indicated that 51.8% and 85.0% of North-Beach residents rated storm
drainage and landscape maintenance in right-of-ways and public areas as excellent or good, respectively.
Completing this Project will add to the needed upgrades in this area and improve overall rating.
ssue:
Shall the Mayor and City Commission approve the Resolution?
tem SummarylRecommendation:
On March 9, 201 1, the Mayor and City Commission authorized the award of a contract to David Mancini & Sons,
Inc. (DMSI) for the Biscayne Point Right-of-way lmprovements Project. As part of the award, the Mayor and City
Commission authorized the Administration to engage in value engineering to reduce the cost and completion time
of the project and awarded the contract subject to a level of service review of the plans by the City's Public Works
Department.
The construction administration fees approved in the Consultant's Agreement were limited to basic services in the
amount of $1 67,377, which represents I .5% of the total cost of construction. The original agreement did not include
post award value engineering services and RPR services from the Consultant. The Administration now proposes to
provide additional construction administration services for the project's pump station design, value engineering
services, and RPR services.
Execution of Amendment No. 9 approves additional services to provide value engineering services, additional
construction administration services, and RPR services for a period of up to twenty-four months (24) for the
Biscayne Point Right-of-way lmprovements project for a lump sum fee of $23,392, $8,364, and $326,928,
respectively, and a not-to-exceed amount of $9,246 for reimbursable expenses, for at total amount of $367,930.
I I
Advisory Board Recommendation:
I I
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking: I Janette Femandez Arencibia, Capital Projects Coordinator, ext. 6596
4
T:\AGENDA\2011\4-13-1 I\Biscayne Point - EAC Amendment No. 9\Biscayne Point - EAC Amendment No. 9 - SUMMARY.doc
BEACH ,,,
MIAMIBEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33 139, www.rniarnibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti H. Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
DATE: April 13, 201 1
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF
MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND
THE ClTY CLERK TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT NO. 9 TO THE AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE ClTY AND EAC CONSULTING, INC., DATED JULY 27,2005, FOR
PROFESSIONAL ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING SERVICES PURSUANT
TO REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS NO. 42-03/04 FOR THE BISCAYNE POINT
NEIGHBORHOOD RIGHT-OF-WAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT; SAID
AMENDMENT FOR VALUE ENGINEERING SERVICES, ADDITIONAL
CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION SERVICES, AND RESIDENT PROJECT
REPRESENTATION (RPR) SERVICES (FOR A PERIOD OF UP TO TWENTY-FOUR
MONTHS), IN THE NEGOTIATED LUMP SUM AMOUNT OF $358,684, PLUS AN
ADDITIONAL NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $9,246 FOR REIMBURSABLE
EXPENSES, FOR A TOTAL NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $367,930; WlTH
PREVIOUSLY APPROPRIATED FUNDING IN THE AMOUNT OF $97,362, FROM
FUND 376, AND FUNDING, IN THE AMOUNT OF $90,648, FROM FUND 420; AND
FURTHER APPROPRIATING FUNDING, IN THE AMOUNT OF $179,920 FROM
FUND 429, STORM WATER PROJECTS LINE OF CREDIT, WlTH SUCH FUNDS TO
BE REPAID FROM PROPOSED FUTURE STORM WATER BONDS.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Approve the Amendment.
KEY INTENDED OUTCOME
Ensure value and the timely delivery of a quality capital project.
FUNDING
Funding in the amount of $97,362 and $90,648 has been previously appropriated from Fund 376 and
Fund 420 in the Capital Budget, respectively. Funding in the amount of $1 79,920 shall be appropriated
from Fund 429, Storm Water Projects Line of Credit, to be repaid from proposed future storm water
bonds.
BACKGROUND
On October 15,2003, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No. 2003-25376, approving
the Infrastructure Improvement Program Basis of Design Report (BODR) for the Biscayne Point
Neighborhood prepared by The Corradino Group, Inc. This BODR was the culmination of a
comprehensive planning effort that included input from and reviews by residents, various City
Departments, and the Design Review Board (DRB). After several attempts to negotiate a reasonable fee
City Commission Memorandum - EAC Amendment No. 9 Memo
April 13, 2011
Page 2 of 4
for the design, bid and award, and construction administration of the project, the City terminated its
relationship with The Corradino Group Inc. On October 13, 2004, the City issued a Request for
Qualifications (RFQ), to select another Consultant to complete the Biscayne Point Neighborhood
lmprovement Project. As a result, on July 27,2005, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution
No. 2005-25973, approving and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute an agreement with
EAC Consulting, Inc. (the Consultant) to provide Professional Engineering and Landscape Architecture
consulting services for the Biscayne Point Neighborhood Right-of-way (ROW) lmprovement Project in
the amount of $1,186,807.
Since the execution of the original Agreement, there have been a total of eight (8) amendments which
have been either approved by the City Commission or administratively approved. The previous
amendments will result in a total contract value of $1,593,451 once all have been fully executed. A
complete list of the executed amendments and proposed amendments for this project has been
provided in Attachment A.
ANALYSIS
Invitation to Bid (ITB) No. 07-1 011 1 was issued on November 30,201 0, with an opening date of January
27,201 1. The Technical Review Panel (TRP) convened the week of February 14,201 1, to shortlist and
interview prospective bidders and recommended to the City Manager that the Biscayne Point project
contract be awarded to David Mancini & Sons, Inc. (DMSI) as the lowest and best bidder for the project.
The City Manager then exercised his due diligence and recommended to the Mayor and City
Commission to award the contract to DMSI. On March 9, 201 1, the Mayor and City Commission
authorized the award of a contract to DMSI for the Biscayne Point Right-of-way lmprovements Project.
As part of the award, the Mayor and City Commission authorized the Administration to engage in value
engineering to reduce the cost and completion time of the project and awarded the contract subject to a
level of service review of the plans by the City's Public Works Department.
The Consultant's original contract did not provide for value engineering services to assist the City with
value engineering alternatives proposed by the Contractor. In order to evaluate the compliance of any
proposed substitutions or design modifications with the design criteria and contract documents, the
Consultant must be involved in all the value engineering discussions. In this amendment, the Consultant
is requesting additional services to participate in the value engineering process. Their proposed services
would include engineering analyses, assessments, verification, and investigations required to ascertain
the merit and benefits of the value engineering proposals provided by the Contractor prior to the
commencement of construction activities. The consultant will attend value engineering meetings,
conference calls, coordinate, provide responses and make recommendations regarding to the proposed
options.
When the Agreement was originally negotiated, the scope of services for the Biscayne Point Right-of-
Way lmprovements project was based on the BODR that was completed for the neighborhood. The
BODR provided only a preliminary analysis of the existing storm water system which did not allow for the
development of a comprehensive storm water system design concept. As such, the scope of services
included as part of the Agreement did not include those construction administration services associated
with constructing a storm water pump station design which was introduced into the project in
Amendment No. 5 to the Agreement. As part of this Amendment No. 10, the Consultant is requesting
additional services to perform construction administration services for the pump station design.
The construction administration services would now be expanded to include the additional hours
required for attending and participating in additional weekly construction progress meetings, providing
additional technical submittal reviews, and reviewing and responding to additional RFls, CDCs, COs,
processing of shop drawings, performing additional specialty site inspection and reporting services,
City Commission Memorandum - EAC Amendment No. 9 Memo
April 13,2011
Page 3 of 4
preparing substantial completion documents, participating in the project close-out process, including
preparing project record drawings and certifying that the Project was constructed in accordance with the
Construction Documents.-The Consultant will be responsible for developing a "punch list" of items
needing completion or correction, prior to consideration of final acceptance. Based on successful
completion of all outstanding work items by the Contractor, the Consultant shall assist City in closing out
the construction contract. The Consultant shall also coordinate with the Contractor as necessary to
transfer record drawing markups, and update the corresponding CAD files for record purposes and to
certify the Project as complete, in accordance with all applicable jurisdictional permitting requirements.
The fee being requested by the Consultant for the project close-out services is included as part of the
construction administration services.
To effectively manage the construction of the Biscayne Point Right-of-way lmprovements project, the
Administration has determined that it would be necessary to have a full-time qualified Resident Project
Representative (RPR) to provide adequate daily field observation in addition to construction
administration services. These services are necessary to verify that critical elements of construction are
properly completed and that the general intent of the Contract Documents is being met.
The Consultant's original contract did not provide for resident project representative services and only
allowed for a limited amount of construction administration services throughout the duration of the
project. The approved construction administration fees under the original contract were $167,377, which
represent 1.5% of the total cost of construction. RPR and construction administration services are
typically between 5.0% and 10% of the total construction value. In 2003, when the original contract was
negotiated, the RPR services for the project were anticipated to be provided by Hazen and Sawyer, Inc.,
the Program Manager at the time the design of the project was initiated. By terminating the continuing
professional services agreement with the Program Manager, the RPR role for the Biscayne Point Right-
of-Way lmprovements project became vacant and the services unfulfilled. As part of Amendment No.
10, EAC proposes to assume the role and responsibilities of the RPR and provide the required close-out
certifications, certifications which were originally to be completed by the Program Manager. The City has
negotiated with EAC for full-time RPR services in order to provide adequate project oversight for a
construction duration period of up to twenty-four (24) months.
EAC's RPR services for the project would entail observing the project construction and determining if
the Contractor is adhering to the Construction Documents; attending weekly construction meetings;
maintaining daily logs of the job conditions; monitoring independent testing laboratories; providing photo
documentation of the site before, during, and at the close-out of construction; reviewing materials and
workmanship for acceptability; verifying quantities of work installed in the field and reviewing contractor
payment requisitions; monitoring as-built documentation; coordinating with the project team to address
Requests for Information (RFls), Contract Document Clarifications (CDCs), Change Orders (COs) and
Field Orders. The RPR shall be onsite at all times while the Contractor is performing work. Consultant's
level of effort is based on the assumption that the RPR shall monitor all Contractor work crews as
specified by the Consultant in the Contract Documents. These services would be in addition to the basic
construction administration services provided in the original contract scope of services and those
additional construction administration services proposed in this amendment.
Once this Amendment has been approved by the City Commission and executed by the Mayor, the
Consultant shall commence with the value engineering services. We estimate that value engineering
discussions will take approximately eight (8) weeks to complete and permitting revisions to take an
additional four (4) to six (6) weeks. As such, Construction on the Biscayne Point Right-of-way
lmprovements project would commence sometime in the 3rd quarter of 201 1. It is important to note that
changes to the current set of plans will require a change order to the construction contract, an exact
estimate of which cannot be determined at this time.
City Commission Memorandum - EAC Amendment No. 9 Memo
April 13,201 1
Page 4 of 4
Execution of Amendment No. 9 approves additional services to provide value engineering services,
additional construction administration services, and RPR services for a period of up to twenty-four
months (24) for the Biscayne Point Right-of-way Improvements project for a lump sum fee of $23,392,
$8,364, and $326,928, respectively, and a not-to-exceed amount of $9,246 for reimbursable expenses,
for at total amount of $367,930. The Consultant's proposed construction administrationl RPR services
fee as a percent of the Project's total construction cost is lower than customary for construction
administrationl RPR services.
CONCLUSION:
The Administration recommends that the Mayor and City Commission authorize the Mayor and City
Clerk to execute Amendment No. 9 to the agreement between the City of Miami Beach and EAC
Consulting, Inc. for Professional Architectural and Engineering Services Pursuant to the Request for
Qualifications No. 42-03/04 for the Biscayne Point Neighborhood Right-of-way Improvement Project,
dated July 27,2005, for value engineering services, additional construction administration services, and
Resident Project Representation (RPR) services (for a period of up to twenty-four months), in the lump
sum amount of $358,684 plus an additional not-to-exceed amount of $9,246 for reimbursable expenses,
for a total not-to-exceed amount of $367,930; with previously appropriated funding in the amount of
$97,362 from Fund 376 and funding in the amoupt of $90,648 from Fund 420; and further appropriating
funding in the amount of $1 79,920 from Fund 429, Storm Water Projects Line of Credit, with such funds
to be repaid from proposed future storm water bonds.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A - Executed Amendments
J MGIDBIFV
T:\AGENDA\2011\4-13-1 I\Biscayne Point - EAC Amendment No. 9\Biscayne Point - EAC Amendment No. 9 - MEM0.doc
ATTACHMENT A
EXECUTED AMENDMENTS
On March 8,2006, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No. 2006-261 33, approving and
authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute Amendment No.1 to the Professional
ArchitectureIEngineering (NE) Services Agreement (Agreement) between the City of Miami Beach (City)
and EAC Consulting, Inc. (Consultant) for the design, permitting and construction of an additional
11,000 linear feet of water main infrastructure required by the City's Public Works Department.
Amendment No. 1 increased the original contract value by $129,325, for a total contract value of
$1,316,132.
On January 6, 2009, Amendment No. 2 was administratively executed by the City Manager, in the
amount of $24,924, for additional stormwater modeling services to find an alternative stormwater
treatment and disposal system for the project. Based on the survey conducted for the project a gravity
based system, as specified in the BODR, would not provide sufficient drainage capacity to meet the
required design criteria. Amendment No. 2 increased the contract value, for a total contract value of
$1,341,056.
On January 28,2009, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No. 2009-26979, approving
and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute Amendment No. 3 to the Agreement for additional
professional A/E services to provide Pavement Marking and Signage Plans, which were not a part of the
Agreement Scope of Services. Amendment No. 3 increased the contract value by $27,000, for a total
contract value of $1,368,056.
On December 9, 2009, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No. 2009-27257 and
Resolution No. 2009-27258, approving and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute Amendment
No. 4 and Amendment No. 5 to the Agreement, respectively. Amendment No. 4 provided for additional
design services associated with the stormwater treatment and disposal system, including the addition of
three (3) pump stations, associated piping and structures needed to comply with the regulatory
agencies' requirements. Amendment No. 5 provided for additional design and construction
administration services to redesign Stillwater Drive as per the revised BODR requirements, addressed in
Resolution No. 2009-271 91 which was adopted by the Mayor and City Commission on September 9,
2009. Amendment No. 4 increased the contract value by $1 13,984 and Amendment No. 5 increased the
contract value by an additional $75,664, for a total contract value of $1,557,704.
Amendment No. 6 and Amendment No. 7 to the Agreement are currently being processed for the City
Manager's administrative approval. Amendment No. 6 provided for additional services to investigate,
assess, and recommend alternative swale reinforcement methodologies to be utilized along Stillwater
Drive. Amendment No. 7 is for additional services to conduct an assessment of existing segrasses,
conduct and evaluate salinity readings, and provide a report of findings for areas near the Project's
storm water outfalls as requested by the Miami Dade County Department of Environmental Resources
Management (DERM) for the Class II Permit. Amendment No. 6 would increase the contract value by
$3,522 and Amendment No. 7 would increase the contract value by an additional $7,251, for a total
contract value of $1,568,477.
Amendment No. 8 to the Agreement is currently being processed for the City Manager's administrative
approval. Amendment No. 8 provides to design, permit, and provide bidding and construction phase
assistance for the irrigation system for the Biscayne Point Neighborhood Improvements Project which
includes the Stillwater, Biscayne Point, and Biscayne Beach sub-neighborhoods. Amendment No. 8
would increase the Consultant's total contract value by a not-to-exceed amount of $24,974, for a total
contract value of $1,593,451.
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE
ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND THE ClTY CLERK TO EXECUTE
AMENDMENT NO. 9 TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE ClTY
AND EAC CONSULTING, INC., DATED JULY 27, 2005, FOR
PROFESSIONAL ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING SERVICES
PURSUANT TO REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS NO. 42-03/04
FOR THE BISCAYNE POINT NEIGHBORHOOD RIGHT-OF-WAY
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT; SAID AMENDMENT FOR VALUE
ENGINEERING SERVICES, ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION
ADMINISTRATION SERVICES, AND RESIDENT PROJECT
REPRESENTATION (RPR) SERVICES (FOR A PERIOD OF UP TO
TWENTY-FOUR MONTHS), IN THE NEGOTIATED LUMP SUM
AMOUNT OF $358,684, PLUS AN ADDITIONAL NOT-TO-EXCEED
AMOUNT OF $9,246 FOR REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES, FOR A
TOTAL NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $367,930; WlTH
PREVIOUSLY APPROPRIATED FUNDING, IN THE AMOUNT OF
$97,362, FROM FUND 376, AND FUNDING, IN THE AMOUNT OF
$90,648, FROM FUND 420; AND FURTHER APPROPRIATING
FUNDING, IN THE AMOUNT OF $179,920, FROM FUND 429, STORM
WATER PROJECTS LINE OF CREDIT, WlTH SUCH FUNDS TO BE
REPAID FROM PROPOSED FUTURE STORM WATER BONDS.
WHEREAS, on July 27, 2005, the Mayor and City Commission adopted
Resolution No. 2005-25973, approving and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to
execute an Agreement with EAC Consulting Inc. (Consultant), for Professional
Architectural and Engineering Services for the Biscayne Point Neighborhood Right-
of-Way (ROW) Improvement Project (the Project); and
WHEREAS, the Agreement provides for the planning, design, bidding and
award, construction administration, and reimbursables for the Project; and
WHEREAS, the Agreement was executed in the amount of $1 ,I 86,807; and
WHEREAS, on March 6, 2006, the Mayor and City Commission approved
Resolution No. 2006-261 33, approving Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement, in the
amount of $129,325, for professional services for the design, permitting and
construction of an additional 11,000 linear feet of water main infrastructure required
by the City's Public Works Department; and
WHEREAS, on January 6,2009, Amendment No. 2 to the Agreement was
administratively approved by the City Manager, in the amount of $24,924, for
additional storm water system modeling services; and
WHEREAS, on January 28,2009, the Mayor and City Commission approved
Resolution No. 2009-26979, approving Amendment No. 3 to the Agreement, in the
amount of $27,000, for additional professional services for the inclusion of
Pavement Markings and Signage drawings which were not included in the original
design; and
WHEREAS, on September 9,2009, the Mayor and City Commission adopted
Resolution No. 2009-27191, modifying the approved Basis of Design Report
(BODR) to change the design of Stillwater Drive, the 77' Street entryway, provide
improvements to the Tatum Waterway Bridge, and provide additional neighborhood
signage; and
WHEREAS, on December 9,2009, the Mayor and City Commission approved
Resolution No. 2009-27257, approving Amendment No. 4 to the Agreement, in the
amount of $1 13,984, for additional professional services to design storm water
pump stations; and
WHEREAS, on December 9, 2009, the Mayor and City Commission also
approved Resolution No. 2009-27258, approving Amendment No. 5 to the
Agreement, in the amount of $75,664, for additional design and construction
administration services for the redesign of Stillwater Drive (as per the revised BODR
requirements addressed in Resolution No. 2009-27191); and
WHEREAS, Amendment No. 6 is currently being processed for the City
Manager's administrative approval, in the amount of $3,522, for additional services
to investigate, assess, and recommend alternative swale reinforcement
methodologies to be utilized along Stillwater Drive; and
WHEREAS, Amendment No. 7 is currently being processed for the City
Manager's administrative approval, in the amount of $7,251, for additional services
to conduct an assessment of existing seagrasses, conduct and evaluate salinity
readings, and provide a report of findings for areas near the Project's storm water
outfalls as requested by the Miami-Dade County Department of Environmental
Resources Management (DERM) for the Class II Permit; and
WHEREAS, Amendment No. 8 is currently being processed for the City
Manager's administrative approval, in the amount of $24,974, for additional services
to provide the design and construction administration services for the Project's
irrigation design as requested by the City's Parks and Recreation Department; and
WHEREAS, the following Amendment No. 9, in the amount of $367,930, is
for value engineering services, additional construction administration services, and
Resident Project Representation (RPR) services for a period of up to twenty-four
(24) months.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND ClTY
COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that the Mayor and
City Commission hereby approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute
Amendment No. 9 to the Agreement between the City and EAC Consulting, Inc.,
dated July 27, 2005, for Professional Architectural and Engineering Services
pursuant to Request for Qualifications No. 42-03/04 for the Biscayne Point
Neighborhood Right-of-way Improvement Project; said Amendment for value
engineering services, additional construction administration services, and Resident
Project Representation (RPR) services (for a period of up to twenty-four (24)
months), in the lump sum amount of $358,684, plus an additional not-to-exceed
amount of $9,246 for reimbursable expenses, for a total not-to-exceed amount of
$367,930; with previously appropriated funding, in the amount of $97,362, from
Fund 376, and funding, in the amount of $90,648, from Fund 420; and further
appropriating funding, in the amount of $179,920, from Fund 429, Storm Water
Projects Line of Credit, with such funds to be repaid from proposed future storm
water bonds.
PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 201 1.
ATTEST:
ROBERT H. PARCHER, CITY CLERK MATT1 HERREA BOWER, MAYOR
JMGlDBlFV
T:\AGENDA\2011\4-13-1 I\Biscayne Point - EAC Amendment No. 9\Biscayne Point - EAC Amendment No. 9 - RESO.doc
APPROVED AS TO
FORM & LANGUAGE
& FOR EXECUTION
AMENDMENT NO. 9
TO THE PROFESSIONAL ARCHITECTURAL
AND ENGINEERING (AIE) SERVICES AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA
AND
EAC CONSULTING, INC.
DATED JULY 27,2005
FOR THE PROVISION OF
PROFESSIONAL ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR THE BISCAYNE
POINT RIGHT-OF-WAY INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT.
This Amendment No. 9 to the above referenced Agreement is made and entered this day of
,201 1, by and between the CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, a municipal corporation existing
under the laws of the State of Florida, having its principal offices at 1700 Convention Center Drive,
Miami Beach, Florida 331 39 (hereinafter referred to as the City), and EAC Consulting, Inc. a Florida
Corporation, having its principal office at 81 5 NW 57th Avenue, Suite 402, Miami, Florida, 33126
(hereinafter referred to as the Consultant).
RECITALS:
WHEREAS, on July 27,2005, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No. 2005-
25973, approving and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute an Agreement with the
Consultant, for Professional Architectural and Engineering Services for the Biscayne Point
Neighborhood Right-of-way (ROW) Improvement Project (the Project); and
WHEREAS, the Agreement provides for the planning, design, bidding and award,
construction administration, and reimbursables for the Project; and
WHEREAS, the Agreement was executed in the amount of $1,186,807; and
WHEREAS, on March 6,2006, the Mayor and City Commission approved Resolution No.
2006-26133, approving Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement, in the amount of $129,325, for
professional services for the design, permitting and construction of an additional 1 1,000 linear feet
of water main infrastructure required by the City's Public Works Department; and
WHEREAS, on January 6,2009, Amendment No. 2 to the Agreement was approved, in the
amount of $24,924, for additional storm water system modeling services; and
WHEREAS, on January 28,2009, the Mayor and City Commission approved Resolution No.
2009-26979, approving Amendment No. 3 to the Agreement, in the amount of $27,000, for additional
professional services for the inclusion of Pavement Markings and Signage drawings which were not
included in the original design; and
WHEREAS, on September 9,2009, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No.
2009-27191, modifyin! the approved Basis of Design Report (BODR) to change the design of
Stillwater Drive, the 77 Street entryway, provide improvements to the Tatum Waterway Bridge, and
provide additional neighborhood signage; and
Biscayne Point Amendment No. 9
Page 2 of 4
WHEREAS, on December 9,2009, the Mayor and City Commission approved Resolution No.
2009-27257, approving Amendment No. 4 to the Agreement, in the amount of $1 13,984, for
additional professional services to design storm water pump stations; and
WHEREAS, on December 9, 2009, the Mayor and City Commission also approved
Resolution No. 2009-27258, approving Amendment No. 5 to the Agreement, in the amount of
$75,664, for additional design and construction administration services for the redesign of Stillwater
Drive (as per the revised BODR requirements addressed in Resolution No. 2009-271 91); and
WHEREAS, Amendment No. 6 is currently being processed for the City Manager's
administrative approval, in the amount of $3,522, for additional services to investigate, assess, and
recommend alternative swale reinforcement methodologies to be utilized along Stillwater Drive; and
WHEREAS, Amendment No. 7 is currently being processed for the City Manager's
administrative approval, in the amount of $7,251, for additional services to conduct an assessment
of existing seagrasses, conduct and evaluate salinity readings, and provide a report of findings for
areas near the Project's storm water outfalls as requested by the Miami-Dade County Department of
Environmental Resources Management (DERM) for the Class 11 Permit; and
WHEREAS, Amendment No. 8 is currently being processed for the City Manager's
administrative approval, in the amount of $24,974, for additional services to provide the design and
construction administration services for the Project's irrigation design as requested by the City's
Parks and Recreation Department; and
WHEREAS, the following Amendment No. 9, in the amount of $367,930, is for value
engineering services, additional construction administration services, and Resident Project
Representation (RPR) services for a period of up to twenty-four months.
1. ABOVE RECITALS
The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated as a part of this Amendment
No. 9.
2. MODIFICATIONS
The Agreement is amended to include the additional terms and conditions outlined in Exhibit
"A and the additional professional services for the Project to provide value engineering
services, additional construction administration services, and Resident Project
Representation (RPR) services for a period of up to twenty-four months for the Project, as
described in EAC's proposal, dated March 2, 2011, attached as Exhibit "B" to this
Amendment.
3. OTHER PROVISIONS
All other provisions of the Agreement remain unchanged.
Biscayne Point Amendment No. 9
Page 3 of 4
4. RATIFICATION
The City and Consultant ratify the terms of the Agreement, as per this Amendment No. 9.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment No. 9, to be
executed in their names by their duly authorized officials as of the date first set forth above.
ATTEST: CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
City Clerk
Robert Parcher
ATTEST:
Mayor
Matti Herrera Bower
CONSULTANT:
EAC CONSULTING, INC.
Secretary:
Print Name
President
Print Name
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A
Exhibit B
EXHIBIT A
A. SCOPE OF SERVICES
SCHEDULE A, "Scope of Services", of the PROFESSIONAL ARCHITECTURAL AND
ENGINEERING (AIE) SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
(CITY) AND EAC CONSULTING, INC. (EAC), dated July 27,2005, is amended as follows:
ADD the following under TASK 5 -ADDITIONAL SERVICES
SUBTASK 5.09 - VALUE ENGINEERING, ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION
ADMINISTRATION, AND RESIDENT PROJECT REPRESENTATIVE (RPR) SERVICES
Subtask 5.09.1 - Value Engineering Services: These additional services shall be as
delineated in Task 1 of attached Exhibit B.
Subtask 5.09.2 - Additional Construction Administration Services: These additional
services shall be as delineated in Task 2 of attached Exhibit B.
Subtask 5.09.3 - Resident Proiect Re~resentative (RPR) Services (20 months): These
additional services shall be as delineated in Task 3 of attached Exhibit B.
Subtask 5.09.4 -Additional RPR Services (4 months): These additional services shall be as
delineated in Task 4 of attached Exhibit B.
B. TIME OF COMPLETION
Additional design services contemplated by this Amendment shall be provided during the
construction of the project and shall be completed once the project has been closed out.
C. PAYMENT AND COMPENSATION
The method of calculating fees for the aforementioned AIE additional services shall be as
outlined in Article 7 of the Agreement.
Original Contract Value $1 ,I 86,807
Amendment No. 1 $129,325
Amendment No. 2 $24,924
Amendment No. 3 $27,000
Amendment No. 4 $1 13,984
Amendment No. 5 $75,664
Amendment No. 6 $3,522
Amendment No. 7 $7,251
Amendment No. 8 $24,974
Amendment No. 9 $367,930
Total Revised Contract Value: $1,961,381
March 2,201 1
Revised Ma& 30.201 1
EAC Consulting, inc.
Janette Fernandez-Arencibia, P.E.
Capital Projects Coordinator
City of Miami Beach - Capital Improvements Office
1700 Convention Center Drive
Miami Beach, FL 33139
Re: Biscayne Point Neighborhood Infrastructure improvements Praject - Supplemental Professional Past Design Services
Dear Ms. Arencibia:
Pursuant to discussions with our staff relating to post design services and additional miscellaneous fasks as
required to supplement the construction contract package, please find as follows anticipated tasks and
corresponding fee proposalfs) required $0 perform the requisite work* Please note that this tasks and services
are not included in our current original scope of servicesfcontract with the City of Miami Beach.
Our services on this supplemental scope of services will reqhtire the following:
Task f - 'Value Engineetinn Coordination, Rwiew, Revisions and Permiang: This service includes all
the civil engineering analyses, assessment, verification and investigatory tasks required to ascertain the
merit and benefits of the value engineering process engaged prior to the commencement of construction
activities. We envision that at the conclusion of the value engineering process, EAC wilt provide
recommendafions to the City regarding the decisions attained through the process.
Task 2 - CA Sewices Relating Pump Stations Design: This includes standard construction
administrations services related to the pump stations designed for the storm water management for Priority
Basinl42. The pump stations work was not included in the base scopelmntract and the design for the
stations was approved as a supplemental Yesign onlyH service in December 2009. Due to upcoming
construction activities and the extent of work required to construct the stations, it is recommended that
adequate construdion administmtion services be performed by EAC Consuling, Inc as Engineer of Record.
Task 3 - Full Time RPR Services far 20 months Construction Dura'ation: This project's construction
must be extremely sensitive to the concerns of the residents of the Neighborhood. Undefstanding the
history of the project and knowledge of decisions directions taken as part of the design process will be key
to ensuring that the construction occurs seamlessly with minimum impact to the concerns af the residents.
Through the provision of Resident Project Representative (RPRf services on the project, EAC will be able to
provide the City with the cantinuity that the project deserves between the design phase and the construction
phase. The RPR's responsibitities shall include the following:
- Be present at the construction site daily during the construction phase of the project,
- Provide detailed Daily, Neekly and Monthly reports to the CityfClP as it relates to mnstruction
activities, progress, incidents and issues that have occurred on the construction site. - Attend all construction praject meetings, both formal and informal between the successful
contractor and the City. These meetings wit1 occur informally on a weekly basis, and formally on a
biweekly basis. They will serve as forums to discuss any schedule and or cost concerns, as to
resolve problems before they become critical.
- Review and familiarize himselffherself with the Construction Schedule. Monitor Construction
Schedule and ensure adherence to schedule. The contractor will be required to submit a detailed
schedule to the RPR a$ the pre construction meeting, This schedule wilt be reviewed and approved
by the CityiClP and RPR. This schedule will be updated in by weekly basis. The RPR will be
responsible for reviewing the contactots schedule to confirm accuracy of the work activities
815 NW 57 Avenue, Suite 1102 IMitlmi, R 33126 IPhone: 305.264-2557 8Fax: 305.2644363 t wi.eacconsult.mm #GA# 7011
completed. Analysis of the contractor schedule will be on the basis of planned versus actual costs
for the month and contract to date. - The RPR will continuously review the contactor's performance, report status, check for variance or
delays and recommend work around and adjustment that can be initiated to get the contractor back
on schedule and or within budget.
- Quality control during construction will be the responsibility of the contractor but oversight and
ensuring the Contractor complies with applicable jurisdictional construction standards including
proper mandatory protocols will be enforced on the City's behalf by the RPR.
- The RPR will review and monitor the Contractor's adherence to an acceptable quality control
program submitted by the Contractor prior to commencement d construction. This program will
describe, in detait, the contacbis quality control, organization, procedures, documentation and
processes for each phase of the work, for which the contractor to ensure compliance with the
approved quality control plan. - The RPR wifl inspect both work in progress and compleied work on a daily bases. In addition to
assuring quality workmanship in accordance with the contract documents, the RPR wifl record
quantity of work place, and will provide daily documentation of construction operations and
activities - The RPR will complete all necessary close out and construction completion forms and
documenta%on in coordination with CitylCIP for the project. - The RPR will liaise daily or periodically with the CityfClP and reporl on concerns as it relates to the
constmction effart and activities.
Task 4 - Odional Service - Additional RPR Services for 4 months Construction Duratim: As stated
previously this project's construction must be extremely sensitive to the concerns of the residents of the
Neighborhood. Although the project constmction phase has been estimated to be 20 months, there may be
a need to extend the construction duration due to unforeseen reasons, Accordingfy, we have included in
this proposal the need to extend RPR services for additional 4 months of construction. The services to be
provided as part of %the RPR work are as previously outlined,
As noted previously, these tasks detailed above constitute a variance from the established Basis of Design fi.e.
BODR) I contractual obligations of EAC Consulting, Inc and as such, our proposal to undertake the requisite
work is consistent with the Citfs policies to compensate for work done or to be performed in addition to the
established Basic Scope of Services. Please find attached our fee proposal tabufation consistent with the scope
of work itemized above.
Please forward to us amendment to out current contract and Notice-to-Proceed (NTP) as we will require these
documefits prior to commencing andlor finalizing this scope of services.
c.c: File
AMMENDMENT No.9 SCHEDULE B CITY OF MIAMI BEACH RIGHT OF WAY INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM A-E CONSULTANT CONSULTANTS COMPENSATION FEE SCHEDULE BISCAYNE POINT NEIGHBORHOOD M SMPE OFSERYICESANO CONTRACTS SUB-TOTAL O.D.C. FEE ESTIMATE TOTAL HOURS TOTAL FEE ESTIMATE Hourly Sitling Rater IWI~WQ~~~Y ~ltyol~11~81.rh~~.~~.~) 120 Sl50.W 32 1115.M 148 182.W 94 S72.W 64 555.W 4.460 570.W 88 S35.W 0 S150.W 0 1W.W 0 182.00 W5.W IJ5.W ----------- - . -- 0 4,686 ppp $9,246 $367,930 - -
A~MENDMENT NO, SCHEDULE B CITY OF MIAMI BEACH 'OF WAY INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM A-E CONSUL CONSULTA~T'S COMPENSATION FEE SCHEDULE ~lscAvt4~ POIM NEIGHBORHOOD
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
A Resolution Authorizing The Donation Of Three (3) Ford Crown Victoria Police Pursuit Vehicles In "As Is"
Condition To The Miami-Dade College School Of Justice.
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
( Increase resident ratings of Public Safety services. I
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): Safety across the City was rated by residents as
one of the most important areas affecting their quality of life and as one of the changes that would make
Miami Beach a better place to live.
Issue:
Shall the Mayor and City Commission adopt the Resolution authorizing the donation of three (3) Ford
Crown Victoria police pursuit vehicles in "as is" condition to the Miami-Dade College School of Justice?
Item SummarylRecommendation:
The City wishes to donate three (3) Police pursuit vehicles pursuant to City of Miami Beach Ordinance No.
2002-3372, adopted on the lgth day of June 2002, regarding donations of surplus stock. The three (3)
Police pursuit vehicles are being donated to the Miami-Dade College School of Justice to offset costs
associated with the City's use of its police driving range. The three (3) vehicles to be donated were
selected from vehicles already replaced by three (3) 201 1 Ford Crown Victoria police pursuit vehicles. The
estimated surplus value of each vehicle to be donated is $3,650.00 or a total of $10,950.00.
1 The Administration recommends adopting the Resolution. I
Advisory Board Recommendation:
NIA
Financial Information:
I I I
Financial Impact Summary:
u 1 OBPl
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking:
Andrew E. Terpak
Account Source of
Funds:
l-----l
I I
Total (
AGENDA ETEM C7f
DATE 4-/3-//
1
2
Amount
MIAMIBEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33 139, www.miamibeachfllgov
COMMlSSlON MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
DATE: April 13, 201 1
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF
MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE DONATION OF THREE (3)
FORD CROWN VICTORIA POLICE PURSUIT VEHICLES IN "AS IS"
CONDITION TO THE MIAMI-DADE COLLEGE SCHOOL OF JUSTICE.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
ANALYSIS
The Administration is recommending that the City Commission approve the donation of
three (3) Police pursuit vehicles pursuant to City of Miami Beach Ordinance No. 2002-3372,
adopted on the lgth day of June 2002, regarding donations of surplus stock. The three (3)
Police pursuit vehicles are being donated to the Miami-Dade College School of Justice
(MDC) to offset costs associated with the City's use of MDC's police driving range. The
City's use of the police driving range will include, but not limited to, eight to thirteen sessions
per year to train Miami Beach Police personnel one day per year, the Driver Improvement
School, three sessions per year for the Citizens Police Academy program. The estimated
annual cost of the driving range program is $26,595.00.
In January of 2000, the City Commission began the donation of Police pursuit vehicles to the
Southeast Florida Institute of Criminal Justice now known as the Miami-Dade College
School of Justice. The City's last vehicle donation to the MDC School of Justice was in 2007.
The MDC School of Justice is a "Not for Profit" organization which provides driver training to
police agencies. Municipalities that do not donate vehicles to the MDC School of Justice
must pay full costs for the use of the driving range. Currently the City of Miami Beach is the
only municipality to donate vehicles and receives driving range time at no cost.
The City historically has donated vehicles every two (2) or three (3) years to the MDC
College School of Justice. In this case the first year benefit of the donation is estimated to
be valued at $1 5,645.00, in subsequent years the benefit to the City would be estimated at
$26,595.00.
The three (3) vehicles to be donated were selected from the vehicles that have already been
replaced with three (3) 201 1 Ford Crown Victoria Police pursuit vehicles. The estimated
surplus value of each vehicle is $3,650.00 or a total of $10,950.00, based on the average
surplus value received at auction.
Commission Memorandum
April 13, 2010
Page 2
The City is donating to the MDC School of Justice, three (3) Ford Crown Victoria Police
pursuit vehicles in "as is" condition. The City makes no representation as to the condition of
the vehicles, no warranties, expressed or implied, and assumes no responsibility.
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends that the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami
Beach, Florida, adopt the Resolution to authorize the donation of three (3) Ford Crown
Victoria Police pursuit vehicles to the Miami-Dade College School of Justice.
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE DONATION OF THREE
(3) FORD CROWN VICTORIA POLICE PURSUIT VEHICLES IN "AS IS"
CONDITION TO THE MIAMI-DADE COLLEGE SCHOOL OF JUSTICE.
WHEREAS, the City wishes to donate three (3) Ford Crown Victoria Police pursuit
vehicles, with an estimated total value of $10,950.00, in "as is" condition to the Miami-Dade
College School of Justice; and
WHEREAS, no funds are required from the City for the donation of these vehicles;
and
WHEREAS, this donation is made in "as is" condition, and the City makes no
representation as to the condition of the vehicles, and no warranties, expressed or implied,
and assumes no responsibility for said vehicles.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that the City herein donates
three (3) Ford Crown Victoria Police pursuit vehicles to the Miami-Dade College School of
Justice; said donation in "as is" condition, with no warranties, expressed or implied, and
with the City assuming no further responsibility for same.
PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 2011.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO
FORM & LANGUAGE
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
A Resolution authorizing the City to enter into agreements for the City's voluntary benefits program pursuant to the RFP
issued by Gallagher Benefit Services, the City's consultant of record, and referring the discussion of a possible new
voluntary benefit to be offered to employees to the Finance and Citywide Projects Committee.
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Control costs of payroll including salary and fringe benefits
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.):
1. 2007 Internal Support Functions Survey
Overall satisfaction of benefits administration was rated 75.6% as excellent or good combined
11. 2008 Environmental Scan
Motivated and Skilled Workforce turnover rates = 13.86% for 2007 vs. 10.7% for 2006
Issue:
Should the City enter into individual agreements to provide employee fully funded voluntary benefit programswith Preferred
Legal Plan and U.S. Legal, Trustmark and Colonia Life &Accident (through brokers Citrin Financial and Pearl Benefit Group)
and work with voluntary benefit carriers to select one (1) independent enrollment firm to provide annual enrollment support
and customized printed enrollment communication materials, all at no cost to the City as all the voluntary benefit programs
are fully funded by employees. In addition, referring the discussion of a possible new voluntary benefit to be offered to
employees to the Finance and Citywide Projects Committee.
Item SummarylRecommendation:
1 The Citv currentlv provides emplovees access to a voluntary benefit program administered by a broker (Comprehensive I
~ompahies), who has been providhg these benefits since 1 &I. ~t the ~ity's direction, ~allagher Benefits Services issued
RFP No. 11-003 which included a request for enrollment support to be provided by an independent enrollment firm at no
cost to the City. The RFP was sent to individual voluntary benefit carriers and benefit brokers as the Administration wanted
to consider all options available. The City received responses from eight (8) individual voluntary plan providers and two (2)
brokers, (the brokers submitted a joint response).
As a result of this RFP, Gallagher Benefits Services recommended the City enter into agreements for a voluntary benefit
program, fully funded by employee contributions, with Preferred Legal Plan and U.S. Legal for a discount legal plan;
Trustmark for accident, critical illness and universal life plans; and Colonial Life &Accident Insurance Company (through
Citrin Financial and Pearl Benefit Group) for a hospital indemnity plan; with the Administration working directly with the
selected vendors to provide annual enrollment support and customized, printed benefit communication materials for all of
the City's benefit programs at no cost to the City.
In addition, referring the discussion of a possible new voluntary benefit to be offered to employees to the Finance and
Citywide Projects Committee for review and discussion.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
1 NIA I
u 1 3 1 I
OBPl Total I
Financial Impact Summary:
No Fiscal Impact. The voluntary benefit programs are fully funded through employee contributions.
Financial Information:
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking:
Sue Radig, Human Resources Benefits Administrator I
Source of
Funds: m
AGEhlDA ITEM C7 G
DATE Y-/3-ll,
1
2
Amount
NIA
Account
MIAMIBEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33 139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
DATE: April 13, 201 1
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF
MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE ClTY ADMINISTRATION TO
ENTER INTO AGREEMENTS FOR THE CITY'S VOLUNTARY BENEFITS
PROGRAM PURSUANT TO THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS ISSUED BY
GALLAGHER BENEFIT SERVICES, INC., THE CITY'S CONSULTANT OF
RECORD, AND REFERRING THE DISCUSSION OF A NEW VOLUNTARY
BENEFIT TO THE FINANCE AND CITYWIDE PROJECTS COMMITTEE.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution and refer the discussion of a new voluntary benefit to the Finance and
Citywide Projects Committee.
BACKGROUND
The City currently provides employees access to a voluntary benefit program. These voluntary
benefits include: universal life insurance, disability income insurance, critical life insurance, lump
sum cancer insurance and a legal services plan. As these voluntary benefits are fully-funded by
employee contributions, the City does not incur any costs related to these plans.
The voluntary benefit plan is administered by a broker, Comprehensive Companies, who has
been providing these services to the City since 1991. The City provides the broker with the
pertinent employee information to facilitate the enrollment, processes the employee deductions,
provides monthly premium payment and billing audits for the carrier, processes the employee's
requests to terminate coverage and facilitates problem resolution between the employee and
the plan through the broker. These voluntary benefits are currently only available to all full-time
employees working at least thirty (30) hours a week.
In order to provide employees with the most current voluntary benefit programs and to review all
options available, the Administration worked with Gallagher Benefits Services (Gallagher), the
City's consultant of record, to issue their Request for Proposals (RFP) No. 10-2591 on May 8,
2009. In addition, since the City changed from fully-insured to self-insured medical and dental
plans on January 1, 2009, and the agreements for both the medical and dental plans were to
expire on December 31, 2009, Gallagher also issued their Group Employee Benefits RFP
No.10-2589 at the same time for the City's self-funded medical and dental plans and its fully-
insured life insurance plan. These Voluntary Benefits and the Group Employee Benefits RFPs
provided the Administration the opportunity to review all of the benefit options available for all
the plan offerings and determine the plans that provided the best coverage at the lowest or most
competitive premium rates.
April 13,201 1 City Commission Meeting
Selection of Voluntary Benefits Program
Page 2 of 10
The Administration presented certain recommendations on voluntary benefits in the past. Given
the questions raised and the fact that the City was converting its carriers and plan options for
the City's medical, dental and life insurance plans, it was necessary to require all benefit eligible
employees and retirees to complete the appropriate enrollment forms for the plan year that
would begin on January 1, 2010 during the annual open enrollment that began in early
November 2009. In order to prepare for the annual open enrollment and include all relevant
information, it was impractical and untimely to make similar changes to the voluntary benefits
program at that time. As such, the City remained with the current voluntary benefits program
given that there would not be sufficient time to select the possible new providers before the
open enrollment period for the 2010 plan year. Given that the voluntary benefits RFP
responses were outdated after the 2010 plan year began, Gallagher reissued a new RFP (No.
11-003) on June 23, 2010 for the City's voluntary benefit program. This RFP was issued due to
the possibility that premiums or the plan benefits had changed.
Regardless of any changes that may occur with the current voluntary benefits, employees with
coverage in one or more of the voluntary benefit plans options currently provided by
Comprehensive Companies may continue their coverage under that plan. In addition, these
employees will be provided the opportunity to elect additional voluntary benefit programs from
the new carriers andlor brokers. Their coverage under the current voluntary benefit plans
provided by Comprehensive Companies will continue until such time the employee notifies the
Human Resources Department of their intent to cancel their coverage.
ANALYSIS
As referenced before, the Administration's decision to request an RFP for its voluntary benefits
program was facilitated by the changes in the City's core group health benefit plans that include
health, dental, vision, life and the new short-term disability, long-term disability, employee
supplemental and dependent life insurance plans, all of which became effective with the plan
year that began January I, 2010. In addition, the Administration was looking at ways to provide
its part-time work affordable healthcare options.
The current process with Comprehensive Companies does not provide the City with the ability
to enroll an employee, determine plan costs, or explain the coverage with the employee as this
information is not provided to the City. The City provides a monthly file to the broker indicating
eligibility information of all newly hired employees, those newly eligible and those employees
requesting coverage information or changes to their current coverage. Enrollment is conducted
on a time schedule determined by the broker. Plan offerings are determined by the broker and
presented to the City for approval. Information regarding new plan offerings or enhancements
to current plan offers from the voluntary benefits carriers utilized by the broker is not shared with
the City. Should the City discover a discrepancy in the billing or plan coverage, the broker must
be contacted to resolve the issue with the plan. This requires the City to explain the issue to the
broker, or the broker's representative, who in turn will contact the plan representative to relay
the issue to the plan for resolution. This resolution is then shared with the broker, or broker
representative, who then shares the information with the City. In some cases, the City has had
issues that take weeks to resolve and may impact an employee's pay, should a contribution
amount be incorrect. In addition, should the City receive numerous employee complaints that
remain unresolved, the City has no recourse with the plan. The extra "layer" of plan
management by a broker provides no real value to the employees or the City.
April 13,201 1 City Commission Meeting
Selection of Voluntary Benefits Program
Page 3 of 10
Additionally, the broker is provided a commission by the individual voluntary benefit plan carriers
to sell their plans to the City employees. The City does not have any input as to the voluntary
benefit plan carrier, the benefit provided by the plan or the cost of the plan. In addition the City
receives no remuneration for providing access to City employees during business hours, or the
City's collection of the premium contributions from the employee's payroll check and the
monthly payment to the voluntary benefit plan carriers for the employee premiums collected.
An option in lieu of having a broker provide these voluntary benefit plans is to have direct
agreements with the voluntary benefit carriers themselves, which, when possible, is the
recommendation being made by Gallagher. Direct agreements with the various voluntary benefit
carriers would provide City employees with the opportunity to consider all the benefits available
to them during their initial enrollment period, during the plan year should a lifestyle change occur
and at annual enrollment. As an added benefit in having direct agreements with the various
voluntary benefit carriers, the City will no longer need to share the employee's personal
information, such as social security numbers, salary, and birthdates with a third party, as
information will be sent through secure processes directly to the carrier.
In addition, direct agreements afford the City a notice by the carriers of any plan enhancements
or new plans complementing its existing offerings, direct contact with the plan's billing
representative should there be an issue with the billing process, and contact with plan
representatives addressing discrepancies in coverage or issues with employee claims. This
direct contact eliminates an additional layer of plan management through a broker, providing
timely, accurate resolutions of discrepancies and employee issues. Also, should the plan not
provide the services indicated in their agreement with the City, the City can terminate the
agreement at anytime, which is not the case if a broker is involved.
Included in the RFP was a request indicating that the proposed premiums should exclude all
commission fees as the City nor Gallagher can accept commission payments from the carrier
for any employee enrollment.
Gallagher received eight (8) responses to the voluntary benefits RFP. These responses
included eight (8) individual carriers and two (2) insurance brokers, Citrin Financial and Pearl
Benefit Group, who collaborated and submitted one joint proposal. The incumbent broker,
Comprehensive Companies, did not submit a response. Attachment A includes a copy of the
letter submitted by Gallagher listing their recommendations.
The voluntary benefit plans being considered are all fully-insured and, as required by the state,
are filed with the Florida lnsurance Commission. When a benefit plan is filed for approval by the
Florida lnsurance Commission by an insurance carrier, the filing must include detailed
information regarding the benefit coverage the plan will provide, cost of providing the indicated
coverage, any commission fees to be paid to a broker or consultant and the premium cost.
Once a plan is approved by the lnsurance Commission, the carrier cannot make any changes to
the coverage, commission fees or premiums without filing the change with the lnsurance
Commission for their review and subsequent approval or denial. All of the voluntary benefit
carriers responding to Gallagher's RFP are for fully-insured plans filed in the state of Florida and
therefore, the premiums associated with each plan include commission fees. These
commission fees which are included in the premium costs proposed cannot be removed. Given
that the City nor Gallagher can accept these commission payments, Gallagher has
recommended that the City consider utilizing these commission payments to help offset the cost
of the City's management of the plan, including their enrollment, communication to employees,
payroll processing, premium billing and the payment of the premiums collected from the
employees payroll check to the individual plans.
April 13,201 1 City Commission Meeting
Selection of Voluntary Benefits Program
Page4of 10
The chart below provides a summary of the types of voluntary benefit plans and the carriers or
brokers who responded to Gallagher's voluntary benefit RFP:
The respondents were asked to provide proposals for the City's voluntary benefits plan,
available to full-time and part-time employees, that would include accident insurance, critical
illness insurance, cancer insurance, universal life and discount legal services. In addition, a
new offering of a hospital indemnity plan was included. As the proposals for critical illness
coverage include coverage for cancer, Gallagher recommended the City not provide duplicate
coverage for just one (1) condition, eliminating a current offering of a cancer policy to the City's
employees. However, the employees currently enrolled in the current cancer policy may
continue their coverage until such time as they notify the Human Resources Department, in
writing, of their intent to terminate the coverage.
The following are summaries of each of the voluntary benefits along with Gallagher's
recommendation:
Broker
(Citrin Financial and
Pearl Benefit Group)
No proposal submitted
Colonial Life & Accident lnsurance
Company
Colonial Life & Accident lnsurance
Company
Colonial Life & Accident Insurance
Company
Colonial Life & Accident lnsurance
Company
Plan
Discount Legal
Accident Plan
Critical Illness
Hospital
Indemnity
Universal Life
Lenal Services
Individual Carrier
ARAG
Fringe Benefit Management (FBMC)
Hyatt Legal Plan
Preferred Legal Plan
U.S. Legal Services (incumbent)
Fringe Benefit Management (FBMC)
Humana
Trustmark
Unum
o Fringe Benefit Management (FBMC)
Humana
Trustmark
Unum
No proposal submitted
Fringe Benefit Management (FBMC)
Humana
Trustmark
Unum
Group legal plans provide employees with access to discounted personal legal services,
including, but not limited to, divorce, traffic tickets, real estate, wills, bankruptcy, unlimited free
legal advice by telephone, free review of legal documents and free face-to-face initial
consultations with attorneys, who will answer both general and specific questions regarding all
legal issues. The plan comparison below identifies the legal service proposals received and
Gallagher's recommendation:
April 13,201 1 City Commission Meeting
Selection of Voluntary Benefits Program
Page 5 of 10
*The ARAG plan was proposed both individually and through FBMC. As both proposals provided
identical benefits and premium costs, they are represented in the same column in this comparison.
April 13, 201 1 City Commission Meeting
Selection of Voluntary Benefits Program
Page 6 of 10
Accident Insurance
Accident lnsurance provides benefits in the event of covered injuries that occur either at work or
outside the work place. Benefits are paid directly to the participant to help offset their
unexpected medical costs and lost wages. The plan also includes a daily benefit for
hospitalization because of illness. The plan is portable, meaning the employee may continue
coverage after leaving the City by paying their premiums directly to the carrier. The following
identifies the proposals for an accident insurance policy that were received and Gallagher's
recommendation:
April 13,201 1 City Commission Meeting
Selection of Voluntary Benefits Program
Page7of 10
Critical Illness
Critical Illness coverage offers financial assistance in the event of a serious illness, such as a
heart attack or stroke. The plan also includes coverage for cancer. Benefits are paid directly to
the participant to help offset the unexpected medical costs and lost wages. The plan is
portable, meaning the employee may continue coverage after leaving the City by paying their
premiums directly to the carrier. The following identifies the proposals for a critical illness policy
that were received and Gallagher's recommendation:
April 13,201 1 City Commission Meeting
Selection of Voluntary Benefits Program
Page 8 of 10
Universal Life
Universal Life coverage offers flexible premiums and the ability to increase or decrease the
benefit as needs change. The level of coverage is selected by the employee. In addition, the
policy earns cash value that may be withdrawn at a future date. The premium cost is based on
the amount of coverage elected. The plan is portable, meaning the employee may continue
coverage after leaving the City by paying their premiums directly to the carrier. The following
identifies the proposals for a universal life policy that were received and Gallagher's
recommendation:
April 13, 201 1 City Commission Meeting
Selection of Voluntary Benefits Program
Page 9 of 10
Hospital lndemnitv
Hospital Indemnity coverage offers financial assistance in the event of a hospitalization to help
pay for plan deductibles, co-payment and co-insurance, as well as everyday living expenses.
Benefits are paid directly to the participant to help offset the unexpected medical costs and lost
wages. The plan is portable, meaning the employee may continue coverage after leaving the
City by paying their premiums directly to the carrier. The only proposal received was from
Colonial Life & Accident (submitted on behalf of Citrin Financial and Pearl Benefit Group jointly).
Gallagher has recommended the City provide this benefit due to the availability of customized
plans, premiums that do not increase with the employee's age and the financial assistance
provided in the event of a hospitalization. Therefore, Colonial Life & Accident lnsurance
Company is the recommended carrier.
Enrollment Services
As was previously stated, the voluntary benefit plans being considered are all fully-insured and
are filed with the Florida lnsurance Commission. These filings have broker commissions
included in the premium costs. As Gallagher cannot accept these commission payments, it was
suggested that the City consider utilizing these payments, which would otherwise remain with
the carrier if not paid to Gallagher, to offset the cost of benefit enrollment through an
independent enrollment service.
The individual insurance carriers and brokers all responded positively to providing independent
enrollment services though an independent enrollment firm. These enrollment firms have
working relationships with all voluntary plans as well as with the City's core group health plans
(medical, dental, vision, disability and life plans).
The use of an independent enrollment firm reduces the financial impact to the City of the open
enrollment for employees and retirees, deferring the cost of all printed enrollment materials from
the City to the enrollment firm, as well as alleviating City staff time, thus saving the City
additional dollars and staff resources that would have had to be allocated for this effort. The
enrollment firm could provide the City employees and retirees a comprehensive, customized,
multi-page plan brochure explaining all the benefit plans available to them. In addition,
employees would have an opportunity for either face-to-face or telephone enrollments with a
non-City employee enrollment representative who would be knowledgeable in the City's health,
dental, life, disability and voluntary benefit plans. The Administration considers this to be
beneficial to the City as it provides an additional resource in addition to the City's Human
Resources staff for employees and retirees regarding the core and voluntary benefit plans
provided to them by the City.
During the City's annual enrollment process, the enrollment firm would do the following:
Provide written enrollment communication;
o Make available benefit enrollers who are fluent in Spanish and Creole;
o Gather missing dependent information, including social security numbers, for all
dependents, a federal requirement for all group health plans; and
Verify dependent eligibility based on criteria required by the City to guarantee that
coverage is being provided to the employees' true dependents as defined by the
City's eligibility guidelines.
April 13,201 1 City Commission Meeting
Selection of Voluntary Benefits Program
Page 10 of 10
City staff will continue to provide day-to-day enrollment support to employees and retirees, with
the enrollment firm providing complimentary support during the annual enrollment period.
Given that the voluntary benefit carriers can make these enrollment services available, the
Administration would work directly with the selected voluntary benefit plan carriers to select one
(I) enrollment firm to provide enrollment support for the core group health plans and the
voluntary options available to employees and retirees. The services of this one (1) enrollment
firm would be contracted by the voluntary benefit plan carrier(s) at no cost to the City.
CONCLUSION
The Administration has reviewed the recommendations of Gallagher Benefits Services and
recommends awarding the administration of the City's employee funded voluntary benefit
programs as follows:
Legal Plan(s) - (1) Preferred Legal Plans and (2) U.S. Legal Plan (provides employees
with a choice between these two (2) legal plans)
e Universal Life, Critical Illness and Accident Plans - Trustmark
Hospital Indemnity Plan - Colonial Life & Accident Company (Citrin Financial and Pearl
Benefits Group as joint brokers)
The City's Human Resources Department continuously explores other voluntary benefits to offer
employees and retirees (fully funded by those who chose to participate). One voluntary benefit
that the City has recently been made aware of (after the voluntary benefits RFP was issued) is a
voluntary loan program which offers active employees an unsecured micro financed loan
ranging anywhere from $500 to $5,000 with fixed payments capped at twenty percent (20%) of
the employees net take home pay, repaid through payroll deductions with repayment terms up
to two (2) years. As this voluntary benefit is one that some active employees may be interested
in, it is recommended that this item be referred to the City Commission Finance and Citywide
Projects Committee for discussion. As other options become available, the possible inclusion of
those other offerings in the City's voluntary benefit program will also be referred to the City
Commission for discussion.
Attachment
ATTACHMENT A
GALLAGHER BENEFIT SERVICES RECOMMENDATION
G Gallagher Benefit Services, Inc.
A Subsidiary of Arthur J. Gallagl~er pi CO.
April 1,2011
Mr. Ramiro Inguanzo, Director of Human Resources
City of Miami Beach
1700 Convention Center Drive
Miami Beach, Florida 33139
Re: Worksite Benefits Request for Proposals and Analysis
Dear Ramiro,
On behalf of the City of Miami Beach, Arthur 1. Gallagher & Co, prepared a request for proposal for
worksite benefits (voluntary) insurance programs. The objective was to seek out payroll deduction
benefits providing the employees and their dependents with comprehensive, low cost, affordable plans
fully paid by the employees through payroll deduction. In addition, this request for proposal specified
any commission payments made available through these products would be utilized to offset all costs
associated with providing the employees with one-on-one meetings to explain the benefits and features
of all programs offered by the City including the core benefits such as medical, dental, disability and life
benefits in addition to the voluntary benefit programs; Universal life, Critical illness insurance, Accident
lnsurance and legal services.
After reviewing the financial analysis and benefit comparisons, we recommend the following vendors by
product line, the Cancer Benefit has been eliminated because it is included in the Critical Illness Benefit:
Universal Life - Trustmark
- Competitive Rate Structure
- Coverage is portable - Value Added, Affordable Long Term Care Rider
- Lowest cost
e Critical Illness - Trustmark
- No benefit reduction due to age - Increase coverage regardless of health in first 5 years
- Cancer benefit included
- Lowest cost
Accident lnsurance - Trustmark
- Comprehensive Benefits Schedule
- 24 hour coverage
- Competitive rates
One Boca Place
2255 Glades Road, Suite 400 E
Boca Raton, FL 33431
561.995.6706
Fax 561.995.6708
www.ajg.com
e Hospital Indemnity - Colonial
- Customized Plans
- Rates do not increase with age. - Competitive Rates
e Pre-Paid Legal - U.S. Legal Services and Preferred Legal Plan
- Provide employees with plan choice
- Allows for current professional relationships to be maintained while allowing employee
benefit and premium choice
In addition to the above, we recommend the City work directly with the selected vendors to administer
the enrollment of the City's Worksite (voluntary) Benefits. This will allow the City to maximize funds
available via commissions available through these products to offset any and all costs associated with
one-on-one employee meetings and the electronic data enrollment necessary to track employee
elections for payroll deduction purposes. This applies to the 2011 plan year and subsequent open
enrollments.
Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 561-998-6733. Again, we appreciate
the opportunity to work with you and the City of Miami Beach.
Area Vice ~residt
RESOLUTIONS TO BE SUBMITTED
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
I A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH,
FLORIDA, WAIVING, BY 517th THIS VOTE, THE COMPETITIVE BIDDING REQUIREMENT,
FINDING SUCH WAIVER TO BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY, AND APPROVING
AND AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF TEN (10) APPLE iPADs (INCLUDING A SECURITY
SERVER), FOR THE INDIVIDUAL ClTY COMMISSIONERS, ClTY MANAGER, ClTY CLERK,
AND ClTY ATTORNEY, IN THE AMOUNT OF $16,000, THAT WILL ALLOW THE ClTY
COMMISSIONERS TO VIEW AND ANNOTATE THE ClTY COMMISSION AGENDA.
I I
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Improve process through Information Technology.
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.):
Issue: I Shall the Mayor and the City Commission Accept The Resolution? I
ltem SummarylRecommendation:
I 1
In an effort to enhance operational efficiencies while maintaining focus on green initiatives, the City of
Miami Beach Commission has been testing the use of iPad, the electronic tablet created by Apple to
electronically review meeting agenda packets from any location without the need for a hardcopy. The
November 17, 2010 Commission Agenda, ltem R9D referred this item to the Finance and Citywide
Project Committee.
At the Finance and Citywide Projects Committee Meeting of Thursday, January 27, 201 1 a discussion
took place regarding The Shift To iPad From Printed Agenda. The Committee agreed to have
Commissioners test the iPad during the next 30 days and bring back to City Commission if testing was
successful. Commissioners Jorge Exposito and Deede Weithorn have successfully tested the use of the
lPad to replace large binders filled with hundreds of pages of supporting materials which are necessary
for city commission agenda items. The utilization of the iPad significantly reduces the amount of paper
used at City Hall while simultaneously saving tax dollars. An application designed for City Commission
agendas allows users to download bookmark agenda and highlight and write notes on individual
documents. Also, they will have access to their email and calendars as well.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
I I
'inancia1 Information:
Source of Funds: Amount
I
OBPl I Total 1 $16,000
I
Financial Impact Summary:
I I
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking:
Account
lnformation Technology Fund
552 Contingency account
BEACH ,,,
Approved
AGENDA ITEM c 7H
MIAMIBEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33 139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
DATE: April 13, 201 1
SUBJECT A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF
MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, WAIVING, BY 517th THIS VOTE, THE COMPETITIVE
BIDDING REQUIREMENT, FINDING SUCH WAIVER TO BE IN THE BEST
INTEREST OF THE CITY, AND APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE
PURCHASE OF TEN (10) APPLE iPADS INCLUDING A SECURITY SERVER FOR
THE INDIVIDUAL ClTY COMMISSIONERS, ClTY MANAGER, ClTY CLERK AND
ClTY ATTORNEY, IN THE AMOUNT OF $16,000, THAT WILL ALLOW THE CITY
COMMISSIONERS TO VIEW AND ANNOTATE THE ClTY COMMISSION
AGENDA.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
FUNDING
lnformation Technology Fund 552 Contingency account: $1 6,000.00
KEY INTENDED OUTCOME SUPPORTED
Improve process through lnformation Technology.
ANALYSIS
In an effort to enhance operational efficiencies while maintaining focus on green initiatives, the
City of Miami Beach Commission has been testing the use of IPad, the electronic tablet
created by Apple to electronically review meeting agenda packets from any location without
the need for a hardcopy. The November 17, 2010 Commission Agenda, Item R9D referred
this item to the Finance and Citywide Project Committee.
At the Finance and Citywide Projects Committee Meeting of Thursday, January 27, 201 1 a
discussion took place regarding "The Shift to lPad from Printed Agenda". The Committee
agreed to have Commissioners test the lPad during the next 30 days and come back to City
Commission if testing was successful. Commissioners Jorge Exposito and Deede Weithorn
have successfully tested the use of the lPad to replace large binders filled with hundreds of
pages of supporting materials which are necessary for city commission agenda items. The
utilization of the lPad significantly reduces the amount of paper used at City Hall while
Commission Memorandum - Purchase of Apple lPads
February 9,201 1
Page 2
simultaneously saving tax dollars. An application designed for City Commission agendas
allows users to download a bookmarked agenda and highlight and write notes on individual
documents. Additionally, they will have access to their email and calendars as well.
The initial investment for the lPad and Security Server is $16,000 (see breakdown below).
When compared to the total estimated annual cost of printed agenda packages of
approximately $4,980, switching to the lPad device has a 3.2 year payback period of the
Capital investment.
I; ,,; ,:,3,". . q7...r.. - . ?yr,.-, . .......I T..,m..- -. y,<,I.- ..<.,zlT; T .lC/. ..".,F.: : .:. .?,. ,
\, ?" < 1;: i, 5 , :;.$$,? i 2 .,.+ ,.;;:.<::.3': ... ..,... .?X.?., . ,$,:.,I
-:..>/z- --.* ;,.. .>+ ..:,/J - ;;y& /<- :g; .!<.& :$gj: ):.=-: ;:<:;:: .... :,.,G$;:, . ;+<..j ~$~@-&.!q?> ;,: :< r$i*$+,> .;@i$* j;{$@,;.;;,q $+q.~&$$j"+&$$;{.~'~+
.?>.fiz>L-:i... ..- :>a*.... . b:..k&-~~ 2;>:2,:~$ -. . . 2~.%.> .d:~~Mi* k.3B
lPad + Applications $988 (64GB)
+Accessories
10 iPads (Commission,
Leaal. Citv Clerk. CM) -,
TOTAL $9,880
Security Server for lpad $6,120
(25 Users Starter Pack)
Total Costs CMB lPad $1 6,000
The annual operational costs (see breakdown below) of the digital alternative has a savings of
$306 compared to the estimated annual costs of printed agenda packets totaling $4,980.
r.... -.-,.- -T" ...-- , ... .. , .il...' ". ....PI^- * ".:A . ? . ?,., - ', -. - i, >..* . ;... . ,! , ){i~2[f~&f:.;&~~~&$ bj-:$&;:<&.::- . >.;:<-!. ]i$&$d,%g::-. . .: - ... ...i
ATT 3G Data Plans $360
10 lPads $3,599
Server Software $1,075
Mainten nace
Total Yr Costs $4,674
One of the City Commission's top priorities is environmental sustainability. In addition to
providing convenience and efficiency, the benefits of electronic agendas on lPad are as
follows:
1. Eliminate paper, printing, and printer maintenance costs associated with printed
agenda packets.
2. Be GREEN by reducing paper usage and environmental impact.
3. Dramatically reduce staff time required to organize and bind printed packets by
creating PDF packets.
4. Eliminate time and costs to physically distribute packets.
5. Instant, remote access to agendas via downloadable PDF.
6. Mark-up, search, and navigate agendas quickly and easily.
7. Access to previous agenda packets to compare notes.
8. New tablet technology costs less, weighs less, and battery lasts up to 5 times longer
than a laptop PC.
9. Commissioners IPads can access email, calendar, contacts, and web browsing
functionality.
Commission Memorandum - Purchase of Apple lPads
February 9,201 1
Page 3
Other governmental entities throughout Florida have implemented the new technology
including Ormand Beach, Palm Coast and Sarasota County.
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends that the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami
Beach, Florida herby waives, by 517th~ vote, the competitive bidding requirement, finding
such waiver to be in the best interest of the City, and approves and authorizes the purchase of
ten (10) Apple iPads including security server for the individual City Commissioners, the City
Manger, City Clerk, and City Attorney, in the amount of $16,000, that will allow the City
Commissioners to view and annotate the City Commission agenda.
JMGIPWIGG
T:\AGENDAUOI 1\4-13-1 l\lpads for Comm Agenda mem rev2.doc
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE
ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, WAIVING, BY 517th THlS VOTE,
THE COMPETITIVE BIDDING REQUIREMENT, FINDING SUCH WAIVER
TO BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY, AND APPROVING AND
AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF TEN (10) APPLE iPADs
(INCLUDING A SECURITY SERVER), FOR THE INDIVIDUAL ClTY
COMMISSIONERS, CITY MANAGER, ClTY CLERK, AND ClTY
ATTORNEY, IN THE AMOUNT OF $16,000, THAT WILL ALLOW THE
CITY COMMISSIONERS TO VIEW AND ANNOTATE THE CITY
COMMISSION AGENDA.
WHEREAS, in an effort to enhance operational efficiencies while maintaining focus
on green initiatives, the City has been testing the use of the iPad, the electronic tablet
created by Apple, to electronically review City Commission Meeting agenda packets from
any location, without the need for a hard copy; and
WHEREAS, at the Finance and Citywide Projects Committee Meeting of January
27, 201 1, a discussion took place regarding the shift to iPad from printed agenda; and
WHEREAS, the Committee recommended that the individual City Commissioners
test the iPad during the next thirty (30) days, and bring back the item to the City
Commission, if testing was successful; and
WHEREAS, the utilization of the iPad significantly reduces the amount of paper
used at City Hall; and
WHEREAS, accordingly, the Administration would recommend that if the City
Commission finds that is in the best interest of the City to shift from its use of printed hard
copy versions of City Commission Meeting agenda books, to the Pads version, then the City
Commission should authorize, by 517~~ vote, a waiver of competitive bidding to purchase
iPad for City Commissioners, the City Manager, City Clerk, and City Attorney for this
purpose.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that the Mayor and City
Commission herby waives, by 517th~ vote, the competitive bidding requirement, finding such
waiver to be in the best interest of the City, and approves and authorizes the purchase of ten
(10) Apple iPads (including security server), for the individual City Commissioners, the City
Manger, City Clerk, and City Attorney, in the amount of $16,000, that will allow the City
Commissioners to view and annotate the City Commission agenda.
PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS DAY OF 201 1.
ATTEST:
ClTY CLERK
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
A Resolution Authorizing The City Of Miami Beach To Accept Monetary Donations In Order To
Fund The City Of Miami Beach "Take Your Child To Work Day", And Further Approving The
Appropriation Of The Donated Funds For The Event.
Key Intended Outcome Supported: I Enhance Learning Opportunities for Youth I
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): nla
Issue:
Shall the Mayor and City Commission accept donations made to the City for "Take Your Child to
Work Day" and further approve the appropriation of donations for the event?
Item SummaryIRecommendation:
I The City of Miami Beach wishes to participate in the National "Take Your Child to Work Day" I
scheduied for Thursday, April 28, 2011. he event is being coordinated and staffed by an
employee-led committee, and funded by donations by the City's various employee labor unions,
as well as a private donation from resident Elias Jimenez.
The Administration recommends that the Mayor and City Commission adopt the resolution
accepting the donations made to the "Take Your Child to Work Day" and further approve the
appropriation of donation for this event.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
NIA
Financial Information:
Financial Impact Summary:
No fiscal impact.
Source of
Funds:
OBPl
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking:
( Michael Gruen, Miami Beach Police Department
2
3
4
Total
MIAMIBEACH 235
I
Amount Account
MIAMIBEACH
City of Miami Bwch, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 331 39, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Co Fission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager n
DATE: April 13, 201 1
u
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF
MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH TO
ACCEPT MONETARY DONATIONS IN ORDER TO FUND THE CITY OF MIAMI
BEACH "TAKE YOUR CHILD TO WORK DAY" AND FURTHER APPROVING THE
APPROPRIATION OF THE DONATED FUNDS FOR THIS EVENT.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
ANALYSIS
Take Your Child to Work Day began in 1993 by the Foundation for Women as the "Take Our
Daughters to Work Day". This national event has since expanded to include boys and is held on the
fourth Thursday in April of each year. Some the goals of this event include teaching children about the
work performed by parents and exposing these children to possible career options in the future. The
City of Miami Beach has participated for many years in this national event. Prior to the Fiscal Year (FY)
2007-2008, the City would sponsor the entire event. Since that time, most of the City's employee
unions (AFSCME, CWA, GSA, FOP and IAFF) have donated funds each year to cover expenses for
this event. Also since that time, the City has not providing funding for this event; however, the City has
provided staff resources to help coordinate and staff the event each year.
This year's Take Your Child to Work Day will be held on Thursday, April 28, 201 1 at various facilities
throughout the City. City employees are encouraged to bring their children (ages 8-12) to participate in
a number of educational activities and mock exercises overseen by various City departments. As has
been done in the past, a committee made up of employees from departments throughout the City will
again help to coordinate and staff the event.
The purpose of this resolution is to authorize the City to accept the donations from the various
employee unions as well as from Mr. Elias Jimenez, a resident of the City of Miami Beach, who has
also agreed to donate $81 0.00 to further fund this year's Take Your Child to Work Day.
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends that the Mayor and City Commission adopt the resolution accepting
donations for Take Your Child to Work Day and further approve the appropriation of donations for the
this year's event.
T:\AGENDA\2011\4-13-1 l\Take Your Child to Work Day 201 1-Memo.docx
RESOLUTION No.
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF
THE ClTY OF MlAMl BEACH, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE
ClTY OF MlAMl BEACH TO ACCEPT MONETARY DONATIONS
IN ORDER TO FUND THE CITY OF MlAMl BEACH "TAKE
YOUR CHILD TO WORK DAY", AND FURTHER APPROVING
THE APPROPRIATION OF THE DONATED FUNDS FOR THE
EVENT.
WHEREAS, the National "Take Your Child to Work Day" is scheduled for Thursday, April
28,201 1 ; and
WHEREAS, the City of Miami Beach has traditionally encouraged employees to bring
their children to work, and to participate in activities that are overseen by various City of Miami
Beach departments; and
WHEREAS, the City of Miami Beach deems this Event an important and essential
component in providing children exposure to possible career options in the foreseeable future,
and the value and significance of the children's education; and
WHEREAS, an employee-led committee is coordinating and staff this year's event; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Miami Beach's various labor unions have expressed an interest
in donating funds for the Event, and it is anticipated that approximately $2,500.00 will be
donated to fund the Events activities; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Elias Jimenez, a resident of the City of Miami Beach, has also agreed to
donate $81 0.00 to further fund the Event activities.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND ClTY
COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF MlAMl BEACH, FLORIDA, that the Mayor and City
Commission for the City of Miami Beach hereby authorizes the City of Miami Beach to accept
monetary donations in order to fund the City of Miami Beach "Take Your Child To Work Day"
(the "Event"), and further approving the appropriation of the donated funds for the Event.
PASSED and ADOPTED this day of April, 201 1.
ATTEST BY:
MATTI HERRERA BOWER
MAYOR
ROBERT PARCHER, ClTY CLERK APPROVED AS TO -- FORM HGUAGE
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title: I A Resolution of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami Beach, Florida, Adopting 1
and Appropriating the Third Amendment to the Police Confiscation Trust Fund Budget for Fiscal
Year 201 011 1 in the amount of $40,677 to be funded from the proceeds of State Confiscated
Funds.
<ey Intended Outcome Supported:
Increase Resident and Business ratings of Public Safety.
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): According to the Center For Research and
Public Policy Residential and Business Satisfaction Survey of City of Miami Beach residents in 2009,
indicated that their three top most important areas of for the City of Miami Beach to address in an effort to
improve public safety throughout the City is Preventing Crime 44.9%, Enforcing Traffic Laws 36.1% and
Increasing Visibility of Police in Neighborhoods 32.4%,
Issue: .--. -.
Shall the Mayor and City Commission adopt and appropriate the third amendment to the Police
Confiscation Trust Fund Budget for Fiscal Year 201 011 I?
Item SummarylRecommendation:
I The Chief of Police has reviewed and identified the needs for the appropriation and has I
established that the expenditures of forfeiture funds are in compliance with section 932.7055,
Florida State Statutes and the Guide to Equitable Sharing of Federally Forfeited Property for
Local Law Enforcement Agencies.
The Administration recommends that the Mayor and City Commission adopt the third amendment
to the Police Confiscation Trust Fund Budget for Fiscal Year 201011 1 in the amount of $40,677
for payment of Legal and Administrative Fees.
Advisory Board Recommendation: I NIA
I I
Financial Impact Summary:
Financial Information:
Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking:
auvett Rattigan, Miami Beach Police Department
Source of Amount
Funds: I
2 $40,677
3
4
OBPl Total $40,677
AM1 BEACH
Account
Confiscation Funds:
607-8000-351 21 0 State funds
AOEWDA ITEM C7 7
DATE
MIAMIBEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33 139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager r?C7i
DATE April 13, 201 1 VC' SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR D CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, ADOPTING AND APPROPRIATING THE THIRD
AMENDMENT TO THE POLICE CONFISCATION TRUST FUND BUDGET FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2010111 IN THE AMOUNT OF $40,677 TO BE FUNDED FROM
THE PROCEEDS OF STATE CONFISCATED FUNDS.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
ANALYSIS
Florida Statute 932.7055 provides for expenditures of forfeiture funds for law enforcement purposes.
Chief of Police, Carlos Noriega, has reviewed and identified the need for the appropriation and has
established that the expenditures of forfeiture funds are in compliance with Section 932.7055,
Florida State Statutes, and the Guide to Equitable Sharing of Federally Forfeited Property for Local
Law Enforcement Agencies. These forfeiture funds have been deposited in the Police Confiscation
Trust Fund.
There are legal and administrative costs incurred in our City Attorney's Office in claiming and
obtaining these funds. The City Attorney's Office has been instrumental in obtaining over $1 62,000
through State-related Confiscations for the Miami Beach Police Department. Significant staff time
and costs have been devoted to this endeavor. As such, the Confiscation Fund will pay the sum of
$40,677 for Legal and Administrative Fees associated with claiming and obtaining State-related
confiscated funds
The City has complied with all statutory procedures involved in the transaction of these funds.
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends that the Mayor and City Commission adopt the Third Amendment
to the Operating Budget for the Police Confiscation Trust Fund for Fiscal Year 201 011 1, in the
amount of $40,677, to provide for Legal and Administrative Fees associated with claiming and
confiscation funds.
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF MlAMl BEACH, FLORIDA, ADOPTING AND
APPROPRIATING THE THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE POLICE
CONFISCATION TRUST FUND BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR
2010111 IN THE AMOUNT OF $40,677 TO BE FUNDED FROM
THE PROCEEDS OF STATE CONFISCATED FUNDS.
WHEREAS, Section 932.7055 of the Florida Statutes, sets forth and establishes the
purpose and procedures that must be utilized for the appropriation and expenditures of the
Police Confiscation Trust Fund; and
WHEREAS, the City Attorney's Office has successfully obtained over $162,000 in
confiscated funds for the City of Miami Beach Police Department pursuant to Section 932.701 of
the Florida Statutes, known as the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act; and
WHEREAS, the City Attorney's Office has incurred significant staff time and costs in
association with these various forfeiture proceedings on behalf of the City of Miami Beach
Police Department; and
WHEREAS, the Chief of Police of the City of Miami Beach has submitted a written
certification which states that this request complies with the provisions of Section 932.7055 of
the Florida Statutes (written certification attached as Exhibit A), and the Guide to Equitable
Sharing of Federally Forfeited Property for Local Law Enforcement Agencies; and
WHEREAS, funds in the amount of $4,677 are available in the Police Confiscation
Trust Fund.
CURRENT INCREASE AMENDED
BUDGET BUDGET
STATE $226,100 $ 40,677 $266,777
FEDERAL
TOTAL
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND ClTY
COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF MlAMl BEACH, FLORIDA, that the Mayor and City
Commission for the City of Miami Beach hereby adopt and appropriate the Third Amendment to
the Police Confiscation Trust Fund Budget for fiscal year 201011 I in the amount of $40,677 to
be funded from the proceeds of State confiscated funds.
PASSED and ADOPTED this day of April, 201 1.
ATTEST:
MAYOR MATTI HERRERA BOWER
ROBERT PARCHER, ClTY CLERK APPROVED AS TO
I
Certification
I, Carlos Noriega, Chief of Police, City of Miami Beach, do hereby certify that the
aforementioned proposed request for expenditures from the City of Miami Beach Police
Confiscation Trust Fund, for the 201 011 1 fiscal year providing funds for Legal and Administrative
Fees complies with the provisions of Section 932.7055(4)(b), Florida Statutes, and the Guide to
Equitable Sharing of Federally Forfeited Property for Local Law Enforcement Agencies.
I
Miami Beach Police Department
EXHIBIT "A
MIAMI BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT
CONFISCATION TRUST FUND BUDGET
THIRD AMENDMENT
FISCAL YEAR 201011 1
STATE FUNDS:
Administrative and Legal Fees associated with collecting confiscation
revenues. $ 40,677
TOTAL STATE FUNDS: $ 40,677
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
A Resolution Of The Mayor And City Commission Of The City Of Miami Beach, Florida, Approving And Authorizing The
Mayor And City Clerk To Enter Into A Locally Funded Agreement With The Florida Department Of Transportation For
Stamped Asphalt Crosswalks On 41'' Street, From Garden Avenue To Sheridan Avenue, and ASpeed Feedback Sign;
And The Execution Of A Maintenance Memorandum Of Agreement For The Crosswalks and A Speed Feedback Sign.
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Enhance mobility throughout the City.
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.):
~rans~ortation remains one of the most significant areas to address from the 2009 Community Satisfaction Survey
results (often mentioned as a Key Quality of Life Issue). 24% of residents rated traffic flow as excellent or good, and
37% as poor. 35% of residents rated the availability of pedestrian trails and bicycle pathsllanes as excellent or good,
and 30% as poor.
Issue: I Shall the Mayor and City Commission approve the Resolution?
Item Summary/Recommendation:
41'' Street is a federal classified Princi~al Urban Arterial under the iurisdiction of the Florida De~artment of
Transportation (FDOT). Improvements aloAg 41'' Street are currently listed is Financial Project umber 419824-1 in the
Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) 201 1-1 5 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP). The project work plan for
the milling and resurfacing from Alton Road to Collins Avenue includes the replacement of damaged sidewalks and curb
and gutters, upgrades to pedestrian ramps to comply with ADA standards, improving the existing bridge railing, new
mast arms at Pine Tree Drive and at Indian Creek Drive, and the installation of shared lane bicycle markings from Alton
Road to Collins Avenue. FDOT has scheduled construction to begin in April 2012, with an estimated completion by
December 201 2.
The City has requested that FDOT modify this scope of work to include stamped asphalt crosswalks in order to provide a
consistent design with other intersections along 41'' Street that also have these crosswalk treatments. The additional
cost to the project for the stamped asphalt crosswalks will be $78,299.00 and $13,253.00 for the speed feedback sign,
which must be provided by the City to FDOT through the execution of a Locally Funded Agreement with FDOT. FY
2010111 People's Transportation Plan funds previously appropriated in the FY 201 011 1 Capital Budget are available for
the City's contribution for the crosswalks and FY 2008109 Concurrency Mitigation funds previously appropriated in the FY
2008109 Capital Budget are available for contribution of the speed feedback sign. The City is also required to enter into a
Maintenance Memorandum of Agreement for the crosswalks and the speed feedback sign.
I THE ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE RESOLUTION.
Advisory Board Recommendation: ,
Financial Information:
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking: I Fernando Vazquez, City Engineer, x.6399
AGENDA ITEM L7K
DATE ZBZ
MIAMIBEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Cenfer Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33 139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM /
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager n
DATE: April 13, 201 1 \d
SUBJECT:A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE CIW OF MIAMI
BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND ClTY
CLERK TO EXECUTE A LOCALLY FUNDED AGREEMENT WlTH THE FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (FDOT) FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF
STAMPED ASPHALT CROSSWALKS ON 41 STREET, AT GARDEN AVENUE,
MERIDIAN AVENUE, MID-BLOCK BETWEEN PRAIRIE AVENUE AND ROYAL PALM
AVENUE, AND MID-BLOCK BEWEEN ROYAL PALM AVENUE AND SHERIDAN
AVENUE, AND A SPEED FEEDBACK SIGN, AS PART OF THE FDOT 41 STREET
ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (UNDER FINANCIAL PROJECT NUMBER
419824-1); AND FURTHER APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF
A MAINTENANCE MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT WlTH FDOT FOR THE
CROSSWALKS AND A SPEED FEEDBACK SIGN ON 41ST STREET, BETWEEN
ALTON ROAD AND GARDEN AVENUE.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
FUNDING
Funding in the amount of $91,552.00, $78,299.00 from previously appropriated FY 201 011 1 PTP Funds
(Fund 187), as referenced in the FY 2010111 Capital Budget, and $13,253.00 from FY 2008/09
Concurrency Mitigation Fund (Fund 158), as referenced in the FY 2008109 Capital Budget.
ANALYSIS
41St Street is a federal classified Principal Urban Arterial under the jurisdiction of the Florida
Department of Transportation (FDOT). The 41'' Street corridor consists of a four lane undivided
roadway with curb, gutter, and sidewalk on both sides of the road running in an east-west direction. The
land-uses along this corridor include a mix of residential and commercial and it is designated as a
shopping district. There are also several schools in the vicinity of 41'' Street, including North Beach
Elementary School and Nautilus Middle School.
Improvements along 41'' Street are currently listed as Financial Project Number 419824-1 in the
Metropolitan Planning Organization 201 1-1 5 Transportation Improvement Plan. The project work plan
for the milling and resurfacing from Alton Road to Collins Avenue includes the replacement of damaged
sidewalks and curb and gutters, upgrades to pedestrian ramps to comply with ADA standards,
improving the existing bridge railing, new mast arms at Pine Tree Drive and at Indian Creek Drive, and
the installation of shared lane bicycle markings from Alton Road to Collins Avenue. FDOT has
scheduled construction to begin in April 2012, with an estimated completion by December 2012. The
estimated construction cost of the project is $2,800,000.
Commission Memorandum - 41 Street Crosswalks
April 13,201 1
Page 2 of 2
The City has requested that FDOT modify this scope of work to include an upgrade from the proposed
standard crosswalk striping to textured stamped asphalt with a brick red herringbone pattern that is
aesthetically appealing and highly visible for motorists and pedestrians (see Attachment 1). This would
also provide a design consistent with other intersections along 41"' Street that have these crosswalk
treatments. The proposed locations for the stamped asphalt crosswalks include the intersections of
41'' Street at Garden Avenue and at Meridian Avenue, midblock between Prairie Avenue and Royal
Palm Avenue, and midblock between Royal Palm Avenue and Sheridan Avenue.
The City has also requested that FDOT modify the scope of work to include the installation of a speed
feedback sign on 41"' Street eastbound between Alton Road and Garden Avenue. The City had
received concerns from residents regarding speeding along 41"' Street from Alton Road to North
Jefferson Avenue. In October 201 0, City staff collected 72 hour speed data and determined that 85
percent of the motorists traveling eastbound from Alton Road to Garden Avenue drive at or below 45
mph and from Garden Avenue to North Jefferson Avenue the speed is at or below 49.2 mph. This is
significantly higher than the speed limit for 41"' Street, which is 30 mph.
The Miami Beach Police Department agreed to increase enforcement of the speed limit along 41''
Street eastbound between Alton Road and Jefferson Avenue during the morning and evening hours.
Additionally, the installation of a speed feedback sign will alert motorists of their speed, which should
encourage compliance with the speed limit. FDOT has agreed to include the installation of the speed
feedback sign in the scope of work.
The additional cost to the project for the stamped asphalt crosswalks will be $78,299.00 and the
additional cost for the speed feedback sign will be $13,253.00. This funding must be provided by the
City to FDOT through the execution of a Locally Funded Agreement (LFA) with FDOT (See Attachment
2). Pursuant to Section 2(g) of the LFA, the City is also required to enter into a Maintenance
Memorandum of Agreement (MMOA) (See Attachment 3).
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends approving the Resolution.
Attachments:
I. Textured Stamped Asphalt Crosswalks
2. Locally Funded Agreement
3. Maintenance Memorandum of Agreement
JMGIDRBIFHBIFV
T:\AGENDAUOIlM-I 3-1 1\41 St Crosswalks Memo 4-201 1 .doc
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF
MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR
AND ClTY CLERK TO EXECUTE A LOCALLY FUNDED AGREEMENT WlTH
THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (FDOT) FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF STAMPED ASPHALT CROSSWALKS ON 41 STREET,
AT GARDEN AVENUE, MERIDIAN AVENUE, MID-BLOCK BETWEEN
PRAIRIE AVENUE AND ROYAL PALM AVENUE, AND MID-BLOCK
BETWEEN ROYAL PALM AVENUE AND SHERIDAN AVENUE, AND A
SPEED FEEDBACK SIGN, AS PART OF THE FDOT 41 STREET ROADWAY
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (UNDER FINANCIAL PROJECT NUMBER 419824-
1); AND FURTHER APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A
MAINTENANCE MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT WlTH FDOT FOR THE
CROSSWALKS AND A SPEED FEEDBACK SIGN ON 41ST STREET,
BETWEEN ALTON ROAD AND GARDEN AVENUE.
WHEREAS, 41 Street is a federal classified Principal Urban Arterial under the jurisdiction of
the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT); and
WHEREAS, improvements along 41 Street are currently listed as Financial Project Number
41 9824-1 in the Metropolitan Planning Organization 201 1-1 5 Transportation Improvement Plan;
and
WHEREAS, the project work plan for the milling and resurfacing from Alton Road to Collins
Avenue includes the replacement of damaged sidewalks and curb and gutters; upgrades to
pedestrian ramps to comply with ADA standards; improving the existing bridge railing; new mast
arms at Pine Tree Drive and at Indian Creek Drive; and the installation of shared lane bicycle
markings from Alton Road to Collins Avenue; and
WHEREAS, FDOT has scheduled construction to begin in April 2012, with an estimated
completion by December 201 2; and
WHEREAS, the City has requested that FDOT modify the scope of work to include stamped
asphalt crosswalks on 41 Street, at Garden Avenue, Meridian Avenue, mid-block between
Prairie Avenue and Royal Palm Avenue, and mid-block between Royal Palm Avenue and
Sheridan Avenue, in order to provide a consistent design with other intersections along 41
Street that have these crosswalk treatments; and
WHEREAS, the City has also requested that FDOT modify the scope of work to include a
speed feedback sign on 41 Street, eastbound between Alton Road and Garden Avenue, to
address speeding that is occurring along this section of the corridor; and FDOT has scheduled
construction to begin in April 2012, with an estimated completion by December 2012; and
WHEREAS, the additional cost to the project for the stamped asphalt crosswalks is
estimated to be $78,299.00 and the additional cost for the speed feedback sign is $13,253.00,
which will be paid for through FY 2010111 People's Transportation Plan funds previously
appropriated in the FY 201011 I Capital Budget and FY 2008109 Concurrency Mitigation funds
previously appropriated in the FY 2008109 Capital Budget; and
WHEREAS, in order to proceed with the aforestated additional work, the Administration
requests approval of the Locally Funded Agreement (LFA) with FDOT, as well as two (2)
accompanying agreements, a Maintenance Memorandum of Agreement and a Financial
Memorandum of Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF
THE ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that the Mayor and City Commission hereby approve
and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a Locally Funded Agreement with the Florida
Department of Transportation (FDOT) for the construction of stamped asphalt crosswalks on 41
Street, at Garden Avenue, Meridian Avenue, mid-block between Prairie Avenue and Royal Palm
Avenue, and mid-block between Royal Palm Avenue and Sheridan Avenue, as part of the
FDOT 41 Street Roadway Improvement Project (under Financial Project Number 419824-1);
and further approve and authorize the Mayor of City Clerk to execute a Maintenance
Memorandum of Agreement with FDOT for the crosswalks and a speed feedback sign on 41St
Street, between Alton Road and Garden Avenue.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of 201 1.
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK MAYOR
T:\AGENDA\2011\4-13-11\41 St Crosswalks Reso 4-201 1 .doc
APPROVED AS TO
FORM & LANGUAGE
&FOR EXECUTION
Attachment 3
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SPECIALTY SURFACE CROSSWALKS AND SPEED FEEDBACK SIGN
MAINTENANCE MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
WITH
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
This AGREEMENT, entered into this I
20 , by and between the FLORIDA DEPAR
component agency of the State of Florid
corporation of
the State of Florida, hereinafter ca
WHEREAS, this AGREEMENT sha
m Chase Avenue to
approved by CITY
WHEREAS, the DEPARTMENT over S.R. 112/41St
to Pine Tree Drive
(M.P. 0.594),
viously installed specialty
JECT LIMITS, in accordance with
NT has drafted design plans for
DEPARTMENT # T-6262, described in the attached Exhibit
WHEREAS, fhe DEPARTMENT and the CITY are both committed to
improving the aesthetics within the PROJECT LIMITS; and
WHEREAS, the CITY has requested that the DEPARTMENT install
specialty surface crosswalks and a speed feedback sign, within the
PROJECT LIMITS, and the DEPARTMENT is willing to do so subject to
the terms and conditions contained herein; and
Specialty Surface Crosswalks and Speed Feedback Sign
Maintenance Memorandum of Agreement between Florida Department of Transportation and City of Miami Beach
Page 1 of 11
WHEREAS, the CITY, by Resolution No. , dated
, attached hereto as Exhibit 'B", which by reference
-
hereto shall become a part hereof, desires to enter into this
AGREEMENT and authorizes its officers to do so.
NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual
benefits to flow each to the other, the parties covenant and agree
as follows:
1. DEPARTMENT RESPONSIBILITIES
1.1. Assignment
the specialty surface
in perpetuity.
2.
The CITY shall be solely the maintenance and
feedback s
airs to the specialty surfaces
hazards for those using or
basis, the area of each crosswalk in
resistance in accordance with ASTM E 274-
ction resistance shall be no less than 30
or equivalent as specified in Exhibit 'A",
Failure to achieve minimum friction
to be friction tested to determine the extent of
the deficiency. All deficient areas shall be
removed to their full extent (lane-by-lane) and
replaced with the same product installed initially.
If more than fifty percent (50%) of the lanes in
the intersection require replacement, the entire
intersection installation may be reconstructed with
a different product on the Qualified Products List.
Spec~alty Surface Crosswalks and Speed Feedback Slgn
Marntenance Memorandum of Agreement between Flonda Department of Transportahon and Clty of Mlaml Beach
Page 2 of 11
c) The CITY shall conduct annual condition surveys of
the specialty surfaces for rutting, raveling, pot
holes, delamination and cracking for the life of
the adj acent pavement.
i. Unless the pavement adjacent to the crosswalk
ting depth of
exceed 0.25
include the
across the full
crosswalk.
25 square inches in
shall include the
y surface in
manufacturer' s
t in the intersection
for more than 10 feet
e crosswalk. Remedial work
a minimum, the full depth
*@
shall be sent to the District Maintenance
s Warranty Coordinator with a cover letter
integrity of the crosswalk area.
e) When remedial action is required in accordance with
the above requirements, the CITY at its own expense
shall complete all necessary repairs within ninety
(90) days of the date the deficiency is identified.
Specialty Surface Crosswalks and Speed Feedback Sign
Maintenance Memorandum of Agreement between Florida Department of Transportation and City of Miami Beach
Page 3 of 11
f) No more than two (2) full specialty surface repairs
shall be made to an area without first resurfacing
the pavement to its full depth.
g) Sweep the specialty surface crosswalks periodically
to keep them free of debris and to maintain an
light pressure
ain removal or
cleaning.
litter from
specialty surfaces.
noticeable color
of the specialty
installer should be c
2-2. SPEED FEEDBACK
a) The CITY sh epair the speed
a part hereof.
3.
writing if mutually agreed to
4.
NANCE ENGINEER may, at his option, issue a
written notice, in care of the CITY MANAGER, to place the CITY
on notice regarding its maintenance deficiencies. Thereafter,
the CITY shall have a period of ninety (90) days within which
to correct the cited deficiency or deficiencies. If said
deficiencies are not corrected within this time period, the
DEPARTMENT may, at its option, proceed as follows:
4.1.Maintain the specialty surface crosswalks and speed
Specialty Surface Crosswalks and Speed Feedback Sign
Maintenance Memorandum of Agreement between Florida Department of Transportation and City of Miami Beach
Page 4 of 1 1
feedback sign declared deficient with DEPARTMENT and/or
its independent contractor's materials, equipment and
personnel. The actual cost for such work will be charged
to the CITY.
4.2.The DEPARTMENT reserves the right to replace the
specialty surface crosswalks with conventional pavement
and bill the CITY for this cost.
5. NOTICES
mail or certified U.S. mail,
prepaid, addressed to the
follows:
tenance Engineer
To the CITY:
6.
etween the parties hereto that the
crosswalks and speed feedback sign
expense of the DEPARTMENT.
7. TERMINATION
This AGREEMENT is subject to termination under any one of the
following conditions:
7.1. In accordance with Section 287.058 (1) (c) , Florida
Specialty Surface Crosswalks and Speed Feedback Sign
Maintenance Memorandum of Agreement between Florida Department of Transportation and City of Miami Beach
Page 5 of 11
Statutes, the DEPARTMENT shall reserve the right to
unilaterally cancel this AGREEMENT if the CITY refuses to
allow public access to any or all documents, papers,
letters, or other materials made or received by the CITY
pertinent to this AGREEMENT which are subject to
provisions of Chapter 119, of the Florida Statutes.
7.2.0nly if mutually agreed to by both with a six (6)
month written notice.
8. TERMS
8 .l. The CITY shall utilize the
governing use of the s
eligibility of:
perform employment
ii. all p subcontractors,
e DEPARTMENT.
all only commence upon
from the DEPARTMENT. This
in perpetuity or until
n the parties hereto and there are
and understanding, oral or written,
MENT is nontransferable and nonassignable in
DEPARTMENT.
8.5.This AGREEMENT, regardless of where executed, shall be
governed by and constructed in accordance with the laws
of the State of Florida.
Specialty Surface Crosswalks and Speed Feedback Sign
Maintenance Memorandum of Agreement between Florida Department of Transportation and City of Miami Beach
Page6of 11
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused these
presents to be executed the day and year first above written.
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH: STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION:
City Manager Disg
IST :
Specialty Surface Crosswalks and Speed Feedback Sign
Maintenance Memorandum of Agreement between Florida Department of Transportation and City of Miami Beach
Page 7 of 11
EXHIBIT "AN
PROJECT LIMITS
Below are the limits of the specialty surface crosswalks and speed
feedback sign to be maintained under this AGR
State Road Number: 112/41St Street
Agreement Limits: From east Alton Road ( to Pine Tree
Drive (M.P. 0.594)
County : Miami -Dade
Speed Feedback Sign:
Intersectio
versions for Test Speeds Other Than
Specialty Surface Crosswalks and Speed Feedback Sign
Maintenance Memorandum of Agreement between Florida Department of Transportation and City of Miami Beach
Page 8 of 11
EXHIBIT "B"
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH RESOLUTION
To be herein incorporated once ratified by the CITY Board of
Commissioners.
Specialty Surface Crosswalks and Speed Feedback Sign
Maintenance Memorandum of Agreement between Florida Department of Transportation and City of Miami Beach
Page 9 of 11
EXHIBIT "C"
SPEED FEEDBACK SIGN MAINTENANCE
The CITY shall perform the below maintenance for each speed
feedback sign check (at a minimum):
Clean debris and soil from the face of play and sign;
Do not use oil based solvents on th onate window or
8 Check bolts on the sign face
the mounting (banding, cla
display to the pole or othe
For solar application
from undue debris or o
five to ten years) ;
On 18" inet should be returned to
oper alignment of the LED
m water prior to cleaning process;
aners on sheet for long periods, wash
0 Don't ap cleaners in direct sunlight or at elevated
temperatures;
8 Don't use scrapers, squeegees or razors;
8 Don't clean with gasoline;
~ollow the application with a lukewarm water rinse;
Specialty Surface Crosswalks and Speed Feedback Sign
Maintenance Memorandum of Agreement between Florida Department of Transportation and City of Miami Beach
Page 10 of 11
To remove graffiti, use Naphtha VM&P grade, Isopropyl Alcohol
or Butyl Cellosolve. Do not use in direct sunlight;
Use Isopropyl Alcohol, Naphtha VM&P grade or Kerosene to lift
stickers and other adhesive backed labels. Wash immediately
with soap and lukewarm water and rinse thoroughly with clean
water;
To remove masking adhesive and gl ompounds , apply
Naphtha VM&P grade, Kerosene or Iso
soft cloth. Wash immediately wit m water and
rinse thoroughly with clean
Use compatible cleaners and@
Windex with Ammonia D3, Palm
Isopropyl Alcohol;
d - Mirror Glaze
Clear Plastic Polish, C1
ish #I, #2 (by Novus
ructing the visibility of the
,and clean graffiti.
Incorporated herein by reference is the "FDOT District Preventive
Maintenance Checklist" for speed feedback signs, which shall be
used as guidance.
Specialty Surface Crosswalks and Speed Feedback Sign
Maintenance Memorandum of Agreement between Florida Department of Transportation and City of Miami Beach
Page I1 of 11
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
A Resolution Supporting The County's Resolution For Co-designation Of The Venetian Causeway From
East San Marino lsland To West Rivo Alto lsland As Judge Irving Cypen Way.
Key Intended Outcome Supported: 1 Ensure well-maintained infrastructure
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.):
I Accordinq to the City's 2007 Community Satisfaction Survey, 84% of City residents rated recent capital ( I projects completed as "excellent" or "good." 1
Issue: I Shall the Mayor and City Commission adopt the Resolution? I
Item SummarylRecommendation:
At the Miami-Dade County Board of County Commissioner's (BCC) meeting held on July 20, 2010,
Resolution No. R-795-10 (attached) was passed urging the City to honor the memory of Judge Irving
Cypen, as well as his contributions to his community, by co-designating Venetian Way from East San
Marino lsland to West Rivo Alto lsland as "Judge Irving Cypen Way".
Commissioner Jonah Wolfson referred this matter to the City's Neighborhoodsl Community Affairs
Committee meeting held February 3, 2011. At the meeting, the committee unanimously moved to
recommend to the City Commission to support the BCC's Resolution with the caveat that the name being
added be subordinate to the historic Venetian Causeway designation.
THE ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE RESOLUTION.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
[ Neighborhoodsl Community Affairs Committee approval on February 3,201 1.
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking: I Fred H. Beckmann, ext 6012
Financial Information:
AMIBEACH
Source of
Funds:
1113 OBPl
AGENDA %+EM C7L
DATE 4-13-11
9
Account
<'I
2
Total
Amount
MIAMIBEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33 139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
DATE: April 13, 201 1 @
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF
MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, SUPPORTING THE MIAMI-DADE COUNTY'S
RESOLUTION TO DESIGNATE THE VENETIAN CAUSEWAY, FROM EASTSAN
MARINO ISLAND TO WEST RlVO ALTO ISLAND, AS "JUDGE IRVING CYPEN
WAY" WlTH THE FURTHER RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNTY THAT,
WHEN PLACING THE NAME, THE COUNTY INSTALL IT WlTH A SMALLER
FONT IN ORDER TO PRESERVE THE HISTORIC INTEGRITY OF THE
VENETIAN CAUSEWAY.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
BACKGROUND
Judge lrving Cypen was born in Chicago, Illinois, of a Russian immigrant father and at the age of
five his family moved to Florida. Judge Cypen married his wife Hazel in 1941, and together raised
five children. He was the first person of Jewish heritage to be elected to what was then the Dade
County Circuit Court.
Judge Cypen was also the heart and soul of the Miami Jewish Home and Hospital, and was its
greatest benefactor, raising over $75 million and donating over a million dollars himself. Besides the
main campus, the Miami Jewish Home and Hospital operates satellite services that include mental
health, memory and research programs as well as Florida's only teaching nursing home program.
Judge lrving Cypen passed away on January 30,2009, at the age of 90.
ANALYSIS
At the Miami-Dade County Board of County Commissioner's (BCC) meeting held on July 20,201 0,
Resolution No. R-795-10 (attached) was passed urging the City to honor the memory of Judge lrving
Cypen, as well as his contributions to his community, by co-designating Venetian Way from East
San Marino Island to West Rivo Alto Island as "Judge lrving Cypen Way".
The Venetian Causeway is an American Scenic Highway and is a nationally registered historic
property.
Commissioner Jonah Wolfson referred this matter to the City's Neighborhoods1 Community Affairs
Committee meeting held February 3, 201 1. At the meeting, the committee unanimously moved to
recommend to the City Commission to support the BCC1s Resolution with the caveat that the name
being added be subordinate to the historic Venetian Causeway designation.
Commission Memorandum - Co-designation of Venetian Causeway
April 13, 201 1
Page 2 of 2
CONCLUSlON
The Administration recommends approving the Resolution.
Attachments:
1. Miami-Dade County Resolution No. R-795-1
JMGIDRBIFHBIHDCIFV
T:\AGENDA\2011M-I 3-1 l\Venetian Way Codesignation MEMO.doc
Approved Mavor Agenda Item No. 5(A)
Veto 7-20- 1 0
Ovemde
RESOLUTION NO. R-795-10
RESOLUTION CODESIGNATING VENETIAN WAY FROM
EAST SAN MARINO ISLAND TO WEST RIVO ALTO ISLAND
AS "JUDGE IRVING CYPEN WAY"; URGING THE CITY OF
MIAMI BEACH TO JOIN IN THIS CO-DESIGNATION
WHEREAS, Judge Irving Cypen was born in Chicago, Illinois, of a Russian immigrant
father, and at the age of five his family moved to Florida; and
WHEREAS, Judge Cypen married his wife Hazel in 1941, and together they raised five
children; and
WHEREAS, Judge Cypen was the first person of Jewish heritage to be elected to what
was then the Dade County Circuit Court; and
WHEREAS, Judge Cypen also was the heart and soul of the Miami Jewish Home and
Hospital, and was its greatest benefactor, raising over $75 million dollars and donating over a
million dollars himself; and
WHEREAS, besides the main campus, the Miami Jewish Home and Hospital operates
satellite services that include mental health, memory and research programs as well as Florida's
only teaching nursing home program; and
WHEREAS, Judge Irving Cypen passed away on January 30,2009, at the age of 90; and
WHEREAS, this Board would like to honor the memory of Judge Irving Cypen, as well as
his contributions to this community, by co-designating Venetian Way from East San Marino
Island to West Rivo Alto Island as "Judge Irving Cypen Way"; and
Agenda Item No. 5(A)
Page No. 2
WHEREAS, Venetian Way from East San Marino Island to West Rivo Alto Island is a
County maintained road located within the City of Miami Beach; and
WHEREAS, this proposed co-designation is located in County Commission District 4,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, that this Board:
Section 1. Having conducted a public hearing, codesignates Venetian Way from East
San Marino Island to West Rivo Alto Island as "Judge Irving Cypen Way".
Section 2. Urges the City of Miami Beach to join in this co-designation.
Section 3. Directs the Clerk of the Board to transmit certified copies of this resolution
to the City Manager of the City of Miami Beach, the United States Postal Service, the Traffic
Signal and Signs Division of the Public Works Department and Land Development Division of the
Public Works Department, the Miami Beach Police Department and the Miami Beach Fire
Department.
The Prime Sponsor of the foregoing resolution is Commissioner Sally A. Heyman and the
Co-Sponsor is Commissioner Audrey M. Edrnonson. It was offered by
Commissioner Sdy A. Heyinan , who moved its adoption. The motion was
seconded by Commissioner Audrey M. Edmonson and upon being put to a vote,
the vote was as follows:
Dennis C. Moss, Chairman aye
Jose "Pepe" Diaz, Vice-Chairman ab~f2rltlt
Bruno A. Barreiro absmt Audrey M. Edmonson aye
Carlos A. Gimenez Sally A. Heyman &Ye
Barbara J. Jordan %Ye Joe A. Martinez aye
Dorrin D. Rolle &Ye Natacha Seijas
Katy Sorenson SOY@ Rebeca Sosa
Sen. Javier D. Souto aye
Agenda Item No. 5 (A 1
Page No. 3
The Chairperson thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this 20" day of
July, 2010. This resolution shall become effective ten (10) days after the date of its adoption
unless vetoed by the Mayor, and if vetoed, shall become effective only upon an override by this
Board.
MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY ITS BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
HARVEY RUVIN, CLERK
By: DIANE tCOLLlNS
Deputy Clerk
Approved by County Attorney as
to form and legal sufficiency. ab!!m
Jess M. McCarty
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF
MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, SUPPORTING MIAMI-DADE COUNTY'S
RESOLUTION TO DESIGNATE THE VENETIAN CAUSEWAY, FROM EAST
SAN MARINO ISLAND TO WEST RlVO ALTO ISLAND, AS "JUDGE IRVING
CYPEN WAY" WlTH THE FURTHER RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNTY
THAT, WHEN PLACING THE NAME, THE COUNTY INSTALL IT WlTH A
SMALLER FONT IN ORDER TO PRESERVE THE HISTORIC INTEGRITY OF
THE VENETIAN CAUSEWAY.
WHEREAS, Judge lrving Cypen was born in Chicago, Illinois, of a Russian immigrant father
and at the age of five his family moved to Florida; and
WHEREAS, Judge Cypen married his wife, Hazel, in 1941, and together they raised five
children; and
WHEREAS, Judge Cypen was the first Jewish person to be elected to the Dade County
Circuit Court; and
WHEREAS, Judge Cypen was also the heart and soul of the Miami Jewish Home and
Hospital, and was its greatest benefactor, raising over $75 million, and personally donating $1
million; and
WHEREAS, besides the main campus, the Miami Jewish Home and Hospital operates
satellite services that include mental health, memory and research programs, as well as
Florida's only teaching nursing home program; and
WHEREAS, Judge lrving Cypen passed away on January 30,2009, at the age of 90; and
WHEREAS, at the Miami-Dade County Board of County Commissioner's (BCC) meeting on
July 20, 2010, the BCC passed Resolution No. R-795-10, urging the City to honor the memory
of Judge lrving Cypen, as well as his contributions to his community, by co-designating
Venetian Way, from East San Marino Island to West Rivo Alto Island, as "Judge lrving Cypen
Way"; and
WHEREAS, the Venetian Causeway is an American Scenic Highway and is a nationally
registered historic property; and
WHEREAS, at its regular meeting on February 3, 2011, the City's Neighborhoods1
Community Affairs Committee unanimously moved to recommend to the City Commission to
support the BCC's Resolution, with the caveat that the name being added be subordinate to the
historic Venetian Causeway designation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF
THE ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that the Mayor and City Commission hereby approve
the County's Resolution for co-designation of the Venetian Causeway, from East San Marino
Island to West Rivo Alto Island, as "Judge lrving Cypen Way," with the further recommendation
to the County that, when placing the name, the County install it with a smaller font in order to
preserve the historic integrity of the Venetian Causeway.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of 201 1.
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK MAYOR
T:\AGENDA\201111-13-1 l\Venetian Way Codesignation RESO.doc
APPROVED AS TO
7
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
I A resolution authorizing the assianment of the $566,257 FY 2010/2011 HOME Agreement from MBCDC to MBCDC: Meridian Place, 1
LLC, a not-for-profit entity created by MBCDC; and authorizing the assignmentof the $500,000 FY 2010/2011 HOME Agreement
from MBCDC to MBCDC: The Barclay, LLC, a not-for-profit entity created by MBCDC.
Key Intended Outcome Supported: I 1. Increase access to workforce or affordable housing. 2. Improve the lives of elderly residents. I
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.: Based on the 2009 Customer Satisfaction Survey: 17.5% of
businesses feel that lack of workforce housing is one of their most important challenges; 80% of residents 65 or older rated City
.esponse to expectations as good or excellent;
Issue:
Shall the March 28, 201 1, HOME Agreements with MBCDC be assigned to MBCDC: Meridian Place, LLC, and MBCDC: The
Barclay, LLC; entities created by MBCDC as successors in interests?
On July 14,2010, the City Commission approved Resolution 2010-27428, adopting the One-Year Action Plan for federal funds for
Fiscal Year 201012011, allocating $1,066,257 of HOME Program funding to Miami Beach Community Development Corporation
(MBCDC) to be utilized in the provision of rental and/or homeownership opportunities and acquisition and/or rehabilitation of multi-
family residential units. Subsequently on March 28, 201 1, contracts were signed with MBCDC, allocating $566,257 of the HOME
funding to the Meridian Place Apartments project, located at 530 Meridian Avenue; and allocating $500,000 to the Barclay
Apartments project, located at 1940 Park Avenue. Meridian Place Apartments will provide 34 units of affordable housing to income
eligible elderly, formerly homeless persons; and the Barclay Apartments provide 66 units of affordable housing to income eligible
persons. Funding for Meridian Place was allocated to provide gap funding in a total building rehabilitation project. Funding for the
Barclay Apartments was allocated to provide funding for elevator modifications and electrical systems upgrades that are required for
the building to be compliant with 40-Year Building Re-Certification Codes.
For each of MBCDC's development projects, a separate ownership entity is created; this is common in development by both private
and non-profit organizations as a means to limit liability. In the case of the Meridian Place Apartments, MBCDC: Meridian Place,
LLC, a Florida not-for-profit limited liability corporation, was created. Likewise, for the Barclay Apartments, MBCDC: The Barclay,
LLC, was created. However, funding allocations were awarded to MBCDC, which is the sole member of each of the LLCs.
It is recommended that the Mayor and City Commission authorize the assignment of the previously awarded funds to the respective
limited liability corporations created for these two projects.
Advisory Board Recommendation: I N/A
Financial Impact Summary:
Financial Information:
City Clerk's Ofice Legislative Tracking: I Anna Parekh X7260
Source of Funds:
El OBPl
AM1 BEACH 271
mENDk;TEM C7M
DATE y-/?-//
1
2
Total
Amount
NIA
Account
MIAMIBEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 331 39, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
DATE: April 13, 201 1
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND THE ClTY COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF MlAMl BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING A ONE-TIME ONLY ASSIGNMENT
OF THE FY 201012011 HOME AGREEMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $566,257
BETWEEN THE ClTY AND MlAMl BEACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION (MBCDC), TO MBCDC: MERIDIAN PLACE, LLC, A NOT-FOR-
PROFIT CREATED BY MBCDC (AND WHOSE SOLE MEMBER IS MBCDC) AS
A SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST IN TITLE OF MERIDIAN PLACE, LOCATED AT
530 MERIDIAN AVENUE, MlAMl BEACH, FL.
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
MlAMl BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING A ONE-TIME ONLY ASSIGNMENT OF
THE FY 201012011 HOME AGREEMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $500,000
BETWEEN THE ClTY AND MlAMl BEACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION (MBCDC), TO MBCDC: THE BARCLAY, LLC, A NOT-FOR-
PROFIT CREATED BY MBCDC (AND WHOSE SOLE MEMBER IS MBCDC) AS
A SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST IN TITLE OF THE BARCLAY APARTMENTS,
LOCATED AT 1940 PARK AVENUE, MlAMl BEACH, FL.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the resolutions.
BACKGROUND
On July 14, 2010, the City Commission approved Resolution 2010-27428, adopting the One-Year
Action Plan for federal funds for Fiscal Year 2010/2011, allocating $1,066,257 of HOME Program
funding to Miami Beach Community Development Corporation (MBCDC) to be utilized in the
provision of rental and/or homeownership opportunities and acquisition and/or rehabilitation of multi-
family residential units. Subsequently on March 28, 201 1, contracts were signed with MBCDC,
allocating $566,257 of the HOME funding to the Meridian Place Apartments project, located at 530
Meridian Avenue; and allocating $500,000 to the Barclay Apartments project, located at 1940 Park
Avenue. Meridian Place Apartments will provide 34 units of affordable housing to income eligible
elderly, formerly homeless persons; and the Barclay Apartments provide 66 units of affordable
housing to income eligible persons. Funding for Meridian Place was allocated to provide gap
funding in a total building rehabilitation project. Funding for the Barclay Apartments was allocated to
provide funding for elevator modifications and electrical systems upgrades that are required for the
building to be compliant with 40-Year Building Re-Certification Codes.
Page 2 of 2
Consent fo Assignment /Meridian & Barclay
For each of MBCDC's development projects, a separate ownership entity is created; this is common
in development by both private and non-profit organizations as a means to limit liability. In the case
of the Meridian Place Apartments, MBCDC: Meridian Place, LLC, a Florida not-for-profit limited
liability corporation, was created. Likewise, for the Barclay Apartments, MBCDC: The Barclay, LLC a
Florida not-for-profit, was created. However, funding allocations were awarded to MBCDC, which is
the sole member of each of the limited liability corporations.
ANALYSIS
Assignments of the March 28,201 1 Contract Agreements from MBCDC to MBCDC: Meridian Place,
LLC, and to MBCDC: The Barclay, LLC are necessary to protect the City's interests by allowing the
City to contract with the legal owners of the properties.
CONCLUSION:
The administration recommends that the Mayor and City Commission, authorize a one-time only
assignment of the March 28, 201 1 HOME Agreements in the amounts of $566,257 and $500,000
between the City of Miami Beach and Miami Beach Community Development Corporation, to
MBCDC: Meridian Place, LLC, and MBCDC: The Barclay, LLC, respectively.
T:\AGENDAEOI 1Wpril 13\ConsentWeridian & Barclay Assignments - MEMO.doc
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF
MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING A ONE-TIME ONLY ASSIGNMENT OF
THE FY 2010/2011 HOME AGREEMENT, DATED MARCH 28, 2011, IN THE
AMOUNT OF $500,000, BETWEEN THE ClTY AND MlAMl BEACH COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (MBCDC), AS ASSIGNOR, TO MBCDC: THE
BARCLAY, LLC, A NOT-FOR-PROFIT CREATED BY MBCDC (AND WHOSE
SOLE MEMBER IS MBCDC), AS ASSIGNEE AND AS SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST
IN TITLE OF THE BARCLAY APARTMENTS, LOCATED AT 1940 PARK AVENUE,
MlAMl BEACH, FL.
WHEREAS, on February 18,1992, the City was designated by the United States Department
of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) as a participating jurisdiction for the receipt of funds as
provided under the HOME Investment Partnerships Program and pursuant to the HOME Program
Final Rule, 24 CFR PART 92, as same may be amended from time to time; and
WHEREAS, the City has an agreement with HUD for the purpose of conducting an
affordable housing program with federal financial assistance under the HOME Program; and
WHEREAS, on April 8, 1993, the Mayor and City Commission approved Resolution No.
93-20756, designating Miami Beach Community Development Corporation (MBCDC) as a qualified
Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO) under the HOME Program; and
WHEREAS, the City has determined the necessity for providing affordable housing in the
City through the Fiscal Year 2010/2011 One-Year Action Plan for Federal funds, adopted by
Resolution No. 201 0-27428 on July 14, 201 0.
WHEREAS, MBCDC entered into a HOME Agreement with the City, dated March 28,201 1,
to fund the rehabilitation of the Barclay Apartments, located at 1940 Park Avenue, in the amount of
$500,000 (the Agreement); and
WHEREAS, MBCDC created a not-for-profit entity, MBCDC: The Barclay, LLC, which is the
successor in interest to MBCDC and has assumed all interests and title to the Barclay Apartments;
and
WHEREAS, MBCDC is the sole member of MBCDC: The Barclay, LLC; and
WHEREAS,MBCDC has requested, and the Administration hereby recommends, that the
Mayor and City Commission approve an assignment of the Agreement from MBCDC, as assignor, to
MBCDC: The Barclay, LLC, as assignee.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF
THE ClTY OF MlAMl BEACH, FLORIDA, that the Mayor and City Commission hereby approve a
one-time only assignment of the HOME Agreement, Dated March 28, 201 1, between the City and
Miami Beach Community Development Corporation (MBCDC), as assignor, to MBCDC: The
Barclay, LLC, a not-for-profit entity created by MBCDC (and whose sole member is MBCDC), as
assignee and as successor in interest in title to the Barclay Apartments, located at 1940 Park
Avenue, Miami Beach FL.
PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS DAY OF ,201 1
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK - Robert Parcher MAYOR - Matti Herrera Bower
APPROVED AS TO
FORM & LANGUAGE
T:\AGENDAEOl I\April 13\Consent\The Barclay, LLC (Ass~gnment RESO).doc
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND THE ClTY COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF
MlAMl BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING A ONE-TIME ONLY ASSIGNMENT OF
THE FY 2010/2011 HOME AGREEMENT, DATED MARCH 28, 2011, IN THE
AMOUNT OF $566,257, BETWEEN THE ClTY AND MlAMl BEACH COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (MBCDC), AS ASSIGNOR, TO MBCDC:
MERIDIAN PLACE, LLC, A NOT-FOR-PROFIT CREATED BY MBCDC (AND
WHOSE SOLE MEMBER IS MBCDC), AS ASSIGNEE AND AS SUCCESSOR IN
INTEREST IN TITLE OF MERIDIAN PLACE, LOCATED AT 530 MERIDIAN
AVENUE, MlAMl BEACH, FL.
WHEREAS, on February 18,1992, the City was designated by the United States Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD) as a participating jurisdiction for the receipt of funds as
provided under the HOME Investment Partnerships Program and pursuant to the HOME Program
Final Rule, 24 CFR PART 92, as same may be amended from time to time; and
WHEREAS, the City has an agreement with HUD for the purpose of conducting an affordable
housing program with federal financial assistance under the HOME Program; and
WHEREAS, on April 8, 1993, the Mayor and City Commission approved Resolution No.
93-20756, designating Miami Beach Community Development Corporation (MBCDC) as a qualified
Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO) under the HOME Program; and
WHEREAS, the City has determined the necessity for providing affordable housing in the City
through the Fiscal Year 2010/2011 One-Year Action Plan for Federal funds, adopted by Resolution
No. 201 0-27428 on July 14, 2010.
WHEREAS, MBCDC entered into a HOME Agreement with the City, dated March 28,201 1,
to fund the rehabilitation of the Meridian Place Apartments, located at 530 Meridian Avenue, in the
amount of $566,257 (the Agreement); and
WHEREAS, MBCDC created a not-for-profit entity, MBCDC: Meridian Place, LLC, which is the
successor in interest to MBCDC and has assumed all interests and title to the Meridian Place
Apartments; and
WHEREAS, MBCDC is the sole member of MBCDC: Meridian Place, LLC; and
WHEREAS, MBCDC has requested, and the Administration hereby recommends, that the Mayor
and City Commission approve an assignment of the Agreement from MBCDC, as assignor, to
MBCDC: Meridian Place, LLC, as assignee.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE
ClTY OF MlAMl BEACH, FLORIDA, that the Mayor and City Commission hereby approve a one-time
only assignment of the HOME Agreement, dated March 28,201 1, between the City and Miami Beach
Community Development Corporation (MBCDC), as assignor, to MBCDC: Meridian Place, LLC, a
not-for-profit entity created by MBCDC (and whose sole member is MBCDC) as assignee and as
successor in interest in title to the Meridian Place Apartments, located at 530 Meridian Avenue,
Miami Beach, FL.
PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS DAY OF ,201 1
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK - Robert Parcher MAYOR - Matti Herrera Bower
T:\AGENDAEOl 1Wpril 13\ConsentWleridian Place, LLC (Assignment RESO).doc
APPROVED AS TO
FORM & MNGUAGE
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
A resolution proclaiming April 25 though April 30,201 1 as "National Community Development Week"
in the City of Miami Beach and authorizing the acceptance of sponsorships made to the City for
Community Development Week events and further accepting future sponsorships for this purpose,
subject to ratification by the Mayor and City Commission.
Key Intended Outcomes Supported:
1. Increase access to workforce or affordable housing. 2. Improve the lives of elderly residents. 3.
Enhance learning opportunities for youth. 4. Reduce the number of homeless. 5. Ensure safety and
appearance of building structures and sites.
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc): Based on the 2009 Customer Satisfaction
Survey: 17.5% of businesses feel that lack of workforce housing is one of their most important
challenges; 80% of residents 65-years or older rated City response to expectations as good or
excellent; 65% of households with children rated the City support of youth progams as good or
excellent; 43.6% of residents responded favorably to the City's handling of homelessness; 64% of
residents felt that code enforcement was acceptable.
.""."I.
Shall the City adopt a resolution proclaiming April 25 through April 30, 201 1 as National Community
Development Week in the City of Miami Beach and authorizing the acceptance of sponsorships made
to the City for Community Development Week events and further accepting future sponsorships for
this purpose, subject to ratification by the Mayor and City Commission ?.
Item SummarylRecommendation:
The Administration recommends that the Mayor and the City Commission adopt a resolution
proclaiming April 25 through April 30,201 1 as National Community Development Week in the City of
Miami Beach. The Administration also recommends that the Mayor and the City Commission
authorize the acceptance of sponsorships for CD Week events.
Advisory Board Recommendation: I NIA
Financial Information:
I I
I I I I
Financial Impact Summary:
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking:
I Anna Parekh X7260
Approved Source of
Funds:
El
OBPl
MIAMIBEACH 279
AGENDA EPEU c7/v
Dnrr ~X.
Account
NIA I
2
3
4
Total
Amount
MIAMIBEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 331 39, www.rniarnibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
DATE: April 13, 201 1
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF MIAMI
BEACH, FLORIDA, PROCLAIMING APRIL 25, 2011, THROUGH APRIL 30, 2011
"NATIONAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WEEK" IN THE ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH;
APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF THOSE CERTAIN
SPONSORSHIPS MADE TO THE ClTY FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WEEK (AS
SET FORTH IN THlS RESOLUTION); AUTHORIZING THE ClTY MANAGER TO
ACCEPT PROSPECTIVE SPONSORSHIPS FOR THlS PURPOSE, SUBJECT TO
RATIFICATION BY THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION; AND AUTHORIZING THE
CITY MANAGER TO MAKE SUCH EXPEDITURES AND/OR REIMBURSEMENTS FROM
THE AFORESTATED SPONSORSHIPS, IN FURTHERANCE OF AND CONSISTENT
WITH THE AFORESTATED PUBLIC PURPOSE EVENT.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
ANALYSIS
The week of April 25 through April 30, 201 1 has been designated as National Community
Development Week by the National Community Development Association to celebrate the
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program.
The CDBG program has as its primary objective the development of viable urban
communities by providing decent housing, a suitable living environment and expanding
economic opportunities, principally for persons of low and moderate-income.
The City of Miami Beach receives a direct allocation of CDBG entitlement funds annually to
provide resources that develop a strong collaborative network of relationships with its
residents, and many nonprofit agencies that provide services help make possible the City's
commitment to its neighborhoods over the years. The CDBG program has had a significant
impact on the City of Miami Beach's local economy through job creation and retention,
physical redevelopment and improved local tax bases, with funds used for capital
improvement, housing, public services, commercial revitalization, and residential
rehabilitation programs.
The City recognizes that in our community and in communities throughout the nation, 37
years of CDBG program funding has developed a strong network of relationships among
local governments, residents, businesses, and non-profit organizations. If designated, the
City is planning events to help highlight some of the programs and projects that have been
possible through this funding. A Letter to Commissioners with a list of events will be
provided.
Commission Memorandum
CD Week April 13,201 1
Page 2 of 2
This year's CD Week event will be held on Tuesday, May 3,201 1. There will be a bus tour
of CDBG funded programs and projects followed by a luncheon. The Administration is
working with two banks and exploring other potential sponsorship options to underwrite and
support this event.
CONCLUSION
Staff recommends that the Mayor and City Commission designate the week of April 9
through April 15, 201 1 as "Community Development Block Grant Weekn in support of this
valued program that has made a tremendous contribution to the viability of the City's housing
stock, infrastructure, public services and economic vitality of our community; and authorizing
the acceptance of sponsorships made to the City for Community Development Week events;
and further accepting future sponsorships for this purpose, subject to ratification by the
Mayor and City Commission
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, PROCLAIMING APRIL 25, 2011,
THROUGH APRIL 30, 201 1 "NATIONAL COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT WEEK" IN THE ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH;
APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF THAT
CERTAIN SPONSORSHIP MADE TO THE ClTY FOR COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT WEEK (AS SET FORTH IN THlS RESOLUTION);
AUTHORIZING THE ClTY MANAGER TO ACCEPT PROSPECTIVE
SPONSORSHIPS FOR THlS PURPOSE, SUBJECT TO RATIFICATION
BY THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION; AND AUTHORIZING THE
ClTY MANAGER TO MAKE SUCH EXPENDITURES AND/OR
REIMBURSEMENTS FROM THE AFORESTATED SPONSORSHIPS, IN
FURTHERANCE OF AND CONSISTENT WITH THE AFORESTATED
PUBLIC PURPOSE EVENT
WHEREAS, Miami Beach takes great pride in participating with the U.S. Housing
and Urban Development's (HUD) Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
Program, which has had a significant impact upon Miami Beach County through
economic development, capital improvements, affordable housing, public services, and
historic preservation; and
WHEREAS, since 1975, the CDBG Program, has been providing local
government with the resources necessary to meet the needs of low and moderate
income persons and neighborhoods; and
WHEREAS, CDBG funds continue to be used annually to assist thousands of
residents of Miami Beach in cooperation with numerous community partners (including,
concerned citizens, the Community Development Advisory Committee, non-profit
agencies, community based organizations, community development corporations, and
Miami Beach City Departments), to develop viable urban communities by providing
decent housing, a suitable and sustainable living environment and expanding economic
opportunities for low and moderate income persons; and
WHEREAS, the City administers the CDBG Program in order to address the
community development needs and priorities of the residents of Miami Beach; and
WHEREAS, in furtherance of Community Development Week, which is hereby
proclaimed in the City of Miami Beach from April 25, 201 1 through April 30, 201 1, the
following entity has proposed a contribution to the City to become a sponsor of
Community Development Week:
Sponsor
Gibraltar Private Bank & Trust - $500; and
WHEREAS, the aforestated, and prospective, sponsorship contributions will be
used to fund events in the City during Community Development Week; and
WHEREAS, it is hereby recommended that the Mayor and City Commission
authorize the acceptance of future sponsorships, in furtherance of Community
Development Week events, subject to ratification of same by the City Commission at a
future meeting; and
WHEREAS, it is further recommended that the Mayor and City Commission
hereby authorize the City Manager or his designee to make any necessary
reimbursements and/or expenditures of the aforestated sponsorships, in furtherance of
and consistent with the aforestated Community Development Week events.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND ClTY
COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that the Mayor and the
City Commission hereby proclaim April 25, 2011 through April 30, 201 1 "National
Community Development Week in the City of Miami Beach; that the City of Miami
Beach's Community Development Week event serves a public purpose; that the Mayor
and City Commission hereby approve Gibraltar Bank and Trust as a sponsor of
Community Development Week, accepting its contribution for such purpose; that the City
Manager is hereby authorized to accept prospective sponsorships for this purpose,
subject to ratification by the Mayor and City Commission; and that the City Manager is
further authorized to make such expenditures and/or reimbursements from the
aforestated sponsorships, in furtherance of and consistent with the aforestated public
purpose event.
PASSED and ADOPTED this day of ,2011.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
ClTY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO
& LANGUAGE
EXECUTION
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
A Resolution approving Amendment No.2 to the Agreement with City of Miami Beach and Live Nation Worldwide, lnc., dated June
22,2007, for the Jackie Gleason Theater of the Performing Arts allowing.for a trial period where Live Nation would be permitted to
extend hours of operation and liquor sales with certain conditions, and further authorize the City Manager to approve future
amendments allowing the extension of hours consistent with the conditions of the attached Amendment.
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Maximize Miami Beach as a Destination Brand
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): The 2009 Community Satisfaction Survey reported more than one-fifth of
all resident respondents feel there are "too few" family friendly activities (24.6%) and cultural activities (24.1%). Additionally, on
average, residents attended 10.61 cultural activities per year and 7.1 9 family friendly activities per year.
Issue: I Should the City allow for an additional twelve (12) month trial period for Live Nation to host events and sell alcohol past midnight? I
Item SummarylRecommendation:
I On Mav 16. 2007, the Citv Commission adopted Resolution No. 2007-26548 authorizing the City Administration to execute a 1 . .
~ana~ement ~~reement 4th Live Nation for the Fillmore Miami Beach at the Jackie ~leason~heate; The Management Agreement
with Live Nation was executed on Friday, June 22,2007. The Term of the Agreement is 10 Years, with one 5-year renewal option at
the discretion of Live Nation. There is a second 5-year renewal option upon mutual agreement. The initial Term began on Thursday,
June 21,2007 and ends on August 31,2017.
Live Nation requested an amendment to the food and beverage restriction in place in the Agreement for a maximum of twelve (1 2)
events per calendar year. Section 2.2(b) restricts Live Nation from selling, distributing, or sewing food andlor beverages after
midnight. As you may know, this provision was included in the agreement to address concerns raised by the nightlife industry at the
time. This request was considered by the Finance and Citywide Projects Committee and the Nightlife Industry Task Force (NITE) in
a series of meeting in late 2008 and 2009. Subsequently, The City Commission adopted Resolution No. 2009-27278 on December
9,2009 approving Amendment No. 1 to the Management Agreement.
On August 17,201 0, the NITE Task Force met and discussed the progress of the aforementioned Amendment. Live Nation advised
NlTE that, to date, they have been unable to book any events during the trial period that required the extension of hours as defined in
the Amendment. However, Live Nation requested another year trial period. NlTE agreed that another year for the trial was
warranted and recommended in favor of another amendment.
The following summarizes the proposed trial program:
1 .Any sale, distribution, and or service of food and beverages, including alcohol, at the Venue shall cease at no later than 2:00 AM.
2. The Venue will be closed to the public no later than 3:00 AM; all patrons within the Venue should also leave by 3:00 AM.
3. No DJ-only performances shall be allowed for the extended hours.
4. "Blackout" dates for the trial period are New Years Eve and five days of the Winter Music Conference normally held the last week
in March.
5.The trial events will not count toward the annual contractually required number of events.
It is recommended that the Commission approve the trial program.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
I The NlTE Task Force met on August 17,201 0 and agreed that another year for the trial was warranted and recommended in favor of ( I another amendment.
Financial Information:
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking:
( Max Sklar, Tourism and Cultural Development Director
I OBPl
MIAMIBEACH 285
Source of Funds:
I 1
Total I
AGENDA r~ EM C7U
Amount
I
Account
MIAMIBEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 331 39, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Co mission 2'
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
DATE: April 13, 201 1
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF MIAMI
BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND ClTY CLERK
TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE ClTY AND LlVE NATION WORLDWIDE, INC., DATED JUNE 22,2007, FOR THE
JACKIE GLEASON THEATER OF THE PERFORMING ARTS (NOW KNOWN AS THE
FILLMORE MIAMI BEACH AT THE JACKIE GLEASON THEATER); SAID AMENDMENT
ALLOWING FOR LlVE NATION TO CONTINUE TO BE PERMITTED TO EXTEND
HOURS OF OPERATION AND LIQUOR SALES, SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WlTH
CERTAIN CONDITIONS, AND FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE ClTY MANAGER TO
ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVE FUTURE REQUESTS FOR SUCH EXTENSION OF
HOURS AND LIQUOR SALES, CONSISTENT WlTH SUCH CONDITIONS.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the resolution.
ANALYSIS
On May 16, 2007, the City Commission adopted Resolution No. 2007-26548 authorizing the City
Administration to execute a Management Agreement with Live Nation for the Fillmore Miami Beach
at the Jackie Gleason Theater. The Management Agreement with Live Nation was executed on
Friday, June 22,2007. The Term of the Agreement is 10 Years, with one 5-year renewal option at
the discretion of Live Nation. There is a second 5-year renewal option upon mutual agreement. The
initial Term began on Thursday, June 21,2007 and ends on August 31,2017.
Following a $3.5 million renovation, Live Nation opened the venue in October 2007 with Ricky
Martin. Live Nation continues to book the venue for a variety of entertainment. A discussion item
was placed on the September 10,2008 Commission agenda regarding the variety and number of
events being booked by Live Nation at the Venue. During the discussion of the aforementioned
item, a desire was expressed to see more events at the venue with a greater variety in the type of
events.
Following the September 10,2008, City Commission meeting, Live Nation requested an amendment
to the food and beverage restriction in place in the Agreement. Section 2.2(b) restricts Live Nation
from selling, distributing, or serving food and/or beverages after midnight. As you may know, this
provision was included in the agreement to address concerns raised by the nightlife industry at the
time. Live Nation has advised us that there have been a number of potential events that they have
been unable to book due to this restriction. For example, events with two performances in one night
would have the second performance impacted. Live Nation originally requested the ability to host
events and sell food and/or beverages after midnight, including alcoholic beverages, for a maximum
of twelve (1 2) events during a trial period.
Live Nation Amendment
April 13, 201 1
City Commission Meeting
Page 2 of 2
This request was considered by the Finance and Citywide Projects Committee and the Nightlife
Industry Task Force (NITE) in a series of meeting in late 2008 and 2009. Subsequently, The City
Commission adopted Resolution No. 2009-27278 on December 9,2009 approving Amendment No.
1 to the Management Agreement. This amendment permitted Live Nation to extend hours of
operation and liquor sales at the Venue for a trial period, subject to the following conditions:
1. Any sale, distribution, and or service of food and beverages, including alcohol, at the
Venue shall cease at no later than 2:00 AM.
2. The Venue will be closed to the public no later than 3:00 AM; accordingly, all patrons
within the Venue should also leave by 3:00 AM.
3. No DJ-only performances shall be allowed for the extended hours.
4. Live Nation shall provide the City Manager or hislher authorized designee with a
written progress report halfway through the trial period, or July 1, 2010.
On August 17,2010, the NlTE Task Force met and discussed the progress of the aforementioned
Amendment. Live Nation advised NlTE that, to date, they have been unable to book any events
during the trial period that required the extension of hours as defined in the Amendment. However,
Live Nation requested another year trial period. NlTE agreed that another year for the trial was
warranted and recommended in favor of another amendment.
It is important to note that Live Nation is a live entertainment promoter and has publicly maintained
that they are not interested in operating the Fillmore as a nightclub. As you may know, they have
operated the Fillmore at a loss for 2008, 2009 and 2010. They continue to look at opportunities to
build their business and the removal of this restriction provides them with additional opportunities.
Due to other projects, the aforementioned Amendment was never formally memorialized. At that
time, the intent was to take the amendment directly to the Commission for consideration. Live Nation
and the City recently completed drafting the attached Amendment No. 2 to the Management
Agreement for the Fillmore Miami Beach at the Jackie Gleason Theater (formerly the Jackie
Gleason Theater of Performing Arts) and are presenting the Amendment to the City Commission for
consideration. The Administration is placing this item directly on the City Commission agenda for
consideration instead of taking it back to the Finance and Citywide Projects Committee to expedite
the potential approval.
Additionally, the Administration is recommending that the City Manager be authorized to approve
future amendments for this specific use only and consistent with the conditions approved by the City
Commission. This would be subject to annual review to ensure compliance with the established
conditions. Any deviation from the approved conditions would require further review and approval
from the City Commission.
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends the adoption of the attached Amendment No. 2 to the Agreement
between the City of Miami Beach and Live Nation Worldwide, Inc., dated June 22, 2007, for the
Jackie Gleason Theater of the Performing Arts. At the end of the trial period, Staff will assess
whether there have been any issues or concerns related to the extended hours for alcoholic
beverage sales. The City Manager would be authorized to approve future amendments consistent
with conditions in the attached Amendment.
JMGIHMFIMAS
T:\AGENDAPOI 1\4-13-1 I\Live Nation Amendment No 2 Memo.doc
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR
AND ClTY CLERK TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE
MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND LlVE NATION
WORLDWIDE, INC., DATED JUNE 22, 2007, FOR THE JACKIE GLEASON
THEATER OF THE PERFORMING ARTS (NOW KNOWN AS THE FILLMORE
MlAMl BEACH AT THE JACKIE GLEASON THEATER); SAID AMENDMENT
ALLOWING FOR LlVE NATION TO CONTINUE TO BE PERMITTED TO
EXTEND HOURS OF OPERATION AND LIQUOR SALES, SUBJECT TO
COMPLIANCE WlTH CERTAIN CONDITIONS, AND FURTHER AUTHORIZING
THE ClTY MANAGER TO ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVE FUTURE
REQUESTS FOR SUCH EXTENSION OF HOURS AND LIQUOR SALES,
CONSISTENT WlTH SUCH CONDITIONS.
WHEREAS, on June 22, 2007, the City entered into an Agreement with Live Nation
Worldwide, Inc. (Live Nation) to manage the Jackie Gleason Theater of the Performing Arts
(now named and known as the Fillmore Miami Beach at the Jackie Gleason Theater) (the
Venue), with an initial term of ten (10) years, commencing on June 22, 2007, and ending on
August 31, 2017 (the Agreement), and
WHEREAS, Section 2.l(b) of the Agreement restricts Live Nation from serving food or
beverages after midnight; and
WHEREAS, Live Nation requested an amendment to the aforestated food and beverage
restriction, as there were a number of potential events it was unable to book (due to this
restriction); and
WHEREAS, on December 9, 2009, the City Commission adopted Resolution No. 2009-
27278, approving Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement, which permitted Live Nation to extend
hours of operation and liquor sales at the Venue for a trial period (12 months), subject to certain
conditions; and
WHEREAS, the trial period expired on December 31, 2010, and Live Nation has
requested that it be extended, andlor otherwise continue to be permitted; and
WHEREAS, the Administration recommends that the City Commission now approve
Amendment No. 2 to the Agreement, which would continue to permit Live Nation to extend
hours of operation and liquor sales at the Venue, subject to the conditions below, and would
further authorize the City Manager to administratively approve such requests in the future;
again, subject to the following conditions:
1. Any sale, distribution, and or service of food and beverages, including alcohol, at
the Venue shall cease at no later than 2:00 AM.
2. The Venue will be closed to the public no later than 3:00 AM; accordingly, all
patrons within the Venue should also leave by 3:00 AM.
3. No DJ-only performances shall be allowed for the extended hours.
4. Live Nation shall provide the City Manager or hislher authorized designee with a
written status report following each event in which permission to serve alcohol
after midnight has been granted.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND ClTY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that the Mayor and City
Commission hereby approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute Amendment
No.2 to the Agreement between the City and Live Nation Worldwide, Inc., dated June 22, 2007,
for the Jackie Gleason Theater of the Performing Arts (now knows as the Fillmore Miami Beach
at the Jackie Gleason Theater); said Amendment continuing to permit the extension of the hours
of operation and liquor sales, subject to Live Nation's compliance with certain conditions, as set
forth in the Amendment, and further authorizing the City Manager to approve future requests for
extension of hours and liquor sales, consistent with such conditions.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of April, 201 1
Attest: MAYOR
ClTY CLERK
T:\AGENDA\2011\4-13-1 ?\Live Nation Amendment No 2 Reso.doc
APPROVED AS TO
FORM & LANGUAGE
AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH AND
LIVE NATION WORLDWIDE, INC., DATED JUNE 22,2007, FOR THE JACKIE GLEASON
THEATER OF THE PERFORMING ARTS (THE AGREEMENT)
This Amendment No. 2 to the Agreement, is made and entered into this day of
, 201 1, by and between the ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, a municipal
corporation having its principal office at 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida,
33139 ("City"), and LIVE NATION WORLDWIDE, INC, a Delaware corporation whose address
is 9348 Civic Center Drive, Beverly Hills, California 90210 ("Live Nation").
RECITALS
WHEREAS, on June 22, 2007, the City entered into an Agreement with Live Nation
Worldwide, Inc. (Live Nation) to manage the Jackie Gleason Theater of the Performing Arts
(now named and known as the Fillmore Miami Beach at the Jackie Gleason Theater) (the
Venue), with an initial term of ten (10) years, commencing on June 22, 2007, and ending on
August 31, 201 7 (the Agreement), and
WHEREAS, Section 2.1 (b) of the Agreement restricts Live Nation from serving food or
beverages after midnight; and
WHEREAS, Live Nation requested an amendment to the aforestated food and beverage
restriction, as there were a number of potential events it was unable to book (due to this
restriction); and
WHEREAS, on December 9, 2009, the City Commission adopted Resolution No. 2009-
27278, approving Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement, which permitted Live Nation to extend
hours of operation and liquor sales at the Venue for a trial period (12 months), subject to certain
conditions; and
WHEREAS, the trial period expired on December 31, 2010, and Live Nation has
requested that it be extended; and
WHEREAS, the Administration recommends that the City Commission now approve
Amendment No. 2 to the Agreement, which would continue to permit Live Nation to extend
hours of operation and liquor sales at the Venue, subject to the conditions below, and would
further authorize the City Manager to administratively approve such requests in the future;
again, subject to the following conditions: a
I. Any sale, distribution, and or service of food and beverages, including alcohol, at
the Venue shall cease at no later than 2:00 AM.
2. The Venue will be closed to the public no later than 3:00 AM; accordingly, all
patrons within the Venue should also leave by 3:00 AM.
3. No DJ-only performances shall be allowed for the extended hours.
4. Live Nation shall provide the City Manager or histher authorized designee with a
written status report following each event in which permission to serve alcohol
after midnight has been granted.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual premises, covenants and agreements
herein contained, and other good and valuable consideration, in receipt and adequacy of which
are hereby acknowledged and intending to be legally bound, the City and Live Nation hereby
amend the Agreement as follows:
1. The aforestated recitals are true and correct and incorporated by
reference herein.
2. Section 2.l(b) of the Agreement, entitled "Engagement," is amended as
follows:
(b) Manager of the Facility. Live Nation accepts the engagement and agrees
to operate, manage, maintain, promote and market the Facility in a manner consistent with other
similar first class facilities operated by Live Nation and its Affiliates as of the Commencement
Date. Subject to the terms of this Agreement, Live Nation shall be, as agent for the City, the sole
and exclusive manager of the City to operate, manager, maintain, promote and market the
Facility during the term. In such capacity, except as otherwise expressly reserved under this
Agreement to the City and/or except for such matters as are subject to the to the approval of the
City or the City Manager, Live Nation shall have exclusive authority over the management and
operation of the Facility and all activities therein; provided, however, the Facility shall be used
only as a live entertainment venue and public auditorium or any combination thereof, and for
such ancillary uses as are customarily related to such primary use, including, without limitation,
broadcasting, recording, filming, private parties or functions, bar (including alcoholic beverages)
and food concessions (and including preparation of food), in each case in conjunction with an
Event or rental function then being held, and sale of merchandise related to any Event then
being held. Other uses may be allowed only with the prior written approval of the City Manager.
Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, in no event shall food and be~erages~including
alcohol, be sold, distributed, or served after midnight (12:OO AM) and in no event shall bottle
service be offered for alcohol, nor beverages, including alcoholic beverages, be sold in bottles.
Bottle service is herein defined as the ability for patrons to purchase entire bottles of liquor for
personal consumption.
Notwithstanding the preceding, and subiect to the prior written approval of the
City Manaqer, which a~~roval (if qiven at all) shall be at the City Manaqer's sole and absolute
discretion, #eG&+kM ahw Live Nation may be permitted to sell, distribute, and/or serve food . . and beverages, including alcohol, at the Venue (?2) I1 . . 1,
, I 9n1n
21 3AlA / '
. . nd h #&%++ subject
;b. ihe"iOi1~~"~ "
1. Any sale, distribution, and or service of food and beverages, including alcohol, at
the Venue shall cease at no later than 2:00 AM.
2. The Venue will be closed to the public no later than 3:00 AM; accordingly, all
patrons within the venue should also leave by 3:00 AM.
3. No DJW performances shall be allowed for extended hours.
4. Live Nation shall provide the City Manager or hislher authorized designee with a
written pwgms status report following each event in which permission to serve
alcohol after midniqht has been wanted Q, cr July
1-;-28-16.
Live Nation must provide the City Manager or hislher authorized representative with at least
fifteen (15) days prior written notice, prior to any (and each) event in which Live Nation intends
to extend the hours of sale, distribution, or service of any food and beverages, including alcohol,
past midnight:; provided, however, that in no event shall . . nr nr - , Live Nation be permitted to skAk+e#
zi~bux#i' ?' ng alcohol, after midnight during New
Year's Eve (December 3IS) and during Winter Music Conference (generally, the last week of
March); these Events will not count toward the required annual number of events, as specificed
in Section 2.2 (b).
The parties further acknowledge that the permission granted under the aforestated trial period
may be revoked at any time by the City Manager, with or without cause and at hislher sole
option and discretion, upon thirty (3) days prior written notice to Live Nation; provided, however,
that Live Nation shal be allowed to proceed with any events booked by Live Nation prior to the
date of termination (which entail the sale, distribution or service of any food or beverages,
including alcohol, past midnight). The City's termination of the trial period shall not result in any
liability to the City.
3. No Further Modifications. Except as provided in this Amendment No. 1,
the Agreement remains unmodified and in full force and effect.
[REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLAN)<I
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been duly executed by the parties hereto as of
the day and year first above written.
ATTEST: CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA
City Clerk Mayor
day of , 2011.
LIVE NATION WORLDWIDE, INC.
ATTEST:
President
Secretary
Print Name
day of , 2011.
T:MGENDAPOI 1\4-13-1 I\Live Nation Amendment No 2- After HoursFINAL.DOC
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
A resolution of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami Beach, Florida authorizing the City
of Miami Beach to accept a $5,000 donation from a Mr. Doron Valero, a Miami Beach resident, in
order to pay for the removal a derelict vessel in a navigational portion of Biscayne Bay within the
jurisdiction of the City of Miami Beach..
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Increase resident ratings of public safety services.
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): According to the Center For Research
and Public Policy, and Business Residential Satisfaction Survey of the City of Miami Beach,
-esidents in 2009, indicated that their three most important areas for the City of Miami Beach to
address in an effort to improve public safety throughout the City are: Preventing Crime 44.9%,
Enforcing Traffic Laws 36.1 % and Increasing Visibility of Police in Neighborhoods 32.4%.
Issue:
Shall the City adopt the Resolution? I
Item Summary/Recommendation:
1 On October 14. 2010. the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission cited a 32 foot vessel. 1
registration number ~~~32657~77~ under Case Number FWSB-10-OFF-8399 for a derelict vessel
pursuant to Florida State Statute 376.15. This vessel is located west of Palm Island in City of Miami
Beach jurisdiction and in a navigational waterway, abandoned and derelict prior to October 14, 2010.
If left in the present condition and location, the above vessel has the potential to become a
navigational hazard especially during night time hours or in limited lighting conditions.
Mr. Doron Valero who resides at 320 South Coconut Lane, Palm Island, Miami Beach would like to
donate $5,000 to pay for the expenses associated with the removal of the removal of the vessel and
alleviate the potential for injury or property damage as a result of the derelict vessel.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
NIA
Financial Information:
I Source of I
I I I
Financial Impact Summary:
NIA
Account Amount
u
OBPl
City Clerk's Office,&gislative Tracking:
Michael Gr r-anager
Planning an$kesearch Section
Funds:
I I
Total I
AGENDA lTEM 7?
DATE 4~3-I/
I
I I
MIAMIBEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33 139, www.rniamibeachfl.gov
MEMO # COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
DATE: April 13, 201 1
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE ClTY
OF MlAMl BEACH, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE ClTY OF MlAMl BEACH
TO ACCEPT A $5,000 DONATION FROM A MR. DORON VALERO, A MlAMl
BEACH RESIDENT, IN ORDER TO PAY FOR THE REMOVAL OF A
DERELICT VESSEL IN NAVIGATIONAL PORTION OF BISCAYNE BAY AND
WITHIN JURISDICTION OF THE ClTY OF MlAMl BEACH.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution
ANALYSIS
On October 14, 2010, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission cited a 32 foot
vessel, registration number PAC32657M77L under Case Number FWSB-10-OFF-8399 for a
derelict vessel pursuant to Florida State Statute 376.15. This vessel is located west of Palm
Island in City of Miami Beach jurisdiction and in a navigational waterway, abandoned and derelict
prior to October 14, 2010. If left in the present condition and location, the above vessel has the
potential to become a navigational hazard especially during night time hours or in limited lighting
conditions.
Mr. Doron Valero who resides at 320 South Coconut Lane, Palm Island, Miami Beach would like
to donate $5,000 to pay for the expenses associated with the removal of the vessel and alleviate
the potential for injury or property damage as a result of the derelict vessel.
JMGICNIR Tp MI G
RESOLUTION No.
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF
THE ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE
CITY OF MlAMl BEACH TO ACCEPT A $5,000 DONATION
FROM MR. DORON VALERO, A MlAMl BEACH RESIDENT, IN
ORDER TO PAY FOR THE REMOVAL OF A DERELICT
VESSEL LOCATED IN THE NAVIGATIONAL PORTION OF
BISCAYNE BAY AND WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE
ClTY OF MlAMl BEACH.
WHEREAS, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission identified a 32 foot
vessel, registration number PAC32657M77L under Case No. FWSB-10-OFF-8399 (the
"Vessel"), as a derelict vessel pursuant to Florida State Statute 376.15; and
WHEREAS, the Vessel is located west of Palm Island and within the jurisdiction of the
City of Miami Beach, which is in a navigational waterway, abandoned and derelict prior to
October 14,2010; and
WHEREAS, the present condition of the vessel has the potential to become a
navigational hazard during night time hours or in limited lighting conditions, and impede other
vessels traveling through the navigated waterway; and
+
WHEREAS, Mr. Doron Valero, a Miami Beach resident, would like to donate $5,000 to
pay for the anticipated expenses associated with the removal of the vessel, and alleviate the
potential for injury or property damage as a result of this derelict vessel.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MlAMl BEACH, FLORIDA, that the Mayor and City
Commission for the City of Miami Beach hereby authorizes the City of Miami Beach to accept a
$5,000 donation from Mr. Doron Valero, a Miami Beach resident, in order to pay for the removal
of a derelict vessel located in the navigational portion of Biscayne Bay and within the jurisdiction
of the City of Miami Beach.
PASSED and ADOPTED this day of April, 201 1.
ATTEST BY:
ROBERT PARCHER, ClTY CLERK
MATTI HERRERA BOWER
MAYOR
APPROVED AS TO
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
A Resolution Of The Mayor And City Commission Of The City Of Miami Beach, Florida, Approving And Authorizing The
Mayor And City Clerk To Execute A Professional Services Agreement With Gannett Fleming For The Project
Development And Environment Study For The West Avenue Bridge Project (Project) In The Amount Of $697,989.12.
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Enhance mobility throughout the City.
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.):
Transportation remains one of the most significant areas to address from the 2009 Community Satisfaction Survey
results (often mentioned as a Key Quality of Life Issue). 24% of residents rated traffic flow as excellent or good, and
37% as poor. 35% of residents rated the availability of pedestrian trails and bicycle pathsllanes as excellent or good,
and 30% as poor.
Issue: I Shall the Mayor and City Commission approve the Resolution? 1
Item SummarylRecommendation:
The West Avenue Bridge Project (Project) proposes to construct a new bridge over the Collins Canal at West Avenue. In
2008, the City conducted a planning-level traffic analysis and feasibility study, which investigated all traffic movements
associated with this proposed bridge. The re~ult:~of the study determined that the proposed bridge would help alleviate
traffic congestion along Alton Road and along 17 Street, and would improve transit, bicycle, and pedestrian mobility and
safety. The proposed bridge would provide a more direct connection to the Sunset Neighborhoods and reduce the
potential for safety conflicts at the intersections of Dade Boulevard and Bay Road.
The Project is partially federally funded, which triggered the need for complying with the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA) and the completion of a Project Development and Environment (PD&E) Study. On August 17,2010, RFQ
48-0911 0 was issued to retain the services of a consultant that specializes in PD&E Studies for new bridges. Bidsync
issued bid notices to 4,258 prospective bidders which resulted in the receipt of the following four (4) bids: BCC
Engineering, Inc.; The Corradino Group, Inc.; Gannett Fleming, Inc.; and T. Y. Lin International.
On October 15, 2010, an Evaluation Committee convened to score and rank the proposals. At this meeting, the
Committee recommended Gannett Fleming, Inc., as the top-ranked firm, T.Y. Lin International as the second-ranked
firm, and The Corradino Group, Inc. as the third-ranked firm. At the November 17, 2010, pursuant to Resolution No.
201 0-27548, the City Commission was authorized to enter into negotiations with the top-ranked firm, Gannett Fleming.
City staff conducted an extensive negotiation process with Gannett Fleming and, based on the negotiated man-hours
and hourly rates, the final cost for the PD&E Study was reduced in half from approximately $1,200,000 to $697,989.12,
which is within the $698,000 available in federal funding for this phase. I THE ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE RESOLUTION. I
Advisory Board Recommendation:
1
Financial Information:
3 I I Total / $697,989.12
I
1
2
.)
I I I
Financial Impact Summary:
Account I source of
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking: I Fernando Vazquez, City Engineer, x.6399
Amount
$697,989.1 2
' Agenda Item e 7
FY 08/09 FHPP Funds (Acct#3032575061357)
Date 41-13-11
@ MIAMIBEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 331 39, www.miamibeachH.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission /
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
DATE: April 13, 201 1
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF MIAMI
BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND ClTY CLERK
TO EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WlTH GANNET FLEMING,
PURSUANT TO REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS NO. 48-09110, FOR THE PROJECT
DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENT STUDY FOR THE WEST AVENUE BRIDGE
PROJECT (PROJECT) IN THE AMOUNT OF $697,989.12; TO BE FUNDED WlTH
FEDERAL HIGH PRIORITY PROJECT FUNDING PREVIOUSLY APPROPRIATED IN
THE FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2008109 CAPITAL BUDGET.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
FUNDING
Federal High Priority Project funding in the amount of $697,989.12 previously appropriated in the
Fiscal Year 2008109 Capital Budget is available for the West Avenue Bridge Project Development and
Environment Study.
BACKGROUND
The West Avenue Bridge Project (Project) proposes to construct a new bridge over the Collins Canal
at West Avenue. The proposed cross section of the bridge consists of two travel lanes, bi-directional
bike lanes, and a sidewalk on each side of the road.
In 2008, the City conducted a planning-level traffic analysis and feasibility study, which investigated all
traffic movements associated with this proposed bridge. This traffic study evaluated the most viable
options for a fixed crossing and the potential costs associated with the construction of a preferred
alternative. The traffic analysis evaluated the impacts to the surrounding neighborhood by routing
some of the traffic from Alton Road, a major arterial roadway, to West Avenue, an urban collector
roadway.
The results of the study determined that the proposed bridge would help alleviate traffic congestion
along Alton Road and along 17'~ Street, and would improve transit, bicycle, and pedestrian mobility
and safety. The proposed bridge would provide a more direct connection to the Sunset
Neighborhoods and reduce the potential for safety conflicts at the intersections of Dade Boulevard
and Bay Road.
Commission Memorandum - RFQ-48-09/10 - PD&E Study for the West Avenue Bridge Project
April 13, 201 1
Page 2 of 5
The Project is partially federally funded, which triggered the need for complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the completion of a Project Development and Environment
(PD&E) Study. The first step in the NEPA process is to complete the Florida Department of
Transportation (FDOT) Efficient Transportation Decision Making (ETDM) Screen for the Project. In
April 2009, the City and the FDOT initiated the ETDM Programming Screen for the Project. This
provided an opportunity for various government agencies and the public to provide early input on the
potential environmental, social, and economic impacts of the proposed bridge. It also provided
guidance on the types of environmental and engineering studies that will be required for the Project
and established the Class of Action Determination. In October 2009, the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) approved a Categorical Exclusion Type II Class of Action Determination.
The City will manage the next phases of the project, which will be the PD&E Study and right-of-way
(ROW) acquisition. The City will retain the services of a consultant that specializes in PD&E Studies
for new bridges through the City's Request for Qualifications (RFQ) procurement process.
RFQPROCESS
On August 17, 2010, RFQ 48-09/10 was issued with an opening date of September 17, 201 0. A pre-
proposal meeting to provide information to prospective proposers was held on August 30, 2010.
Bidsync issued bid notices to 4,258 prospective bidders which resulted in the receipt of the following
four (4) bids:
BCC Engineering, Inc.
The Corradino Group, Inc.
Gannett Fleming, Inc.
T. Y. Lin International
The City Manager, via a Letter to Commission (LTC) No. 259-2010, appointed an Evaluation
Committee (Committee) consisting of the following individuals:
e Christine Bettin, Transportation Coordinator, City of Miami Beach Public Works
Dat Huynh, P.E., District Project Development Engineer, FDOT
Walter Miros, Miami Beach Resident, Leadership Academy Graduate
Marcos Redondo, Project Manager, Miami-Dade 'County Public Works
Betsy Wheaton, Environmental Specialist, City of Miami Beach Public Works
On October 15, 2010, the Committee convened to score and rank the proposals. Prior to the meeting
commencing, Dat Huynh and Marcos Redondo noted in their disclosure questionnaire that they had
previously worked for firms that were to be evaluated and were therefore asked not to participate in
the Committee. In determining the best qualified firms, the Committee discussed each firm's proposal
according to the criteria as set forth in the RFQ.
Upon completion of the interviews, the Committee discussed their individual perceptions of each
prospective firm's qualifications, experience, and competence to score and rank each accordingly.
Based on the scores and rankings of the Committee members, a motion was presented by Elizabeth
Wheaton, seconded by Walter Miros, and was unanimously approved by the Committee to
recommend Gannett Fleming, Inc., as the top-ranked firm, T.Y. Lin International as the second-ranked
firm, and The Corradino Group, Inc. as the third-ranked firm.
Commission Memorandum - RFQ-48-09/10 - PD&E Study for the West Avenue Bridge Project
April 13, 201 I
Page 3 of 5
The City Manager reviewed the Evaluation Committee's recommendation and recommended that the
Mayor and City Commission accept the Committee's ranking of firms. At the November 17, 2010 City
Commission meeting, the Administration was authorized to enter into negotiations with the top-ranked
firm, Gannett Fleming.
The City is the lead agency for the PD&E Study; however, this phase will be closely coordinated with
FDOT. On June 29, 2009, the City executed a Local Agency Program (LAP) Agreement with FDOT
for use of the federal funds available for this Project, which ultimately holds FDOT responsible for the
final PD&E study documents submitted to FHWA.
The City and FDOT met with Gannett Fleming on January 7,201 1 to discuss the scope of services for
the Project PD&E Study and also to conduct a site visit at the project location. On January 28, 201 1,
Gannett Fleming submitted a man-hour estimate and fee proposal that estimated the PD&E study
would take approximately 9,138 hours to complete. Based on these hours and the proposed hourly
rates of the prime and subconsultants, the study would cost approximately $1.2 million.
The City and FDOT closely reviewed Gannett Fleming's proposed number of hours and, based on the
City's and FDOT's professional expertise, assigned a new number of hours that better reflected the
time and effort required to sufficiently complete each task of the PD&E study. As a result of this close
review, City staff was able to reduce the hours in half to 4,775 hours prior to the negotiations.
On March 3, 201 1, a negotiation meeting was held with City staff, FDOT, and Gannett Fleming. At
this meeting, each task and its associated man-hour requirements were discussed in detail. For
several of the tasks, Gannett Fleming was able to provide a rational justification for an increase to the
City's assigned hours, which increased the total number of hours to 6,023.
City staff also negotiated Gannett Fleming's proposed hourly rates based on an analysis of the City's
and FDOT's average hourly rates for job classifications required for a PD&E Study. Based on the
negotiated man-hours and hourly rates, the final cost for the PD&E Study is $697,989.12, which is
within the amount of $698,000 available in Federal High Priority Project (FHPP) funding for this
phase. The final negotiated man-hours, hourly rates, and Scope of Services are included in the
Professional Services Agreement between the City and Gannett Fleming for the PD&E Study.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
The first task in the PD&E Study is data collection for the study area. Once the data collection is
completed, the Consultant will conduct an alternatives analysis, where several alternative bridge
concepts will be developed. The alternatives analysis will be comprised of the technical engineering
and environmental analyses identified during the ETDM Programming Screen. The potential
environmental, social, cultural, and physical impacts associated with each alternative will be
assessed. The engineering analysis will include the development of conceptual plans that show a
typical cross section and plan view of the alternatives overlaid on aerial photographs. It will also
include a traffic analysis as well as geotechnical, drainage, and bridge hydraulic reports. The
environmental analysis will include cultural resource, essential fish habitat, and endangered species
biological assessments, as well as other environmental evaluations and reports. Based on the
alternatives analysis and public input, an evaluation matrix will be used to eliminate the least desirable
alternatives and select a single-preferred alternative that meets the purpose and need of the project,
along with the no-build alternative.
Commission Memorandum - RFQ-48-09/10 - PD&E Study for the West Avenue Bridge Project
April 13, 201 1
Page 4 of 5
The community will be involved throughout the PD&E process through the implementation of a Public
Involvement Plan (PIP). Residents, business owners, and other stakeholders will have several
opportunities to review project information and participate in the decision making process. The public
will be invited to attend public meetings throughout the study to review and comment on the
alternative conceptual designs of the Project. At the end of the PD&E process, a public hearing is
held to provide an official public forum where all impacted stakeholders can express their concerns,
opinions, and comments regarding the Project.
After the comments from the public hearing have been addressed, the analyses conducted throughout
the PD&E process and all public input are compiled into a Project Development Summary Report
(PDSR). The PDSR is submitted to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) for Location and
Design Concept Acceptance. Once this acceptance is received, the study phase of the project will be
complete. The Scope of Services is included in the Professional Services Agreement which has been
form approved by the City Attorney's office.
It is estimated that the entire PD&E process will be completed within eighteen (18) months. The
phases that follow the study phase include the design and construction of the approved conceptual
improvements.
FUNDING
The preliminary estimated cost of the West Avenue Bridge Project, including the PD&E Study,
architecturallengineering services, construction, and the costs associated with land acquisition for the
bridge ROW, is approximately $5,369,569 (Table 1).
Table 1. West Avenue Bridge Project Estimated Cost
I Construction Phase
I
Item
Design Contingency
Total Planning and Design Phase
Proposed
$1 58,068
$1,417,420
I
ROW Land Acquisition
Grand Total
$1,635,000
$5,369,569
Commission Memorandum - RFQ-48-09/10 - PD&E Study for the West Avenue Bridge Project
April 13, 201 1
Page 5 of 5
The City has received a total of $1,259,352 in FHPP funding for planning and design. The City has
also allocated People's Transportation Plan (PTP) funds in the amount of $797,720 ($312,720
previously appropriated) and Concurrency Mitigation Funds (CMF) in the amount of $108,068
($80,000 previously appropriated) for planning, design, construction, and land acquisition. Pay-As-
You-Go funds in the amount of $1,303,396 have also been appropriated for land acquisition.
The City has secured Miami-Dade County (County) District 8 Road Impact Fee (RIF) funds in the
amount of $3,011,000 for the Project, leaving an unfunded balance of $1 93,429, which can be paid for
with future year PTP or Concurrency funds. In order to receive the RIF funds, the City will be required
to enter into a Joint Participation Agreement (JPA) with the County, at which time the RIF funds will be
appropriated and replace the previously appropriated Pay-As-You-Go funds. Once the City executes
the JPA, it will be taken to the County lnfrastructural Land-use Committee, the County Small Business
Development Review Committee, and then to the Board of County Commissioners for final execution.
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends approving the resolution.
JMGIDRBIFHBIFV
T:\AGENDA\2011\4-13-1 I\West Ave. Bridge PD&E Study- MEMO - 4-13-201 1 .docx
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF
MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR
AND ClTY CLERK TO EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENT WlTH GANNETT FLEMING, PURSUANT TO REQUEST FOR
QUALIFICATIONS NO. 48-09110, FOR THE PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND
ENVIRONMENT STUDY FOR THE WEST AVENUE BRIDGE PROJECT
(PROJECT), IN THE AMOUNT OF $697,989.12; TO BE FUNDED WlTH
FEDERAL HIGH PRIORITY PROJECT FUNDING PREVIOUSLY
APPROPRIATED IN THE FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2008109 CAPITAL BUDGET.
WHEREAS, the West Avenue Bridge Project (Project) proposes to construct a new
bridge over the Collins Canal at West Avenue in order to help alleviate traffic congestion
along Alton Road and along 1 7'h Street; improve transit, bicycle, and pedestrian mobility and
safety; provide a more direct connection to the Sunset Neighborhoods; and reduce the
potential for safety conflicts at the intersections of Dade Boulevard and Bay Road; and
WHEREAS, the Project is partially federally funded, which triggered the need for
complying with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the completion of a
Project Development and Environment (PD&E) Study; and
WHEREAS, on July 14, 2010, the Mayor and City Commission approved the
issuance of Request for Qualifications (RFQ) No. 48-0911 0, for the project development and
environment study for the West Avenue Bridge Project (the "RFQ"); and
WHEREAS, on November 17, 2010, pursuant to Resolution No. 2010-27548, the City
Commission was authorized to enter into negotiations with the top-ranked firm, Gannett
Fleming; and
WHEREAS, City staff conducted an extensive negotiation process with Gannett
Fleming and, based on the negotiated man-hours and hourly rates, the final cost for the
PD&E Study is $697,989.12, which is within the $698,000 available in Federal funding for
this phase.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION
OF THE ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that the Mayor and City Commission hereby
approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a Professional Services
Agreement with Gannett Fleming, pursuant to Request for No. 48-09/10, for the Project
Development and Environment Study for the West Avenue Bridge Project (Project), in the
amount of $697,989.12; to be funded with Federal High Priority Project funding previously
appropriated in the fiscal year (FY) 2008/2009 Capital Budget.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of 201 1.
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK MAYOR
APPROVED AS TO
FORM & LANGUAGE
T:~GENDA\2011\4-13-1 I\West Ave Bridge PDE - RESO 4-13-201 1 .doc
305
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title: I A resolution of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami Beach, Florida, authorizing the Mayor and I
City Clerk to execute Amendment No. 20 to the professional services agreement between the City of Miami
Beach, Florida, and CH2M Hill for the Professional Landscape Architectural and Engineering Services for the
Right-of-way lnfrastructure lmprovements Program for Neighborhood No. 8 Bayshore and Sunset Islands,
dated May 16, 2001, reallocating funds in the amount of $340,069.99, from construction administration to
bidding and award services for the Bayshore Neighborhoods No. 8A, 8B, 8C, and 8D packages.
A resolution of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami Beach, Florida, authorizing the Mayor and
City Clerk to execute Amendment No. 21 to the professional services agreement between the City of Miami
Beach, Florida, and CH2M Hill for the Professional Landscape Architectural and Engineering Services for the
Right-of-way lnfrastructure lmprovements Program for Neighborhood No. 8 Bayshore and Sunset Islands,
dated May 16, 2001, to provide additional design documents and permitting services to procure the DERM
Tree Removal Permits for the Bayshore and Sunset Island Neighborhoods No. 8A, 8B, 8C, and 8D projects,
to participate in value engineering, provide design modifications and associated re-permitting services to
incorporate the level of service review comments requested by the City Commission, for a Not-to-exceed
amount of $1 35,112.97, and $63,605.00, for reimbursable expenses; with previously appropriated funding in
the amount of $1 13,297.1 8; appropriating $85,420.79 from Fund 429, Stormwater Projects Line of Credit, with
such funds to be repaid from proposed future stormwater bonds.
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Ensure Well Maintained lnfrastructure and Ensure Well Designed, Quality Capital Projects.
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): 43% of the residential respondents to the 2009 I ~ommunit~~atisfaction survey rated Storm Drainage (to avoid flooding) as Excellent and Good. I
Issue: I Shall the City Commission approve the amendment to the Contract?
Item SummarylRecommendation: I The original agreement between the City and CH2MHill consisted of a project requiring one set of construction
documents, and permitting, bidding1 award and construction administration services for only one package.
The City required CH2MHill to re-package the project into four packages (Central Bayshore, Lower North Bay
Road, Lake Pancoast, and Sunset Islands 3 & 4). Additional effort by CH2MHill was needed to convert the
original set into four independent sets of construction documents which required plan modifications and permit
resubmittals. The creation of the independent bid packages increased the level of effort for bid1 award
services, including the preparation of additional plans and environmental assessments required for permitting.
Due to the time required to conduct the environmental assessments required by the governing agencies as
support documentation for the dewatering strategies, the bidding and award phases of packages 8A, 88, and
8C were placed on hold in May, 201 0 and re-released for bidding and award in October 201 0 after the plans
were completed and fully permitted, thus requiring additional services for additional bidding and award phase
services by CH2MHill.
The purpose of Amendment No. 20, is to reallocate funds from the construction administration task to bidding
and award services for the Bayshore Neighborhoods No. 8A, 8B, 8C, and 8D packages to provide for
additional services associated with the extended bidding and award phase due to additional permitting
requirements, in the amount of $144,591.84, $120,716.06, $39,749.13, and $35,012.96, respectively, for a
total contract reallocation of $340,069.99; increasing the total bidding and award services budget from
$59,224 to $399,293.99, and decreasing the total construction administration budget from $371,441 to
$31,371.01.
On December 8,2010, the Mayor and City Commission awarded the Bayshore Neighborhood No. 8B Right-
of-Way lnfrastructure lmprovements project to Trans Florida and Development Corporation. On January 19,
201 1, the Mayor and City Commission awarded the Bayshore Neighborhood No. 8A18C Right-of-way
lnfrastructure lmprovements project to Lanzo Construction. The contracts were awarded subject to a level of
service review of the plans by the City's Public Works Department. In addition, the Mayor and City
Commission authorized the Administration to engage in value engineering to reduce the cost and completion
time of the projects. As a result of the level of service reviews and value engineering discussions, CH2M Hill
has requested additional services to incorporate comments and provide associated re-permitting services.
I In addition, the City has requested that CH2M Hill provide plans and permitting services to procure the DERM I
BEACH ,,, DATE 4-/-3-//
Tree Removal Permit for the Bayshore and Sunset lsland Neighborhoods No. 8A, 8B, 8C, and 8D projects as
these services were not a part of the original scope of services of the Consultant. A DERM Tree Removal
Permit will be required, prior to construction of each project, to remove andlor relocate existing trees that have
been identified as encroachments primarily due to conflicts with proposed stormwater related improvements.
Amendment No. 21 approves additional design and permitting services to procure the DERM Tree Removal
Permits for the Bayshore and Sunset lsland Neighborhoods No. 8A, 8B, 8C, and 8D projects and additional
services to participate in value engineering discussions and provide design modifications with associated re-
permitting services to incorporate level of service review comments, for a not-to-exceed amount of
$1 35,112.97 and an additional not-to-exceed amount of $63,605.00 for reimbursable expenses, for a total not-
to-exceed amount of $1 98,717.97.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
Financial Information:
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking:
OBPl
- I I
4\20~~1\~ayshore - ~~2~~r~mendment No. 20 ahb 21\Bayshore - CH~MHIII Amendments No 20 a
SUMMARY doc
Source of
Funds: 1
Financial Impact Summary: Amendment No. 20 will not increase the original total contract amount.
10
Total
Approved Amount
$50,287.98
Account
302-2205-069357
$1 9,453.52
$1 98,717.97
429-231 8-069357
@ MIAMIBEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33 139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
DATE: April 13, 201 1
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF MlAMl
BEACH, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND ClTY CLERK TO EXECUTE
AMENDMENT NO. 20 TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF MlAMl BEACH, FLORIDA, AND CH2M HlLL FOR THE
PROFESSIONAL LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING SERVICES
FOR THE RIGHT-OF-WAY INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM FOR
NEIGHBORHOOD NO. 8 BAYSHORE AND SUNSET ISLANDS, DATED MAY 16,
2001, REALLOCATING FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $340,069.99, FROM
CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION TO BIDDING AND AWARD SERVICES FOR
THE BAYSHORE NEIGHBORHOODS NO. 8A, 8B, 8C, AND 8D PACKAGES.
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF MlAMl
BEACH, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND ClTY CLERK TO EXECUTE
AMENDMENT NO. 21 TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE ClTY OF MlAMl BEACH, FLORIDA, AND CH2M HlLL FOR THE
PROFESSIONAL LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING SERVICES
FOR THE RIGHT-OF-WAY INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM FOR
NEIGHBORHOOD NO. 8 BAYSHORE AND SUNSET ISLANDS, DATED MAY 16,
2001, TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL DESIGN DOCUMENTS AND PERMITTING
SERVICES TO PROCURE THE DERM TREE REMOVAL PERMITS FOR THE
BAYSHORE AND SUNSET ISLAND NEIGHBORHOODS NO. 8A, 8B, 8C, AND 80
PROJECTS, TO PARTICIPATE IN VALUE ENGINEERING, PROVIDE DESIGN
MODIFICATIONS AND ASSOCIATED RE-PERMITTING SERVICES TO
INCORPORATE THE LEVEL OF SERVICE REVIEW COMMENTS REQUESTED BY
THE ClTY COMMISSION, FOR A NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $135,112.97, AND
$63,605.00, FOR REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES; WlTH PREVIOUSLY
APPROPRIATED FUNDING IN THE AMOUNT OF $1 13,297.18; APPROPRIATING
$85,420.79 FROM FUND 429, STORMWATER PROJECTS LINE OF CREDIT, WlTH
SUCH FUNDS TO BE REPAID FROM PROPOSED FUTURE STORMWATER
BONDS.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolutions.
Bayshore CH2M Hill Amendments No. 20 and 21
April 13, 2011
Page 2 of 9
FUNDING
Amendment No. 21
Funding in the amount of $1 13,297.18 has been previously appropriated in the Capital Budget;
funding in the amount of $85,420.79 to be appropriated from Fund 429, Stormwater Projects line of
~redit,to be repaid from proposed future stormwater bonds as follows:
Central Bavshore Neighborhood (Package 8A):
$50,287.98 Pay-As-You-Go account # 302-2205-069357
$44.825.34 Stormwater Projects Line of Credit account # 429-2205-061 357(')
$95,113.32 Total (BP- 8A)
Lower North Bay Road Neiqhborhood (Package 8B):
$ 6,230.36 2003 G.O. Bond Neighborhood account # 376-2326-061 357
$ 2,663.24 2003 G.O. Bond Neighborhood account # 384-2326-061 357
$ 9,481 .I 0 2003 G.O. Bond Neighborhood account # 384-2326-069357
$27,547.97 Stormwater Bonds 2000 Series account # 428-2326-061 357
$45,922.67 Total (BP- 8B)
Lake Pancoast Neighborhood (Package 8C):
$17,086.53 2003 G.O. Bond Neighborhoods account # 384-2325-069357
$14,941.93 Stormwater Projects Line of Credit account # 429-2325-069351(')
$32,028.46 Total (BP- 8C)
Sunset Islands 3 and 4 Neighborhood (Package 8D):
$ 6,200.00 Stormwater Projects Line of Credit account # 429-231 8-061357(')
$1 9,453.52 Stormwater Projects Line of Credit account # 429-231 8-069357(')
$25,653.52 Total (BP- 8D)
Grand Total: $198,717.97
('I Previously programmed in Capital Budget to be repaid from future Stormwater Bonds.
INTRODUCTION
The intent of this resolution is to provide adequate and clear direction in order to properly execute
the CH2MHill contract. In this memorandum we will explain, in detail, the purpose of Amendments
No. 20 and 21.
In Amendment No. 20 the City is requesting additional services related to the requested additional
effort required by the Consultant to provide bidding and award services for four (4) independent
construction packages, in lieu of providing these services for only one (1) construction package as
originally specified in their contract. This amendment also requests additional services for the
increased effort associated with obtaining the Miami-Dade Department of Environmental Resources
Management (DERM) Dewatering Permits for the Bayshore and Sunset Island Neighborhoods No.
8A, 8B, 8C and 8D projects. The intent is to reallocate fees from Construction Administration
services to Bidding and Award services to cover the increased level of effort required for this task
and decrease the budget for Construction Administration services, the replenishment of which shall
be addressed via separate amendment to the contract, if required.
The purpose of Amendment No. 21 is to approve additional services to provide design documents
and permitting services to procure the DERM Tree Removal Permits for the Bayshore and Sunset
Bayshore CH2M Hill Amendments No. 20 and 21
April 13, 2011
Page 3 of 9
Island Neighborhoods No. 8A, 88, 8C, and 8D projects. A DERM Tree Removal Permit will be
required to remove andlor relocate existing trees that have been identified as encroachments
primarily due to conflicts with proposed stormwater related improvements. In addition, expanded
services are required to participate in value engineering analysis as well as provide design
modifications and associated re-permitting services to incorporate the level of service review
comments requested by the City Commission during award of the construction contracts for the
Bayshore Neighborhoods No. 8A, 8B, and 8C projects.
BACKGROUND
On May 16, 2001, the City of Miami Beach (the "City") adopted Resolution No. 2001-24387,
approving and authorizing the execution of an agreement (the "Agreement") with CH2MHil1, Inc. (the
"Consultant") for professional services for the Right-of-way (ROW) Infrastructure Improvements
Program for Neighborhood No. 8 - Bayshore and Sunset Islands project (the "Project") pursuant to
Request for Qualifications No. 134-99100. The Agreement was negotiated for a not-to-exceed
amount of $1 33,174 for detailed planning services for various streetscape, landscape, and utility
improvements and the creation of a Basis of Design Report for the entire Bayshore neighborhood,
including all the Sunset Islands, Central Bayshore, Lower North Bay Road, and Lake Pancoast. The
Project scope of work was subsequently amended to include design services for these
neighborhoods and further amended to assemble multiple bid packages.
On April 9, 2003, the City Commission approved the Basis of Design Report (BODR), completed
and submitted by CH2MHill for the Neighborhood No. 8 Bayshore I Sunset lslands Project. This
BODR was the culmination of a comprehensive planning effort that included input from and reviews
by residents, various City Departments, and the Design Review Board (DRB).
Since the execution of the original Agreement, there have been a total of nineteen (1 9) amendments
which have been either approved by the City Commission or administratively approved. The
previous amendments have resulted in a total contract value of $2,919,373. Amendments No. 20
and 21 are concurrently being presented herein for approval by the Mayor and City Commission. A
complete list of the executed amendments and proposed amendments for this project is provided in
Attachment A.
PROJECT LIMITS & SCOPE OF SERVICES:
The Central Bayshore Neighborhood 8A Project (Package 8A) is located within the mid beach
area. The project limits includes, but is not limited to, the public right-of-ways (ROWS) within all
areas generally bounded to the north by West 40th Street; west along Chase Avenue; east along
Flamingo Drive; and south along West 28th Street.
The Package 8A Scope of Work includes, but is not limited to, demolition, site preparation,
earthwork, storm drainage, road paving and restoration, concrete sidewalks and valley gutters, water
distribution, landscape up lighting, vegetation and planting, and irrigation.
The Lower North Bay Road Neighborhood 8B Project (Package 8B) limits, in general are
bounded by Sunset Drive, Alton Road, Biscayne Bay and Sunset Lake.
The Package 8B Scope of Work includes improvements to the storm water collection and disposal
system, including construction of four (4) pressurized wells, and two (2) storm water pump stations,
curb and gutter, improvements to the water distribution system, demolition, site preparation,
earthwork, roadway reconstruction, roadway milling and resurfacing, sidewalk replacement, and
signage and pavement markings.
Bayshore CHZM Hill Amendments No. 20 and 27
April 73, 2071
Page 4 of 9
The Lake Pancoast Neighborhood 8C Project (Package 8C) is also located within the mid beach
area. The project limits includes, but is not limited to the public rights-of-way (ROW) within all areas
generally bounded to the north by West 26th Street and includes approximately 500 feet of Flamingo
Drive to the north (of West 26" Street); to the west by Pine Tree Drive; to the south by West ~4~
Street; and to the east by Lake Pancoast Drive.
The Package 8C Scope of Work includes, but is not limited to, demolition, site preparation,
earthwork, street resurfacing, sidewalk repair, planting strip restoration and enhanced landscaping,
curb and gutter upgrades, entryway features and enhanced street signage, street light upgrades,
streetscape for traffic calming, Flamingo Drive water main replacement, and streetscape for
improved on-street parking and is not included as part of these amendments.
The Sunset Islands Neighborhood 8D Project (Package 8D) is comprised of Sunset Islands Ill
and IV. The Package 8D Scope of Work is anticipated to include improvements to the stormwater
collection and disposal system, water main replacement, demolition, site preparation, earthwork,
street resurfacing, sidewalk replacement, landscaping, curb and gutter upgrades, entryway features
and enhanced street signage, and street lighting upgrades. The Bayshore Bid Package D Project is
currently at 30% level of design.
CONSTRUCTION SERVICES AWARDS
On November 25, 2009, lnvitation to Bid (ITB) No. 2-0911 0 was issued and bids were received on
February 8, 2010 from Lanzo Construction Co. of Florida, Metro Equipment Service, Inc.,
Southeastern Engineering Contractors, Inc., and Trans Florida Development Corporation. On
December 8, 2010, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No. 2010-27567,
authorizing the award of a contract to Trans Florida Development Corporation, for the Right-of-way
lnfrastructure Improvement Program - Neighborhood No. 8 - Lower North Bay Road (Package 8B).
On December 31,2009, lnvitation to Bid (ITB) No. 18-0911 0 was issued and bids were received from
GlobeTec Construction, LLC, Lanzo Construction Co., Florida, and Southeastern Engineering
Contractors, Inc., on November 10,2010. On January 20,201 1, the Mayor and City Commission
adopted Resolution No. 201 1-27587, authorizing the award of a contract to Lanzo Construction Co.,
Florida, for the Right-of-way lnfrastructure Improvement Program - Neighborhood No. 8 - Central
Bayshore (Package 8A) and Lake Pancoast (Package 8C).
At both of these awards the City Commission directed the City Manager to have the City Engineer
conduct a peer review of the engineering plans to ensure that the proposed drainage system met
the required level of service.
ANALYSIS
A. AMENDMENT No. 20
The original 2001 Agreement between the City and the Consultant outlined one (1) project, requiring
one (I) set of construction documents, permitting services, bidding and award services, and
construction phase assistance for only one (I) bid package. As part of the original Agreement
between the City and the Consultant, the City negotiated a total Bidding and Award services fee of
$59,224 and a total Construction Administration fee of $371,441 (see Table 1, Page 7). During the
design phase of the project the City directed the Consultant to re-package the project into four (4)
distinct areas (Central Bayshore - Package 8A, Lower North Bay Road - Package B, Lake
Bayshore CH2M Hill Amendments No. 20 and 21
April 13, 2011
Page 5 of 9
Pancoast - Package C, and Sunset Islands 3 and 4 - Package D). Consequently, following the
City's directive, additional effort was necessary to repackage the original set of permit plans into four
(4) independent sets of construction documents. This required modifications to the plans as well as
a resubmittal of the packages to the various permitting agencies for review.
The creation of the four independent bid packages significantly increased the level of effort required
for bid and award services, including the preparation of additional plans and environmental
assessments required for permitting purposes. Likewise, the level of effort required by the
Consultant for construction administration services also increased with the creation of the four (4)
independent packages.
Given the significant additional level of effort to repackage the independent sets of contract
documents and to provide the additional design documents and environmental assessments
associated with the permitting of the projects, staff authorized CH2MHill to proceed with the work in
order to be able to advance the project through the bidding and award phase. This directive was
issued with the understanding that, although there was sufficient balance in the contract to cover the
additional permitting expenses and bid and award services, additional funding for construction
administration would need to be addressed separately.
Amendment No. 20 (see Attachment B) is requesting the reallocation of fees from Construction
Administration services to Bidding and Award services to cover the increased time necessitated by
the City's request to provide Bidding and Award Services for four (4) independent construction
packages. The initial Bidding and Award Task was scheduled to provide Bidding and Award services
for one (1) construction package. The replenishment of the Construction Administration Services
Task for this Consultant, if warranted, will be addressed via separate amendment to the Contract.
During the bidding and award phase of the Central Bayshore Package 8A, Lower North Bay Road
Package 88, and Lake Pancoast Package 8C, concerns were raised about having the Contractor
procure the Miami-Dade County Department of Environmental Resources Management (DERM)
Dewatering Permit and South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) Water Use Permit
following the award of the project due to recent SFWMD and DERM policy changes. In the past,
obtaining a dewatering permit was considered part of the Contractor's means and methods of
construction, to be secured by the selected Contractor as an engineering sub-consultant service
after award of the contract. Therefore, the Consultant's original contract, executed in 2001, did not
include scope of services associated with obtaining this permit during the permitting phase of the
projects. In 2007, due to more stringent permitting requirements handed down by SFWMD, DERM
began requiring sampling and testing for the presence of ammonia-nitrogen from the extracted
ground water. Part of this requirement was to monitor and control the discharge of any ammonia-
nitrogen water to Biscayne Bay to a very low level of 0.1 mgll. To obtain the DERM Class I! Permit
and a DERM Dewatering Permit for the Bayshore projects, the City was required by DERM to
provide environmental assessments in each neighborhood and to provide details regarding the
construction dewatering methodologies.
Due to the time required to conduct the environmental assessments required by SFWMD and DERM
as support documentation for the dewatering strategies, the bidding and award phases of all three
packages were postponed indefinitely in early April 2010. After the Dewatering Plans were
completed and fully permitted by the respective governing agencies, the Central Bayshore, Lower
North Bay Road, and Lake Pancoast packages were re-released for bidding and award in late
October 2010, necessitating additional services for bidding and award phase services by the
Consultant.
Typically, procuring the DERM Dewatering Permit and SFWMD Water Use Permit are the
responsibility of the Contractor. However, due to the additional requirements by DERM and SFWMD,
Bayshore CH2M Hill Amendments No. 20 and 21
April 13, 207 1
Page 6 of 9
the City determined that it would be in its best interest to have the Consultant obtain these permits
prior to construction award. The engineering and scientific expertise required to facilitate the
permitting process was best served by having the engineers undertake this effort prior to bidding.
This would provide potential bidders with a complete understanding of the requirements of the
dewatering permits. The upfront effort associated with obtaining this permit, prior to the award of
contracts, provides additional flexibility during the construction phase of the projects. It also allows
the City to limit potential change orders resulting from complications with dewatering and further
limits the potential for delay claims from the contractor associated with the time required to complete
the environmental assessments; develop methodologies, plans, specifications; and procurement of
the DERM Dewatering Permit and SFWMD Water Use Permit, which are required for the project.
The support documents, plans and specifications required for securing the dewatering permits were
completed by the Consultant and provided to the Contractor with a schedule of dewatering options
that would be permitted by the governing agencies, subject to the site conditions -found during
construction. The Consultant was instrumental in negotiating project specific water quality and
quantity requirements with DERM and in providing alternative dewatering strategies that would
appease the department. The due diligence services conducted by the Consultant have resulted in
the securing of DERM Dewatering Permits.
Additional permitting services required to secure the new permits or re-permit each of the four (4)
independent construction packages and along the assessment, analysis, development of plans and
specifications, and permitting associated with obtaining Dewatering Permits from the governing
agencies are included as part of Amendment No. 20. A summary of the additional permitting tasks
for all packages follows:
Provide additional permitting assistance to respond to regulatory agency comments for all four
(4) construction packages and to incorporate modifications associated with regulatory changes
that occurred since the original applications were filed.
Prepare an environmental site assessment proposal, suitable for review by the governing
agencies, outlining the scope of environmental assessments requested by the governing
agencies as part of their review and approval of environmental permits for each construction
package.
Evaluate the feasibility of alternate dewatering discharge disposal methods to be used during
construction of each package; provide details and descriptions for each dewatering discharge
method deemed feasible by the governing agencies; develop a dewatering site plan for each
construction package; and submit to the governing agencies for approval.
Perform a hydraulic assessment of the proposed dewatering methods, to be proposed for each
construction package, to determine the potential limits of groundwater drawdown at each
location and superimpose these limits and horizontal limits of contamination as identified in the
Phase I and II Environmental Assessment Studies (provided by others). This dewatering
influence area map was required by the governing agencies.
a Prepare plans, procedures and bidding requirements for methods to be used to treat and
dispose of any potential contaminated groundwater from contaminated sites.
Prepare dewatering plans for each package to be submitted to the governing agencies for
review in advance of each bidding package.
Prepare estimated construction costs for the alternate dewatering methods to be utilized on
each of the construction packages.
Amendment No. 20, provides for the reallocation of the funds from construction administration to
bidding and award services for the Bayshore Neighborhood No. 8A, 8B, 8C, and 8D packages for
the previously described services associated with additional bidding and award services, as well as
additional plan modifications and submittals necessary to expedite and meet permitting
requirements. At this time, the scope of services for bidding and award are currently underway and
Bayshore CHZM Hill Amendments No. 20 and 21
April 13, 2011
Page 7 of 9
the scope of services for additional permitting are complete for Bayshore Neighborhood Packages
8A, 8B, and 8C. The bidding and award services and additional permitting services for Bayshore
Neighborhood Package 8D have not yet begun. Due to the re-packaging of the project, the
Construction Administration services included as part of the original Agreement do not reflect the
level of effort required for each individual package. Therefore, the current Construction
Administration budget remains underfunded, regardless of the proposed budget transfer. Funding
for the Construction Administration services required for each package shall be addressed
separately via a Contract amendment, if required.
The proposed reallocation of $340,069.99, from Construction Administration to Bidding and Award
Services for the Right-of-way lnfrastructure lmprovements Program for Neighborhood No. 8
Bayshore and Sunset Islands. Amendment No. 20 (see Attachment B) will not increase the original
Bid and Award and Construction Administration total contract value of $430,665.00. Referto Table 1
below for reallocation details.
TABLE 1 - CH2M HILL AMENDMENT NO. 20
ADDITIONAL SERVICES BREAKDOWN
(1) Includes additional permitting
B. AMENDMENT NO. 21
The Invitation to Bid (ITB) No. 02-09/10 for the City of Miami Beach Right-of-way lnfrastructure
Improvement Program, Bayshore Neighborhood 8B: Lower North Bay Road project opened on
November 9,201 0. ITB No. 18-09/10 for the Bayshore Neighborhoods 8A and 8C: Central Bayshore
and Lake Pancoast projects opened on November 10, 2010. Following the bid openings, two
separate Technical Review Panels (TRPs), as well as the Consultant's support staff, convened to
review, evaluate and rank the bids submitted for the Projects. The TRPs also conducted interviews
of the Contractors' key personnel. At the conclusion of the interviews, the TRPs unanimously
recommended Trans Florida Development Corporation as the lowest and best bidder for the
Bayshore Neighborhood No. 88 project, and Lanzo Construction for the Bayshore Neighborhoods
No. 8A and 8C projects. On December 8, 2010, the Mayor and City Commission awarded the
Bayshore Neighborhood No. 8B Right-of-way lnfrastructure lmprovements project to Trans Florida
Development Corporation and on January 19,201 1 awarded the Bayshore Neighborhoods No. 8A
and 8C Right-of-way lnfrastructure lmprovements projects to Lanzo Construction. The Mayor and
City Commission authorized the Administration to engage in value engineering on all projects to
reduce the cost and completion time of the project and awarded the contracts. As part of the
Commission approval and award of contracts they made the recommendation that the Public Works
Department review the design to verify that an acceptable of service was incorporated in the storm
water drainage plans.
Revised
Bid and
Award
(I )
$159,397.84
$135,522.06
$54,555.13
$49,818.96
$399,293.99
The City's Public Works Department finalized their storm water level of service review for the
Additional
Permitting
$58,990.00
$41,011 .OO
$1 6,254.00
$1 9,622.00
$1 35,877.00
Additional
Bid and
Award
$85,601.84
$79,705.06
$23,495.1 3
$1 5,390.96
Package
A
B
C
D
Original
Bid and
Award
$14,806.00
$14,806.00
$14,806.00
$14,806.00
Total $59,224.00 $204'1 92.99
Bayshore CH2M Hill Amendments No. 20 and 21
April 13, 2011
Page 8 of 9
Bayshore Neighborhood 8B project on February 17, 201 1 and provided a list of comments to be
incorporated by the Consultant. These level of service review comments and requested
modifications generally included removal of proposed tideflex valves, modification of catch basin
spacing, upsizing of existing outfalls, and incorporation of stormwater elements to alleviate sidewalk
flooding. The City has recognized that some of the requested design modifications were not
considered in the original design by the Consultant because the design was conducted under a
different regulatory framework.
Since a level of service review after the bidding and award phase of the project was not a part of the
Consultant's original scope of services, the Consultant is requesting additional services, as part of
Amendment No. 21 (see Attachment B) to incorporate the requested design modifications. The
Consultant's original contract scope of services also excluded value engineering services which are
required to begin value engineering discussions. Therefore, the Consultant is also requesting
additional services to participate in value engineering discussions with the Contractor and provide
recommendations of the proposed options to the City with respect to their conformance with the
contract documents and the design intent.
Any design changes impacted by the value engineering discussions will be presented to the City
Commission as an additional service for approval. These design changes, if any, shall be completed
along with the design modifications approved by this amendment and re-permitted together. The
Capital lmprovements Project Office estimates that all design modificationslchanges and associated
re-permitting shall be completed within 3-4 months, with construction projected to begin in the 3rd
quarter of 201 1. In order to meet the proposed schedule, the City will proceed by executing the
construction contracts with the selected Contractors for the Bayshore Neighborhoods 8A, 8B, and
8C projects; issuing the first notice-to-proceed (NTP) once the value engineering discussions have
been completed; and issuing the second NTP two (2) months following the issuance of the first NTP.
Any savings resulting from the value engineering discussions and implementation shall be handled
as a deductive change order to the construction contract.
In addition to the value engineering analysis, design modification, and re-permitting services, the
City has requested that CH2M Hill provide plans and permitting services to procure the DERM Tree
Removal Permit for the Bayshore and Sunset Island Neighborhoods No. 8A, 8B, 8C, and 8D
projects as these services were not a part of the original scope of services of the Consultant. A
DERM Tree Removal Permit will be required to remove andlor relocate existing trees that have been
identified as encroachments primarily due to conflicts with proposed stormwater related
improvements. In addition, expanded services are required to participate in value engineering
analysis as well as provide design modifications and associated re-permitting services to incorporate
the level of service review comments requested by the City Commission during award of the
construction contracts for the Bayshore Neighborhoods No. 8A, 8B, and 8C projects.
CONCLUSION:
It is recommended that two (2) individual Resolutions of the Mayor and City Commission of the City
of Miami Beach, Florida, be authorized by the Mayor and City Clerk to execute Amendments No. 20
and 21 to the professional services agreement between the City of Miami Beach, Florida, and CH2M
Hill for the Professional Landscape Architectural and Engineering Services for the Right-of-way
Infrastructure lmprovements Program for Neighborhood No. 8 Bayshore and Sunset Islands, dated
May 16,2001 (the Agreement), to reallocate funds in the amount of $340,069.99, from construction
administration to bidding and award services, for the Bayshore Neighborhoods No. 8A, 8Bl8C, and
8D packages; to provide additional design documents and permitting services to procure the DERM
Tree Removal Permits for the Bayshore Neighborhoods No. 8A, 8B, 8C, and 8D packages; to
participate in value engineering; and to provide design modifications and associated re-permitting
Bayshore CH2M Hill Amendments No. 20 and 21
April 13, 2011
Page 9 of 9
services to incorporate the level of service review comments for the Bayshore Neighborhoods No.
8A, 8B, and 8C packages, for a negotiated not-to-exceed amount of $135,112.97 and $63,605.00
for reimbursable expenses; with previously appropriated funding in the amount of $1 13,297.18;
appropriating $85,420.79 from Fund 429, Stormwater Projects Line of Credit, with such funds to be
repaid from proposed future stormwater bonds.
Attachments: Attachment A - Executed Amendments
Attachment B - Amendments No. 20 and 21
JMGIDBIFV
T:WGEbIDA\2011\4-13-Il\Bayshore - CH2MHill Amendment No. 20 and 21\Bayshore - CH2MHill Amendments No. 20 and 21 -
MEMO.doc
RESOLUTION NO. 201 1-
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE ClTY
OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND ClTY
CLERK TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT NO. 20 TO THE PROFESSIONAL
SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE ClTY OF MlAMl BEACH,
FLORIDA, AND CH2M HILL FOR THE PROFESSIONAL LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR THE RIGHT-OF-
WAY INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM FOR
NEIGHBORHOOD NO. 8 BAYSHORE AND SUNSET ISLANDS, DATED
MAY 16, 2001, REALLOCATING FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF
$340,069.99, FROM CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION TO BIDDING
AND AWARD SERVICES FOR THE BAYSHORE NEIGHBORHOODS NO.
8A, 8B, 8C, AND 8D PACKAGES.
WHEREAS, on May 16,2001, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution
No. 2001-24387, approving and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute an
agreement with the Consultant for professional services (the Agreement) for the Right-of-
Way Infrastructure Improvements Program Neighborhood No. 8 Bayshore and Sunset lsland
project (the Project), pursuant to Request for Qualifications No. 134-99100; and
WHEREAS, the Agreement provides for the detailed planning services for various
streetscape, landscape, and utility improvements within the Bayshore and Sunset lsland
neighborhoods; and
WHEREAS, the planning effort for the Bayshore and Sunset lsland neighborhoods
has been completed and detail design activities are underway; and
WHEREAS, the Agreement was executed in the not-to-exceed amount of $133,174;
and
WHEREAS, on December 10, 2003, the Mayor and City Commission adopted
Resolution No. 2003-25432, approving additional design services as Amendment No. 1 to
the Agreement, for planning, design, permitting, bidding I award, and construction
administrative services for the Bayshore and Sunset lsland neighborhoods in the not-to-
exceed amount of $1,913,302; and resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,046,476; and
WHEREAS, on February 24, 2005, Amendment No. 2 to the Agreement was
administratively executed, to re-package Sunset Islands 1 and 2 from Bid Package 8D to Bid
Package 88 at no additional cost, resulting in no change to contract; and
WHEREAS, on November 8, 2005, Amendment No. 3 to the Agreement was
administratively executed to include the completion of a topographic survey along Pine Tree
Drive, from West 28th to West 4oth Streets, along the east side of the road, in the not-to-
exceed amount of $12,850; resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,059,326; and
WHEREAS, on February 17, 2006, Amendment No. 4 to the Agreement was
administratively executed to include the evaluation, permitting and preparation of
construction cost alternatives for the installation of curblvalley gutters to Sunset Islands 1
and 2, in the not-to-exceed amount of $2,500; resulting in a revised contract fee of
$2,061,826; and
WHEREAS, on February 16, 2006, Amendment No. 5 to the Agreement was
executed to include the installation of four (4) drainage test wells to provide additional
information for the preparation of a Letter of Reasonable Assurance to be submitted to the
Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), as required in the permit
application for the Project, in the not-to-exceed amount of $55,863; resulting in a revised
contract fee of $2,117,689; and
WHEREAS, on September 6, 2006, the Mayor and City Commission adopted
Resolution No. 2006-26283, approving Amendment No. 6 to the Agreement for the design of
"P3.2 classified water main replacements required by the City's Public Works Department,
in the not-to-exceed amount of $372,230; resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,489,919;
and
WHEREAS, on September 6, 2006, the Mayor and City Commission adopted
Resolution No. 2006-26283, approving Amendment No. 7 to the Agreement for the design of
bike laneslroutes required by the City's Public Works Department, in the not to exceed
amount of $58,128; resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,548,047; and
WHEREAS, on September 9, 2006, Amendment No. 8 to the Agreement was
administratively executed to include the design of alternative parking in the Lake Pancoast
area, in the not-to-exceed amount of $24,900; resulting in a revised contract fee of
$2,572,947; and
WHEREAS, on September 9, 2006, Amendment No. 9 to the Agreement was
administratively executed to include the design of road edge treatment to Sunset Islands 1
and 2, in the not-to-exceed amount of $3,200; resulting in a revised contract fee of
$2,576,147; and
WHEREAS, on September 9, 2006, Amendment No. 10 to the Agreement was
administratively executed to include the design of resident requested modifications in the
Lake Pancoast area; in the not-to-exceed amount of $8,680; resulting in a revised contract
fee of $2,584,827; and
WHEREAS, on August 6, 2007, Amendment No. 11 to the Agreement was
administratively executed for an additional thirty seven (37) soil borings in Sunset Island No.
1 to verify underground utility services and potential conflicts, in the not to exceed amount of
$10,400; resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,595,227; and
WHEREAS, on April 11,2007, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution
No. 2007-26504, approving Amendment No. 12 to the Agreement for additional services
regarding verification of additional underground utilities to avoid conflicts in 103 boring sites
along North Bay Road between Sunset Drive and Alton Road, in the not to exceed amount of
$27,500; and 334 boring sites for Bid Package 8A - Central Bayshore, in the not to exceed
amount of $94,675; and to perform a traffic study at the intersection of West 28th Street and
Prairie Avenue, in the not to exceed amount of $20,780; all resulting in a revised contract fee
of $2,738,182; and
WHEREAS, on December 7, 2007, Amendment No. 15 to the Agreement was
administratively executed for additional services to prepare a re-application package for the
Historic Preservation Board for the Lake Pancoast Bid Package, in the not to exceed amount
of $2,145; resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,777,886; and
WHEREAS, on December 7, 2007, Amendment No. 16 to the Agreement was
administratively executed for additional services for design services, preparation of
materials, and attendance at a meeting with residents discussing options for the intersection
of 28" Street and Prairie Avenue, in the not to exceed amount of $2,947; resulting in a
revised contract fee of $2,780,833; and
WHEREAS, on December 20, 2007, Amendment No. 13 to the Agreement was
administratively executed for additional services to expand the traffic study of alternative
design concepts for the ~8'~ Street and Prairie Avenue intersection (previously authorized
under Amendment No. 12), in the not to exceed amount of $22,156; resulting in a revised
contract fee of $2,760,338; and
WHEREAS, on December 20, 2007, Amendment No. 14 to the Agreement was
administratively executed for additional services to implement miscellaneous design
revisions to bike lanes, traffic tables, crosswalks, the ~8~ Street and Prairie Avenue
intersection, and water mains, in the not to exceed amount of $1 5,403; resulting in a revised
contract fee of $2,775,741 ; and
WHEREAS, on January 6, 2009, Amendment No. 17 to the Agreement was
administratively executed for additional services for design services, preparation of
materials, and attendance at various Board and civic meetings discussing options on Sunset
Islands No. I and II, in the not to exceed amount of $15,344; resulting in a revised contract
fee of $2,796,177; and
WHEREAS, on January 6, 2009, Amendment No. 18 to the Agreement was
administratively executed for additional services for design services necessary for the
preparation of a technical memorandum evaluating the use of exfiltration trenches in lieu of a
stormwater pump station in Lake Pancoast, in the not to exceed amount of $15,196;
resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,811,373; and
WHEREAS, on October 14, 2009, the Mayor and City Commission adopted
Resolution No. 2009-27223, approving Amendment No. 19 to the Agreement which provided
for additional design scope on Sunset Islands No. 3 and 4; that included preparation of a
technical memorandum which investigated the existing stormwater system, proposed
improvements required to meet a 5-year, l-day level of service, and presented them in a
schematic plan; that relocated water meters in rear easements to the right-of-way; that
added valley gutters, catch basins, replacement/upsizing of outfalls, tideflex valves, and
stormwater quality improvements; that coordinated the undergrounding of electric, cable, and
phone services; that coordinated new gas service; and that updated the existing condition
sheets; in the not-to-exceed amount of $108,000; resulting in a revised contract fee of
$2,919,373.
WHEREAS, the following Amendment No. 20, reallocates funds from construction
administration to bidding and award services for the Bayshore Neighborhoods No. 8A, 8B,
8C, and 8D packages for additional services associated with the extended bidding and
award phase due to additional permitting requirements, in the amount of $144,591.84,
$1 20,716.06, $39,749.1 3, and $35,012.96, respectively, for a total contract reallocation of
$340,069.99; increasing the bidding and award services budget for Neighborhoods No. 8A,
8B,8C, and 8D packages from $14,806 to $159,397.84, $14,806 to $135,522.06, $14,806 to
$54,555.13, and $1 4,806 to $49,818.96, respectively, for a total bidding and award services
budget of $399,293.99, and decreasing the total construction administration budget from
$371,441 to $31,371.01.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND THE ClTY
COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA that the Mayor and City
Commission hereby approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute Amendment
No. 20 to the professional services agreement between the City of Miami Beach, Florida,
and CH2M Hill for the Professional Landscape Architectural and Engineering Services for
the Right-of-way Infrastructure Improvements Program for Neighborhood No. 8 Bayshore
and Sunset Islands, dated May 16,2001, reallocating funds in the amount of $340,069.99,
from Construction Administration to Bidding and Award services for the Bayshore
Neighborhoods No. 8A, 8B, 8C, and 8D packages.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of ,2011.
ATTEST:
ROBERT B. PARCHER, CITY CLERK MATTI HERRERA BOWER, MAYOR
T:GL\GENDAEOI 1\4-13-1 I\Bayshore - CHZMHill Amendment No. 20 and 2l\Bayshore - CH2MHill Amendments No. 20 -
RESO.doc
APPROVED AS TO
FORM & LANGUAGE
& FOH EXECUTION
RESOLUTION NO. 201 1-
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND ClTY
CLERK TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT NO. 21 TO THE PROFESSIONAL
SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH,
FLORIDA, AND CH2M HILL FOR THE PROFESSIONAL LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR THE RIGHT-OF-
WAY INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM FOR
NEIGHBORHOOD NO. 8 BAYSHORE AND SUNSET ISLANDS, DATED
MAY 16,2001, TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL DESIGN DOCUMENTS AND
PERMITTING SERVICES TO PROCURE THE DERM TREE REMOVAL
PERMITS FOR THE BAYSHORE AND SUNSET ISLAND
NEIGHBORHOODS NO. 8A, 88, 8C, AND 8D PROJECTS, TO
PARTICIPATE IN VALUE ENGINEERING, PROVIDE DESIGN
MODIFICATIONS AND ASSOCIATED RE-PERMITTING SERVICES TO
INCORPORATE THE LEVEL OF SERVICE REVIEW COMMENTS
REQUESTED BY THE CITY COMMISSION, FOR A NOT-TO-EXCEED
AMOUNT OF $135,112.97, AND $63,605.00, FOR REIMBURSABLE
EXPENSES; WITH PREVIOUSLY APPROPRIATED FUNDING IN THE
AMOUNT OF $1 13,297.18; APPROPRIATING $85,420.79 FROM FUND
429, STORMWATER PROJECTS LINE OF CREDIT, WITH SUCH FUNDS
TO BE REPAID FROM PROPOSED FUTURE STORMWATER BONDS.
WHEREAS, on May 16,2001, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution
No. 2001-24387, approving and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute an
agreement with the Consultant for professional services (the Agreement) for the Right-of-
Way Infrastructure Improvements Program Neighborhood No. 8 Bayshore and Sunset lsland
project (the Project), pursuant to Request for Qualifications No. 134-99100; and
WHEREAS, the Agreement provides for the detailed planning services for various
streetscape, landscape, and utility improvements within the Bayshore and Sunset lsland
neighborhoods; and
WHEREAS, the planning effort for the Bayshore and Sunset lsland neighborhoods
has been completed and detail design activities are underway; and
WHEREAS, the Agreement was executed in the not-to-exceed amount of $1 33,174;
and
WHEREAS, on December 10, 2003, the Mayor and City Commission adopted
Resolution No. 2003-25432, approving additional design services as Amendment No. 1 to
the Agreement, for planning, design, permitting, bidding 1 award, and construction
administrative services for the Bayshore and Sunset lsland neighborhoods in the not-to-
exceed amount of $1,913,302; and resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,046,476;and
WHEREAS, on February 24, 2005, Amendment No. 2 to the Agreement was
administratively executed, to re-package Sunset Islands I and 2 from Bid Package 8D to Bid
Package 8B at no additional cost, resulting in no change to contract; and
WHEREAS, on November 8, 2005, Amendment No. 3 to the Agreement was
administratively executed to include the completion of a topographic survey along Pine Tree
Drive, from West 28th to West 4oth Streets, along the east side of the road, in the not-to-
exceed amount of $12,850; resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,059,326; and
WHEREAS, on February 17, 2006, Amendment No. 4 to the Agreement was
administratively executed to include the evaluation, permitting and preparation of
construction cost alternatives for the installation of curblvalley gutters to Sunset Islands 1
and 2, in the not-to-exceed amount of $2,500; resulting in a revised contract fee of
$2,061,826; and
WHEREAS, on February 16, 2006, Amendment No. 5 to the Agreement was
executed to include the installation of four (4) drainage test wells to provide additional
information for the preparation of a Letter of Reasonable Assurance to be submitted to the
Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), as required in the permit
application for the Project, in the not-to-exceed amount of $55,863; resulting in a revised
contract fee of $2,117,689; and
WHEREAS, on September 6, 2006, the Mayor and City Commission adopted
Resolution No. 2006-26283, approving Amendment No. 6 to the Agreement for the design of
"P3.2" classified water main replacements required by the City's Public Works Department,
in the not-to-exceed amount of $372,230; resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,489,919;
and
WHEREAS, on September 6, 2006, the Mayor and City Commission adopted
Resolution No. 2006-26283, approving Amendment No. 7 to the Agreement for the design of
bike laneslroutes required by the City's Public Works Department, in the not to exceed
amount of $58,128; resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,548,047; and
WHEREAS, on September 9, 2006, Amendment No. 8 to the Agreement was
administratively executed to include the design of alternative parking in the Lake Pancoast
area, in the not-to-exceed amount of $24,900; resulting in a revised contract fee of
$2,572,947; and
WHEREAS, on September 9, 2006, Amendment No. 9 to the Agreement was
administratively executed to include the design of road edge treatment to Sunset Islands 1
and 2, in the not-to-exceed amount of $3,200; resulting in a revised contract fee of
$2,576,147; and
WHEREAS, on September 9, 2006, Amendment No. 10 to the Agreement was
administratively executed to include the design of resident requested modifications in the
Lake Pancoast area; in the not-to-exceed amount of $8,680; resulting in a revised contract
fee of $2,584,827; and
WHEREAS, on August 6, 2007, Amendment No. 11 to the Agreement was
administratively executed for an additional thirty seven (37) soil borings in Sunset Island No.
1 to verify underground utility services and potential conflicts, in the not to exceed amount of
$1 0,400; resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,595,227; and
WHEREAS, on April 1 1,2007, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution
No. 2007-26504, approving Amendment No. 12 to the Agreement for additional services
regarding verification of additional underground utilities to avoid conflicts in 103 boring sites
along North Bay Road between Sunset Drive and Alton Road, in the not to exceed amount of
$27,500; and 334 boring sites for Bid Package 8A - Central Bayshore, in the not to exceed
amount of $94,675; and to perform a traffic study at the intersection of West 28th Street and
Prairie Avenue, in the not to exceed amount of $20,780; all resulting in a revised contract fee
of $2,738,182; and
WHEREAS, on December 7, 2007, Amendment No. 15 to the Agreement was
administratively executed for additional services to prepare a re-application package for the
Historic Preservation Board for the Lake Pancoast Bid Package, in the not to exceed amount
of $2,145; resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,777,886; and
WHEREAS, on December 7, 2007, Amendment No. 16 to the Agreement was
administratively executed for additional services for design services, preparation of
materials, and attendance at a meeting with residents discussing options for the intersection
of 28th Street and Prairie Avenue, in the not to exceed amount of $2,947; resulting in a
revised contract fee of $2,780,833; and
WHEREAS, on December 20, 2007, Amendment No. 13 to the Agreement was
administratively executed for additional services to expand the traffic study of alternative
design concepts for the 28th Street and Prairie Avenue intersection (previously authorized
under Amendment No. 12), in the not to exceed amount of $22,156; resulting in a revised
contract fee of $2,760,338; and
WHEREAS, on December 20, 2007, Amendment No. 14 to the Agreement was
administratively executed for additional services to implement miscellaneous design
revisions to bike lanes, traffic tables, crosswalks, the 28th Street and Prairie Avenue
intersection, and water mains, in the not to exceed amount of $1 5,403; resulting in a revised
contract fee of $2,775,741; and
WHEREAS, on January 6, 2009, Amendment No. 17 to the Agreement was
administratively executed for additional services for design services, preparation of
materials, and attendance at various Board and civic meetings discussing options on Sunset
Islands No. I and 11, in the not to exceed amount of $15,344; resulting in a revised contract
fee of $2,796,177; and
WHEREAS, on January 6, 2009, Amendment No. 18 to the Agreement was
administratively executed for additional services for design services necessary for the
preparation of a technical memorandum evaluating the use of exfiltration trenches in lieu of a
stormwater pump station in Lake Pancoast, in the not to exceed amount of $15,196;
resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,811,373; and
WHEREAS, on October 14, 2009, the Mayor and City Commission adopted
Resolution No. 2009-27223, approving Amendment No. 19 to the Agreement which provided
for additional design scope on Sunset Islands No. 3 and 4; that included preparation of a
technical memorandum which investigated the existing stormwater system, proposed
improvements required to meet a 5-year, I-day level of service, and presented them in a
schematic plan; that relocated water meters in rear easements to the right-of-way; that
added valley gutters, catch basins, replacement/upsizing of outfalls, tideflex valves, and
stormwater quality improvements; that coordinated the undergrounding of electric, cable, and
phone services; that coordinated new gas service; and that updated the existing condition
sheets; in the not-to-exceed amount of $108,000; resulting in a revised contract fee of
$2,919,373.
WHEREAS, on April 13,201 1, Amendment No. 20 shall be presented to the Mayor
and City Commission for approval to reallocate funds from construction administration to
bidding and award services for the Bayshore and Sunset Island Neighborhoods No. 8A, 88,
8C, and 8D packages for additional services associated with the extended bidding and
award phase due to additional permitting requirements, in the amount of $144,591.84,
$1 20,716.06, $39,749.13, and $35,012.96, respectively, for a total contract reallocation of
$340,069.99; increasing the bidding and award services budget for Neighborhoods No. 8A,
8B, 8C, and 8D packages from $14,806 to $159,397.84, $14,806 to $135,522.06, $14,806 to
$54,555.1 3, and $1 4,806 to $49,818.96, respectively, for a total bidding and award services
budget of $399,293.99, and decreasing the total construction administration budget from
$371,441 to $31,371 .01; and
WHEREAS, the following Amendment No. 21, approves additional services to
provide design documents and permitting services to procure the DERM Tree Removal
Permits for the Bayshore and Sunset lsland Neighborhoods No. 8A, 8B, 8C, and 8D projects
and additional services to participate in value engineering and provide design modifications
and associated re-permitting services to incorporate the level of service review comments
requested by the City Commission during award of the construction contracts for the
Bayshore Neighborhoods No. 8A, 88, and 8C projects, for a not-to-exceed amount of
$135,112.97 and an additional not-to-exceed amount of $63,605.00 for reimbursable
expenses, for a total not-to-exceed amount of $198,717.97; resulting in a revised contract
fee of $3,118,090.97.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND THE ClTY
COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA that the Mayor and City
Commission hereby approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute Amendment
No. 21 to the professional services agreement between the City of Miami Beach, Florida,
and CH2M Hill for the Professional Landscape Architectural and Engineering Services for
the Right-of-way Infrastructure Improvements Program for Neighborhood No. 8 Bayshore
and Sunset Islands, dated May 16, 2001, to provide additional design documents and
permitting services to procure the DERM Tree Removal Permits for the Bayshore and
Sunset Island Neighborhoods No. 8A, 88, 8C, and 8D projects, to participate in value
engineering, provide design modifications and associated re-permitting services to
incorporate the level of service review comments requested by the City Commission, for a
not-to-exceed amount of $135,112.97, and $63,605.00 for reimbursable expenses; with
previously appropriated funding in the amount of $1 13,297.1 8; appropriating $85,420.79
from Fund 429, Stormwater Projects Line of Credit, with such funds to be repaid from
proposed future stormwater bonds.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of ,2011.
ATTEST:
ROBERT &. PARCHER, CITY CLERK MATT1 HERRERA BOWER, MAYOR
T:\AGENDA\2011\4-13-11\Bayshore - CHZMHill Amendment No. 20 and ZI\Bayshore - CH2MHill Amendments No. 21 -
RES0.doc
APPROVED AS TO
FORM 81 LANGUAGE
& FOR EXECUTION
ATTACHMENT A
EXECUTED AMENDMENTS
On December 10, 2003, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No. 2003-25432,
approving additional design services as Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement, for planning, design,
permitting, bidding 1 award, and construction administrative services for the Bayshore and Sunset
Island neighborhoods in the not-to-exceed amount of $1,913,302; and resulting in a revised contract
fee of $2,046,476.
On February 24, 2005, Amendment No. 2 to the Agreement was administratively executed, to re-
package Sunset Islands 1 and 2 from Bid Package 8D to Bid Package 88 at no additional cost,
resulting in no change to contract.
On November 8,2005, Amendment No. 3 to the Agreement was administratively executed to include
the completion of a topographic survey along Pine Tree Drive, from West 28th to West 40" Streets,
along the east side of the road, in the not-to-exceed amount of $12,850; resulting in a revised
contract fee of $2,059,326.
On February 17,2006, Amendment No. 4 to the Agreement was administratively executed to include
the evaluation, permitting and preparation of construction cost alternatives for the installation of
curblvalley gutters to Sunset Islands I and 2, in the not-to-exceed amount of $2,500; resulting in a
revised contract fee of $2,061,826.
On February 16,2006, Amendment No. 5 to the Agreement was executed to include the installation
of four (4) drainage test wells to provide additional information for the preparation of a Letter of
Reasonable Assurance to be submitted to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection
(FDEP), as required in the permit application for the Project, in the not-to-exceed amount of
$55,863; resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,117,689.
On September 6, 2006, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No. 2006-26283,
approving Amendment No. 6 to the Agreement for the design of "P3.2" classified water main
replacements required by the City's Public Works Department, in the not-to-exceed amount of
$372,230; resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,489,919.
On September 6, 2006, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No. 2006-26283,
approving Amendment No. 7 to the Agreement for the design of bike lanes/routes required by the
City's Public Works Department, in the not to exceed amount of $58,128; resulting in a revised
contract fee of $2,548,047.
On September 9, 2006, Amendment No. 8 to the Agreement was administratively executed to
include the design of alternative parking in the Lake Pancoast area, in the not-to-exceed amount of
$24,900; resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,572,947.
On September 9, 2006, Amendment No. 9 to the Agreement was administratively executed to
include the design of road edge treatment to Sunset Islands I and 2, in the not-to-exceed amount of
$3,200; resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,576,147.
On September 9, 2006, Amendment No. 10 to the Agreement was administratively executed to
include the design of resident requested modifications in the Lake Pancoast area; in the not-to-
exceed amount of $8,680; resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,548,827.
On August 6, 2007, Amendment No. 1 I to the Agreement was administratively executed for an
additional thirty seven (37) soil borings in Sunset Island No. 1 to verify underground utility services
and potential conflicts, in the not to exceed amount of $1 0,400; resulting in a revised contract fee of
On April 11,2007, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No. 2007-26504, approving
Amendment No. 12 to the Agreement for additional services regarding verification of additional
underground utilities to avoid conflicts in 103 boring sites along North Bay Road between Sunset
Drive and Alton Road, in the not to exceed amount of $27,500; and 334 boring sites for Bid Package
8A - Central Bayshore, in the not to exceed amount of $94,675; and to perform a traffic study at the
intersection of West ~8'~ Street and Prairie Avenue, in the not to exceed amount of $20,780; all
resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,738,182.
On December 7, 2007, Amendment No. 15 to the Agreement was administratively executed for
additional services to prepare a re-application package for the Historic Preservation Board for the
Lake Pancoast Bid Package, in the not to exceed amount of $2,145; resulting in a revised contract
fee of $2,777,886.
On December 7, 2007, Amendment No. 16 to the Agreement was administratively executed for
additional services for design services, preparation of materials, and attendance at a meeting with
residents discussing options for the intersection of 28th Street and Prairie Avenue, in the not to
exceed amount of $2,947; resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,780,833.
On December 20, 2007, Amendment No. 13 to the Agreement was administratively executed for
additional services to expand the traffic study of alternative design concepts for the 28th Street and
Prairie Avenue intersection (previously authorized under Amendment No. 12), in the not to exceed
amount of $22,156; resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,760,338; and
On December 20, 2007, Amendment No. 14 to the Agreement was administratively executed for
additional services to implement miscellaneous design revisions to bike lanes, traffic tables,
crosswalks, the ~8'~ Street and Prairie Avenue intersection, and water mains, in the not to exceed
amount of $15,403; resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,775,741.
On January 6, 2009, Amendment No. 17 to the Agreement was administratively executed for
additional services for design services, preparation of materials, and attendance at various Board
and civic meetings discussing options on Sunset Islands No. I and II. This amendment was
approved in the not to exceed amount of $1 5,344; resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,796,177.
On January 6, 2009, Amendment No. 18 to the Agreement was administratively executed for
additional services for design services necessary for the preparation of a technical memorandum
evaluating the use of exfiltration trenches in lieu of a stormwater pump station in Lake Pancoast, in
the not to exceed amount of $15,196; resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,811,373; and
On October 14, 2009, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No. 2009-27223,
approving Amendment No. 19 to the Agreement which provided for additional design scope on
Sunset Islands No. 3 and 4; that included preparation of a technical memorandum which
investigated the existing stormwater system, proposed improvements required to meet a 5-year, 1-
day level of service, and presented them in a schematic plan; that relocated water meters in rear
easements to the right-of-way; that added valley gutters, catch basins, replacemenffupsizing of
outfalls, tideflex valves, and stormwater quality improvements; that coordinated the undergrounding
of electric, cable, and phone services; that coordinated new gas service; and that updated the
existing condition sheets; in the not-to-exceed amount of $108,000; resulting in a revised contract
fee of $2,919,373.
ATTACHMENT B
AMENDMENTS NO. 20 AND 21
AMENDMENT NO. 20
TO THE PROFESSIONAL LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURAL
AND ENGINEERING (AIE) SERVICES AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
THE ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA
AND
CHZMHILL, INC.
DATED MAY 16,2001
FOR THE
RIGHT-OF-WAY INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM NEIGHBORHOOD NO. 8
BAYSHORE AND SUNSET ISLANDS.
This Amendment No. 20 to the above referenced Agreement is made and entered this day of
,201 1, by and between the ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH, a municipal corporation existing
under the laws of the State of Florida, having its principal offices at 1700 Convention Center Drive,
Miami Beach, Florida 33139 (hereinafter referred to as the City), and CH2MHil1, Inc. a Florida
Corporation, having its principal office at 800 Fairway Drive, Suite 350, Deerfield Beach, Florida,
33441 (hereinafter referred to as the Consultant).
RECITALS:
WHEREAS, on May 16, 2001, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No.
2001 -24387, approving and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute an agreement with the
Consultant for professional services (the Agreement) for the Right-of-way Infrastructure
Improvements Program Neighborhood No. 8 Bayshore and Sunset lsland project (the Project),
pursuant to Request for Qualifications No. 134-99100; and
WHEREAS, the Agreement provides for the detailed planning services for various
streetscape, landscape, and utility improvements within the Bayshore and Sunset lsland
neighborhoods; and
WHEREAS, the planning effort for the Bayshore and Sunset lsland neighborhoods has been
completed and detail design activities are underway; and
WHEREAS, the Agreement was executed in the not-to-exceed amount of $133,174; and
WHEREAS, on December 10, 2003, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution
No. 2003-25432, approving additional design services as Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement, for
planning, design, permitting, bidding I award, and construction administrative services for the
Bayshore and Sunset lsland neighborhoods in the not-to-exceed amount of $1,913,302; and
resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,046,476;and
WHEREAS, on February24,2005, Amendment No. 2 to the Agreement was administratively
executed, to re-package Sunset Islands 1 and 2 from Bid Package 8D to Bid Package 88 at no
additional cost, resulting in no change to contract; and
WHEREAS, on November 8,2005, Amendment No. 3 to the Agreement was administratively
executed to include the completion of a topographic survey along Pine Tree Drive, from west 28h to
West 4oth Streets, along the east side of the road, in the not-to-exceed amount of $12,850; resulting
in a revised contract fee of $2,059,326; and
WHEREAS, on February 17,2006, Amendment No. 4 to the Agreement was administratively
executed to include the evaluation, permitting and preparation of construction cost alternatives for
the installation of curblvalley gutters to Sunset Islands 1 and 2, in the not-to-exceed amount of
$2,500; resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,061,826; and
WHEREAS, on February 16,2006, Amendment No. 5 to the Agreement was executed to
include the installation of four (4) drainage test wells to provide additional information for the
preparation of a Letter of Reasonable Assurance to be submitted to the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection (FDEP), as required in the permit application for the Project, in the not-to-
exceed amount of $55,863; resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,117,689; and
WHEREAS, on September 6,2006, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No.
2006-26283, approving Amendment No. 6 to the Agreement for the design of "P3.2 classified water
main replacements required by the City's Public Works Department, in the not-to-exceed amount of
$372,230; resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,489,919; and
WHEREAS, on September 6,2006, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No.
2006-26283, approving Amendment No. 7 to the Agreement for the design of bike laneslroutes
required by the City's Public Works Department, in the not to exceed amount of $58,128; resulting in
a revised contract fee of $2,548,047; and
WHEREAS, on September 9, 2006, Amendment No. 8 to the Agreement was
administratively executed to include the design of alternative parking in the Lake Pancoast area, in
the not-to-exceed amount of $24,900; resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,572,947; and
WHEREAS, on September 9, 2006, Amendment No. 9 to the Agreement was
administratively executed to include the design of road edge treatment to Sunset Islands 1 and 2, in
the not-to-exceed amount of $3,200; resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,576,147; and
WHEREAS, on September 9, 2006, Amendment No. 10 to the Agreement was
administratively executed to include the design of resident requested modifications in the Lake
Pancoast area; in the not-to-exceed amount of $8,680; resulting in a revised contract fee of
$2,584,827; and
WHEREAS, on August 6,2007, Amendment No. 11 to the Agreement was administratively
executed for an additional thirty seven (37) soil borings in Sunset Island No. 1 to verify underground
utility services and potential conflicts, in the not to exceed amount of $1 0,400; resulting in a revised
contract fee of $2,595,227; and
WHEREAS, on April 11, 2007, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No.
2007-26504, approving Amendment No. 12 to the Agreement for additional services regarding
verification of additional underground utilities to avoid conflicts in 103 boring sites along North Bay
Road between Sunset Drive and Alton Road, in the not to exceed amount of $27,500; and 334
boring sites for Bid Package 8A- Central Bayshore, in the not to exceed amount of $94,675; and to
perform a traffic study at the intersection of West 28'h Street and Prairie Avenue, in the not to exceed
amount of $20,780; all resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,738,182; and
WHEREAS, on December 20, 2007, Amendment No. 13 to the Agreement was
administratively executed for additional services to expand the traffic study of alternative design
concepts for the 28th Street and Prairie Avenue intersection (previously authorized under
Amendment No. 12), in the not to exceed amount of $22,156; resulting in a revised contract fee of
$2,760,338; and
WHEREAS, on December 20, 2007, Amendment No. 14 to the Agreement was
administratively executed for additional services to implement miscellaneous design revisions to bike
lanes, traffic tables, crosswalks, the ~8'~ Street and Prairie Avenue intersection, and water mains, in
the not to exceed amount of $15,403; resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,775,741 ; and
WHEREAS, on December 7, 2007, Amendment No. 15 to the Agreement was
administratively executed for additional services to prepare a re-application package for the Historic
Preservation Board for the Lake Pancoast Bid Package, in the not to exceed amount of $2,145;
resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,777,886; and
WHEREAS, on December 7, 2007, Amendment No. 16 to the Agreement was
administratively executed for additional services for design services, preparation of materials, and
attendance at a meeting with residents discussing options for the intersection of ~8'~ Street and
Prairie Avenue, in the not to exceed amount of $2,947; resulting in a revised contract fee of
$2,780,833; and
WHEREAS, on January 6,2009, Amendment No. 17 to the Agreement was administratively
executed for additional services for design services, preparation of materials, and attendance at
various Board and civic meetings discussing options on Sunset Islands No. I and II, in the not to
exceed amount of $15,344; resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,796,177; and
WHEREAS, on January6,2009, Amendment No. 18 to the Agreement was administratively
executed for additional services for design services necessary for the preparation of a technical
memorandum evaluating the use of exfiltration trenches in lieu of a stormwater pump station in Lake
Pancoast, in the not to exceed amount of $1 5,196; resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,811,373;
and
WHEREAS, on October 14,2009, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No.
2009-27223, approving Amendment No. 19 to the Agreement which provided for additional design
scope on Sunset Islands No. 3 and 4; that included preparation of a technical memorandum which
investigated the existing stormwater system, proposed improvements required to meet a 5-year, 1-
day level of service, and presented them in a schematic plan; that relocated water meters in rear
easements to the right-of-way; that added valley gutters, catch basins, replacementlupsizing of
outfalls, tideflex valves, and stormwater quality improvements; that coordinated the undergrounding
of electric, cable, and phone services; that coordinated new gas service; and that updated the
existing condition sheets; in the not-to-exceed amount of $108,000; resulting in a revised contract
fee of $2,919,373.
WHEREAS, the following Amendment No. 20, reallocates funds from construction
administration to bidding and award services for the Bayshore Neighborhoods No. 8A, 8B, 8C, and
80 packages for additional services associated with the extended bidding and award phase due to
additional permitting requirements, in the amount of $1 44,591.84, $1 20,716.06, $39,749.1 3, and
$35,012.96, respectively, for a total contract reallocation of $340,069.99; increasing the bidding and
award services budget for Neighborhoods No. 8A, 88, 8C, and 8D packages from $14,806 to
$1 59,397.84, $1 4,806 to $1 35,522.06, $14,806 to $54,555.1 3, and $1 4,806 to $49,818.96,
respectively, for a total bidding and award services budget of $399,293.99, and decreasing the total
construction administration budget from $371,441 to $31,371.01.
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto, and in consideration of the mutual promises,
covenants, agreements, terms, and conditions herein contained, and other good and valuable
consideration, the respect and adequacy are hereby acknowledged, do agree as follows:
1. ABOVE RECITALS
The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated as a part of this Amendment
No. 20.
2. MODIFICATIONS
The Agreement is amended to include the additional terms and conditions outlined in Exhibit
"A" and the additional professional services for the Project to provide extended bidding and
award services due to additional permitting requirements for the Project, as described in the
Consultant's proposal, dated November 4,201 0, attached as Exhibit "B to this Amendment.
3. OTHER PROVISIONS
All other provisions of the Agreement remain unchanged.
4. RATIFICATION
The City and Consultant ratify the terms of the Agreement, as per this Amendment No. 20.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment No. 20, to be
executed in their names by their duly authorized officials as of the date first set forth above.
ATTEST: CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
City Clerk Mayor
Robert Parcher Matti Herrera Bower
ATTEST:
Secretary:
CONSULTANT:
CH2MHILL, INC.
President
Print Name
-
Print Name
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A
Exhibit B - Consultant's Amendment 20 (Task Order 20)
T:V?tGEIUDA'20I$~4-13-IliBayshore - CM2MHill Amendment No. 20 and 2liBaysl-1ore - GH2Mi-lill Amendments No. 20 -
Ak4ENDMENT.doc
EXHIBIT A
A. SCOPE OF SERVICES
SCHEDULE A, "Scope of Services", of the PROFESSIONAL ARCHITECTURAL AND
ENGINEERING (AIE) SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
(CITY) AND CHZMHILL, INC. (CONSULTANT), dated May 16,2001, is amended as follows:
REPLACE the scope of services outlined in Sub-Tasks 3.1 thru 3.4 with the scope of services
outlined in Sub-Tasks 1.1 thru 1.4 of TASK ORDER 20 (provided as EXHIBIT B to this
Amendment).
SUPPLEMENT the scope of services outlined in Sub-Tasks 3.5 with the scope of services
outlined in Sub-Task I .5 of EXHIBIT B.
REPLACE the scope of services outlined in Sub-Tasks 3.7 with the scope of services outlined
in Sub-Task 1.7, with the exception of the last paragraph.
ADD Sub-Task 1.8 - Project Meetings and Document Changes as Sub-Task 3.8 of the
contract.
REPLACE the Deliverables and Schedule outlined in TASK 3 of the Agreement with the
Deliverables and Schedule outlined in TASK I of EXHIBIT B.
ADD the following under TASK 5 - ADDITIONAL SERVICES:
Sub-Task 5.16 - Additional Permitting Assistance
The scope of services for this Sub-Task are as outlined in Sub-Task 2.1 of EXHIBIT B.
Sub-Task 5.17 - Prepare an Environmental Site Assessment Proposal
The scope of services for this Sub-Task are as outlined in Sub-Task 2.2 of EXHIBIT B.
Sub-Task 5.18 - Development of Alternative Dewaterinn Methods, Details and Site Plans
The scope of services for this Sub-Task are as outlined in Sub-Task 2.3 of EXHIBIT B.
Sub-Task 5.19 - Hydraulic Studv to Determine Limits of Dewaterinn Influence
The scope of services for this Sub-Task are as outlined in Sub-Task 2.4 of EXHIBIT B.
Sub-Task 5.20 - Development of Plans and Procedures to Treat and Dispose of
Contaminated Groundwater
The scope of services for this Sub-Task are as outlined in Sub-Task 2.5 of EXHIBIT B.
Sub-Task 5.21 - Development of DERM Required - Dewaterinn Plan
The scope of services for this Sub-Task are as outlined in Sub-Task 2.6 of EXHIBIT B.
Sub-Task 5.22 - Development of Estimated Construction Cost Associated with Alternate
Dewaterinn Methods
The scope of services for this Sub-Task are as outlined in Sub-Task 2.7 of EXHIBIT B.
ADD the Deliverables and Schedule outlined in TASK 2 of EXHIBIT B under TASK 5 of the
Agreement.
B. TIME OF COMPLETION
As of January 21,201 1, Project Packages A, B and C have been released for bid and awarded
by the City Commission. The scope of services under this Amendment shall continue
accordingly, per the Schedules delineated in EXHIBIT B and incorporated herein.
C. PAYMENT AND COMPENSATION
Compensation for the aforementioned A/E additional services shall be as outlined in Article 7 of
the Agreement. The total labor fee proposed for this scope of work shall be a lump sum amount
of $399,293.99, of which $59,224 is currently authorized for bidding and award services and an
additional $340,069.99 shall be reallocated from construction administration to bidding and
award services as part of this Amendment, resulting in no change to the total contract amount.
Invoicing will be monthly and based on the percentage of work completed by the invoice date.
Original Contract Value
Amendment No. 1
Amendment No. 2
Amendment No. 3
Amendment No. 4
Amendment No. 5
Amendment No. 6
Amendment No. 7
Amendment No. 8
Amendment No. 9
Amendment No. 10
Amendment No. 11
Amendment No. 12
Amendment No. 13
Amendment No. 14
Amendment No. 15
Amendment No. 16
Amendment No. 17
Amendment No. 18
Amendment No. 19
Amendment No. 20
Total Revised Contract Value:
T:\hGENDAi2Olli4-:3-11\Bayshare - CI12MHill Amendment No. 20 and 2l!Bayshore - Cfi2MHiit Amctndmants No. 20 -
A%lENDIL?ENT.doc
EXHIBIT B
Amendment 20 (Task Order)
Bidding and Additional Permitting Services for the City of Miami
Beach Neighborhood No. 8, Design Packages NC, B, and D
This Task Order when executed, shall be incorporated in, and shall become an integral part
of the STAiDARD AGREEiMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, dated May 16,2001.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The City of Miami Beach is implementing a drainage improvements and water main
replacement program in the vicinity of the Bayshore Golf Course. Spec.ifically, the Lower
North Bay area identified as Neighborhood No. 8 (Bayshore/Sunset Island comm~ty).
Construction associated with Neighborhood No. 8 includes related infrastructure
improvements including the stormwater drainage system. This work will help reduce
stormwater discharge into Biscape Bay and provide nuisance flooding relief in the North
Bay area.
For the ease of construction management Neighborhood No. 8 was divided into four
packages by the City. These include:
Package A - Central Bayshore
Package B - Lower North Bay Road
Package C - Lake Pancoast
Package D - Sunset Islands 3 and 4
This Task Order addresses Permitting and Bidding Services and the preparation of project
specific dewatering plcvls required by DEEM for Packages A/C, 8, and D. Note that
Packages A and C will be bid together as a single construction contract.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
The CONSULTAhi agrees to furnish to CITY as part of Task Order 20 services during the
permitting and bid phase for Packages A/C, B, and D. These services are detailed in Tasks 1
and 2 below which describe the scope of work, deliverables, and completion schedules, The
additional permitting and bid phase services provided by the CONSULTANT include the
following activities:
oemen t 1. Project Mana,
2. Preparation of Bid Documents
3. Additional permitting assistance including the preparation of a environmental site
assessment proposal and dewatering plans to be included in each construction
package by addendum
4. Attendance at Pre-Bid Conferences
3. Preparation of Construction Contract Addenda and conformed documents
6. Attendance at Bid Opening, Bid Selection Committee Meeting and Neighborhood
iniormationa 1 meetings
TASK 1 -BIDDING, AWARD SERVICES, PUBLIC INFORMATION
SERVICES
Sub-Task 1.1 = Construction Contract Document Review
CONSULTANT shall assist CITY in bidding and award of each of the construction contracts
associated with Packages A/C, B and D.
CONSLTTAiW shall combine existing docuunents for Packages A and C into a single set of
bid documents to include two sets of drawings, a single specification document and a single
bid form. Documents will be submitted to the CrrY for review and CITY comments will be
incorporated within 2 weeks of receipt of comments. CONSULTANT will provide
electronic copies of final documents for the CITY to proceed with advertisement of bid.
CONSULT,kW shall update the bid documents as defined by addenda and changes
requested by the CITY and provide a second set of electronic copies of the revised final
documents for the continued, extended bid process.
For Package B, CONSULTA-W will review bid package prepared by the Cm,
CONSULTANT will meet with CITY to discuss any revisions and prepare revised
documents. It is assumed that revisions will be incorporated as an addendum. ?his
addendum is in addition to those identified in Subtask 1.5 below.
Package D bid document preparation is covered under a separate amendment to the
CONSULTANT'S contract.
Sub-Task 1.2 - Bid Document Delivery
CONSULTAINT shall provide CITY with one electronic set of contract documents for each of
the four projects. The CITY Procurement Department will reproduce documents and handle
the advertising, distribution, sale, mainknance of plan holder lists and other aspects of bid
document distribution.
Sub-Task 1.3 - Pre-Bid Conference
CITY shall attend and participate in pre-bid conference for each oi the three Bid Packages
(A/C, B, and D). CONSULTANT shall attend the pre-bid conferences and bid openings for
each project. CONSULTANT shd review CITY'S meeting s~maries prior to distribution
to perspective Bidders.
Attend and participate in one initial Pre-bid conference and bid opening for
packages A/C, B, and D.
Attend and participate in one secondary Pre-bid conference for packages A/C B.
* Respond to questions .@om prospective bidders and prepare Addenda for
distribution by others for packages A/C, B, and D.
Sub-Task 1.4 - Addenda Issuance
CONSULTANT shall provide, through CITY, timely responses to the inquiries of
prospective bidders and subseq~lently documented through issuance of wriiten addenda,
where req~rired. The format for addenda shall be provided to COhTSULTA.UT by CITY.
Responses to prospective bidders shall be documented and a record of each shall be
transmitt2d to CITY on a same day basis. CONSTJL,TANT shd prepare and submit addenda
to the CITY for approval and distribution. Six (6) addenda are assumed for each package.
Sub-Task 1.5 - Bid Evaluation
COSSULTANT will attend the City's Bid Selection Committee Meeting for each package
and provide comments to CITY with regard to ranking of bidders
This scope of services includes no allotvance for CONSULTANT'S time to assist CITY in the
event of a bid protest.
Sub-Task 1.6 - Contract Award
CONSULTANT shall provide three (3) sets of Construction Contract Documents for
execution by CITY and the successful bidder within ten tvorhg days of request by CITY
for each package.
Sub-Task 1.7 - As-Bid Contract Documents
After contract award and prior to the preconstniction conference for each of the packages,
CONSULTAW shall prepare As-Bid construction contract documents, which incorporate
the following items into the construction contract documents:
/ a Contractor's bid submittals, including but not Limited to, bid proposal, insurance,
licenses, etc.
Amend/modlty front-end documents and/or technical specifications to incorporate
changes made via contract addenda by incorporation of the addenda into the final
contract documents.
Revise construction contract drawings as required to include
modifications/revisions incorporated via contract addenda.
Sub-Task 1.8 - Project Meetings and Document Changes
/
Throughout the extended bidding process and prior to contract award, attend project
meetings as requested by the CITY and update the project documents in response to
coordination or minor issues that take place during this period. The CONSULTAiW will
attend one (1) neighborhood informational meeting for each project area. bleethgs may take
place at the CITY'S offices or off-site (i.e. DEW) as required by the ongoing process. Design
and coordination changes will be minimal in nature. Significant modifications to the
Contract Documents or Drawings will be considered a change in project scope requiring
additional compensation.
Deliverables:
CONSULTA3T shall prepare As-Bid construction contract doc~unents and reproduce
twelve (12) sets for distribution to CITY within ten (10) calendar days after the City
Commission approval/contract execution for packages A/C, 8, and D,
a Prepare recommendation of award lees for packages A/C, B, and D.
Prepare As-Bid conkact documents; reproduce hvelve (12) sets and forward to CJ3Y
for packages A/C, B, and D.
Provide additional drawing sets as requested by the CITY during the permitting
review process. Some drawing sets will be signed and sealed by Professional
Engineer.
Schedule:
The CONSULTANT will complete the work associated with Task Order No. 20 for Packages
A/C and B commensurate with the CITY'S desire to complete the bidding phase for the
projects prior to the end of 2010. it is assumed CITY will complete the bidding of Packages
A/C and B in 2010 and Package D by early 2011. This task will be completed within 3
months of the last bid advertisement.
TASK 2 - Additional Permitting Services
@.lrc)
Sub-Task 2.1 - Additional Permitting Assistance
The CONSUXTA-RTT -will provide as-needed permitting assistance to respond to regulatory
agency request for additional information for all four construction packages and to account
for regulatory changes that have occurred since the original applications were filed. This
task anticipates the preparation of multiple responses to additional RFI's for each agency
(DERM, SFWMD, hiIDPtV, MDDOH, FDEP and internal CITY permitting) as well as any
additional required correspondence and comm~mication. CONSULTAhT shall assist CIIY
in providing additional information required by the permitting agencies, including but not
limited to DEKM and the SFWbID as a result of new and more restrictive requirements
associated with the protection of water quality in Biscayne Bay. The Consultant will note
the CITY when budget is 75 percent spent and if additional fee will be required to obtain
required permits.
;5. n>
Sub-Task 2.2 - Prepare an Environmental Site Assessment Proposal
CONSULTA-NT shall assist the CITY with the preparation of a proposal, suitable for review
by DEE%f, outlining the scope of environmental assessments requested by DEW as part of
their review and approval of environmental permits for each project. The proposal tvill be
suitable for use on each project. This task includes attendance at two (2) 'anticipated
meetings to be held at the DEfill offices and assumes that one (1) RFI and subsequent
response will be required to complete the acceptance process. The cost of these services has
been proportioned between all four projects. The proposal will be used to define the work
of others for the actual completion of site assessment activities.
C5.W
Sub-Task 2.3 - Development of Alternate Dewatering Methods, Details and Site
Plans
CONSULTAhT shall evaluate the feasibility of alternate dewatering discharge disposal
methods to be used during construction of the Neighborhood 8 projects including:
discharge to well-point injection system; discharge to temporary injection wells; and
discharge to existing sanitary system. Details, including drawings and detailed
descriptions, shall be prepared for each dewatering discharge method deemed feasible.
These dewatering details shall be incorporated into the contract documents prior to bidding
for each of the bid packages A/C, B and D. CONSULTAhT shall develop a Dewatering Site
Plan for eadh of the bid packages 4/C, B arld D, which will indicate graphically, wluch
dewatering methods are acceptable at each work zone within each of the packages. These
dewatering site plans shall be incorporated into the contract documents during bidding (by
addendum) for each of the bid packages A/C B and prior to bidding for bid package D.
These dewatering site plans and details will be submitted to DERb1 for approval as part of
the overall Dewatering Plan. The cost of these services has been proportioned between al!
four projects.
(".\'I)
Sub-Task 2.4 - Hydraulic Study to Determine Limits of Dewatering Influence
CONSULTANT shall perform a hydraulic assessment of proposed dewatering method(s) to
be used within each work zone of each of the packages A/C, B and D to determine the
potential limits of groundwater drawdown ai each location. This analysis will be used to
define the horizontal limits of groundwater drawdown associated with each of the
approved dewatering methods. Superimposed on these limits will be the horizontal limits
of any contaminated sites identified in the Phase 1/11 Environmental Assessment Stt~dies to
be performed for each of the packages (by others). Dewatering methods shall be revised as
necessary to demonstrate that the proposed dewatering method(s) will not cause migration
of any contaminate plumes. The dewatering influence area map was identified as a
required item to be submitted to DERt1 as part of the overall Detvatering Plan. The cost of
these services has been proportioned between all four projects.
C6.20)
Sub-Task 2.5 - Development of Plans and Pr~cedures to Treat and Dispose of
Contaminated Groundwater
CONSULTANT shall prepare plans, procedtues and bidding requirements for methods to
be used to treat and dispose of my potential contaminated groundwater from contaminated
sites identified by the environmental site assessments to be performed for each of the
packages (separate task order). These plans and procedures shall be incorporated into the
contract documents during bidding by addend~m for each of the bid packages A/C and B
and prior to bidding for package D as part of the overall Dewatering Plan. The cost of these
services has been proportioned between all four projects.
C5.33
Sub-Task 2.6 - Development of DERM Required - Dewatering Plan
Cons~dtant shall prepare Dewatering Plan for bid packages A, B, C and D to be s~bmitted to
DEKtI for review to advance of bidding the project. This task includes one (1) RFI and
subsequent response req~ured to complete the process. The dewatering plans will be
developed in conjunction with the environmental site assessments being conducted under a
separate Task Order. The Dewatering Plans will be incorporated into the contract
documents for each project and will serve as a guideline for the contractor-specific
dewatering plans to be submitted to DEmI by the contractor selected for each project.
6. n
Sub-Task 2.7 - Development of Estimated Construction Cost Associated with
Alternate Dewatering Methods
Consultant shall prepare estimated construction costs for the alternate dewatering methods
to be utilized on each of the hid packages A/C, B artd D.
Schedule:
COKSULTAhT shall provide all deliverables associated with Task 2 commensurate with
the bid schedule and prior to the start of construction for Packages H/C and B. The tasks for
Package D will be completed concurrent with the preparation of design documents and
permit applications for Package D being completed under a separate Task Order.
Deliverables:
CONSULTAhi shall prepare dewatering plans and details for review by DERbl and
incorporation into the construction csntract documents A/C, B, and D.
GENERAL ASSUMPTIONS
1. Tnis scope of services includes no allot~ance for CONSULTk\Ts time to assist
CITY in the event of a bid protest.
2. Reproduction Services-CONSULTANT shall be paid for the cost plus applicable
markup for reprod~zction of reports, contract documents and miscellaneous
items, as indicated in the scope of work or as requested by CITY.
3. Travel and Subsistence-CONSULTANT shall be reimbursed for actual costs with
applicable markup for employee travel associated tvifl~ this Task Order.
4, CONSULTANT is not responsible for paying for pedts from Federal, State or
local regulatory agencies that are required for the prosecution of this project.
Consultant shall not be responsible for Re,datory Agency delays or any delays
caused for reasons beyond the direct control of the Consultant
PROJECT BUDGET
The total labor fee proposed for this scope of work shaU be a not-to-exceed amotmt of
$399,294.00 which is below the current remaining authorized fee of $430,666.00. Regarding
reimbursable expenses, CH2M HILL estimates that expenses required to complete the scope
of work described above can be accomplished within the existing remaining authorization
for reimbursable expenses. This fee is based on time basis compensation and reimbursable
expenses, as shown in the fee proposal from CH231 HILL, dated November 2,2010.
Invoicing will be monthly and based on 2009 hourly rates and subsequent amendments and
adjustments by the CITY <and as agreed between the CITY and CONSULTAhT. With the
approval by the CITY, CONSULTANT may utilize unused budgets within subtasks as long
as overall not-to-exceed fee limit is not exceeded.
TIME OF COMPLETION
These Bid Phase, Permitting and Dewatering Plan Services associated with Package AJC, B,
C and D as itemized above will commence upon receipt of Notice to Proceed issued by the
City and will proceed as detailed in each task above. 'The work under this authorization
will be complete when the bid process for Package D has been completed.
Execution of this Task Order constitutes CITY'S Notice to Proceed with the scope of work
described herein, and in accordance with the Standard Agreement for Professional Services
dated May 16,2002.
Approved by:
CH2M HILL
Date: Date:
Charles Carreno, P.E.
Director of Capital Improvement Projects v Florida Operations Manager
Bayshore
CHZM HILL
Amendment 20- Bidding, Award and Additional Permitting Services
Total Negotiated Fee for Bidding and Permitting Services
Current Authorization for Bidding and Award
- v -
-
1 1 Additional I 1
Item
Totaf
Additional Fee for Bidding and Permitting Services (Amendment 20)
Item
Total
Total
I I I i - I
Total $340,069.99 1 $204,192,991 $135,877.001 $0.00
Bid and Award
Additional
Permitting
Total
$59,224.00
- -
*Covered under remaining reimbursables authorized fee
$399,293.99
Reimbursables*
Item
Bid and Award
$59.224.00
$263,416.991 $135,877.00
Total
$0.00
Permitting
$0.00
Reimbursables*
$0.00
Bid and Award
Additional
Permitting Reimbursables*
AMENDMENT NO. 21
TO THE PROFESSIONAL LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURAL
AND ENGINEERING (AIE) SERVICES AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
THE ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA
AND
CHZMHILL, INC.
DATED MAY 16,2001
FOR THE
RIGHT-OF-WAY INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM NEIGHBORHOOD NO. 8
BAYSHORE AND SUNSET ISLANDS.
This Amendment No. 21 to the above referenced Agreement is made and entered this day of
,201 1, by and between the ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH, a municipal corporation existing
under the laws of the State of Florida, having its principal offices at 1700 Convention Center Drive,
Miami Beach, Florida 33139 (hereinafter referred to as the City), and CH2MHil1, Inc. a Florida
Corporation, having its principal office at 800 Fairway Drive, Suite 350, Deerfield Beach, Florida,
33441 (hereinafter referred to as the Consultant).
RECITALS:
WHEREAS, on May 16, 2001, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No.
2001 -24387, approving and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute an agreement with the
Consultant for professional services (the Agreement) for the Right-of-way Infrastructure
Improvements Program Neighborhood No. 8 Bayshore and Sunset lsland project (the Project),
pursuant to Request for Qualifications No. 134-99100; and
WHEREAS, the Agreement provides for the detailed planning services for various
streetscape, landscape, and utility improvements within the Bayshore and Sunset lsland
neighborhoods; and
WHEREAS, the planning effort for the Bayshore and Sunset lsland neighborhoods has been
completed and detail design activities are underway; and
WHEREAS, the Agreement was executed in the not-to-exceed amount of $1 33,174; and
WHEREAS, on December 10, 2003, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution
No. 2003-25432, approving additional design services as Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement, for
planning, design, permitting, bidding I award, and construction administrative services for the
Bayshore and Sunset lsland neighborhoods in the not-to-exceed amount of $1,913,302; and
resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,046,476;and
WHEREAS, on February 24,2005, Amendment No. 2 to the Agreement was administratively
executed, to re-package Sunset Islands 1 and 2 from Bid Package 80 to Bid Package 8B at no
additional cost, resulting in no change to contract; and
WHEREAS, on November 8,2005, Amendment No. 3 to the Agreement was administratively
executed to include the completion of a topographic survey along Pine Tree Drive, from west 28h to
west 4oh Streets, along the east side of the road, in the not-to-exceed amount of $1 2,850; resulting
in a revised contract fee of $2,059,326; and
WHEREAS, on February 17,2006, Amendment No. 4 to the Agreement was administratively
executed to include the evaluation, permitting and preparation of construction cost alternatives for
the installation of curblvalley gutters to Sunset Islands 1 and 2, in the not-to-exceed amount of
$2,500; resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,061,826; and
WHEREAS, on February 16,2006, Amendment No. 5 to the Agreement was executed to
include the installation of four (4) drainage test wells to provide additional information for the
preparation of a Letter of Reasonable Assurance to be submitted to the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection (FDEP), as required in the permit application for the Project, in the not-to-
exceed amount of $55,863; resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,117,689; and
WHEREAS, on September 6,2006, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No.
2006-26283, approving Amendment No. 6 to the Agreement for the design of "P3.2 classified water
main replacements required by the City's Public Works Department, in the not-to-exceed amount of
$372,230; resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,489,919; and
WHEREAS, on September 6,2006, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No.
2006-26283, approving Amendment No. 7 to the Agreement for the design of bike laneslroutes
required by the City's Public Works Department, in the not to exceed amount of $58,128; resulting in
a revised contract fee of $2,548,047; and
WHEREAS, on September 9, 2006, Amendment No. 8 to the Agreement was
administratively executed to include the design of alternative parking in the Lake Pancoast area, in
the not-to-exceed amount of $24,900; resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,572,947; and
WHEREAS, on September 9, 2006, Amendment No. 9 to the Agreement was
administratively executed to include the design of road edge treatment to Sunset Islands 1 and 2, in
the not-to-exceed amount of $3,200; resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,576,147; and
WHEREAS, on September 9, 2006, Amendment No. 10 to the Agreement was
administratively executed to include the design of resident requested modifications in the Lake
Pancoast area; in the not-to-exceed amount of $8,680; resulting in a revised contract fee of
$2,584,827; and
WHEREAS, on August 6,2007, Amendment No. 11 to the Agreement was administratively
executed for an additional thirty seven (37) soil borings in Sunset Island No. 1 to verify underground
utility services and potential conflicts, in the not to exceed amount of $1 0,400; resulting in a revised
contract fee of $2,595,227; and
WHEREAS, on April 11, 2007, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No.
2007-26504, approving Amendment No. 12 to the Agreement for additional services regarding
verification of additional underground utilities to avoid conflicts in 103 boring sites along North Bay
Road between Sunset Drive and Alton Road, in the not to exceed amount of $27,500; and 334
boring sites for Bid Package 8A- Central Bayshore, in the not to exceed amount of $94,675; and to
perform a traffic study at the intersection of West 28th Street and Prairie Avenue, in the not to exceed
amount of $20,780; all resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,738,182; and
WHEREAS, on December 20, 2007, Amendment No. 13 to the Agreement was
administratively executed for additional services to expand the traffic study of alternative design
concepts for the ~8'~ Street and Prairie Avenue intersection (previously authorized under
Amendment No. 12), in the not to exceed amount of $22,156; resulting in a revised contract fee of
$2,760,338; and
WHEREAS, on December 20, 2007, Amendment No. 14 to the Agreement was
administratively executed for additional services to implement miscellaneous design revisions to bike
lanes, traffic tables, crosswalks, the 28" Street and Prairie Avenue intersection, and water mains, in
the not to exceed amount of $15,403; resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,775,741 ; and
WHEREAS, on December 7, 2007, Amendment No. 15 to the Agreement was
administratively executed for additional services to prepare a re-application package for the Historic
Preservation Board for the Lake Pancoast Bid Package, in the not to exceed amount of $2,145;
resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,777,886; and
WHEREAS, on December 7, 2007, Amendment No. 16 to the Agreement was
administratively executed for additional services for design services, preparation of materials, and
attendance at a meeting with residents discussing options for the intersection of 28th Street and
Prairie Avenue, in the not to exceed amount of $2,947; resulting in a revised contract fee of
$2,780,833; and
WHEREAS, on January 6,2009, Amendment No. 17 to the Agreement was administratively
executed for additional services for design services, preparation of materials, and attendance at
various Board and civic meetings discussing options on Sunset Islands No. I and II, in the not to
exceed amount of $15,344; resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,796,177; and
WHEREAS, on January 6,2009, Amendment No. 18 to the Agreement was administratively
executed for additional services for design services necessary for the preparation of a technical
memorandum evaluating the use of exfiltration trenches in lieu of a stormwater pump station in Lake
Pancoast, in the not to exceed amount of $1 5,196; resulting in a revised contract fee of $2,811,373;
and
WHEREAS, on October 14,2009, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No.
2009-27223, approving Amendment No. 19 to the Agreement which provided for additional design
scope on Sunset Islands No. 3 and 4; that included preparation of a technical memorandum which
investigated the existing stormwater system, proposed improvements required to meet a 5-year, 1-
day level of service, and presented them in a schematic plan; that relocated water meters in rear
easements to the right-of-way; that added valley gutters, catch basins, replacement/upsizing of
outfalls, tideflex valves, and stormwater quality improvements; that coordinated the undergrounding
of electric, cable, and phone services; that coordinated new gas service; and that updated the
existing condition sheets; in the not-to-exceed amount of $1 08,000; resulting in a revised contract
fee of $2,919,373; and
WHEREAS, on April 13,201 I, Amendment No. 20 shall be presented to the Mayor and City
Commission for approval to reallocate funds from construction administration to bidding and award
services for the Bayshore and Sunset Island Neighborhoods No. 8A, 8B, 8C, and 8D packages for
additional services associated with the extended bidding and award phase due to additional
permitting requirements, in the amount of $1 44,591.84, $1 20,716.06, $39,749.13, and $35,012.96,
respectively, for a total contract reallocation of $340,069.99; increasing the bidding and award
services budget for Neighborhoods No. 8A, 8B, 8C, and 8D packages from $1 4,806 to $1 59,397.84,
$1 4,806 to $1 35,522.06, $1 4,806 to $54,555.1 3, and $14,806 to $49,818.96, respectively, for a total
bidding and award services budget of $399,293.99, and decreasing the total construction
administration budget from $371,441 to $31,371 .01; and
WHEREAS, the following Amendment No. 21, approves additional services to provide
design documents and permitting services to procure the DERM Tree Removal Permits for the
Bayshore and Sunset lsland Neighborhoods No. 8A, 8B, 8C, and 8D projects and additional
services to participate in value engineering and provide design modifications and associated re-
permitting services to incorporate the level of service review comments requested by the City
Commission during award of the construction contracts for the Bayshore Neighborhoods No. 8A,
8B, and 8C projects, for a not-to-exceed amount of $135,112.97 and an additional not-to-exceed
amount of $63,605.00 for reimbursable expenses, for a total not-to-exceed amount of $1 98,717.97;
resulting in a revised contract fee of $3,118,090.97.
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto, and in consideration of the mutual promises,
covenants, agreements, terms, and conditions herein contained, and other good and valuable
consideration, the respect and adequacy are hereby acknowledged, do agree as follows:
1. ABOVE RECITALS
The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated as a part of this Amendment
No. 21
2. MODIFICATIONS
The Aareement is amended to include the additional terms and conditions outlined in Exhibit
"A ani the additional professional services for the Project to provide design documents and
permitting services to procure the DERM Tree Removal Permits for the Bayshore and
Sunset Island Neighborhoods No. 8A, 88, 8C, and 8D projects and additional services to
participate in value engineering and provide design modifications and associated re-
permitting services to incorporate the level of service review comments for the Bayshore
Neighborhoods No. 8A, 88, and 8C projects, as described in the Consultant's proposal,
attached as Exhibit "B" to this Amendment.
3. OTHER PROVISIONS .
All other provisions of the Agreement remain unchanged.
4. RATIFICATION
The City and Consultant ratify the terms of the Agreement, as per this Amendment No. 21.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment No. 21, to be
executed in their names by their duly authorized officials as of the date first set forth above.
ATTEST: CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
City Clerk Mayor
Robert Parcher Matti Herrera Bower
ATTEST: CONSULTANT:
CHZMHILL, INC.
Secretary: President
Print Name Print Name
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A
Exhibit B - Consultant's Amendment 21 (Task Order 21)
T:'AGENDA\2011\4-13-Il\Bayshore - CH2MHill Amendment No. 20 and 2l:Bayshore - CH2lLlHill Amendments No. 21 -
AMEND1LIENT.doc
A. SCOPE OF SERVICES
SCHEDULE A, "Scope of Services", of the PROFESSIONAL ARCHITECTURAL AND
ENGINEERING (AIE) SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
(CITY) AND CHZMHILL, INC. (CONSULTANT), dated May 16,2001, is amended as follows:
ADD the following under TASK 5 -ADDITIONAL SERVICES:
Sub-Task 5.23 - Tree Removal
The scope of services for this Sub-Task are as outlined in Task 1 of EXHIBIT B.
Sub-Task 5.24 - Design Modifications
The scope of services for this Sub-Task are as outlined in Task 2 of EXHIBIT B.
Sub-Task 5.25 - Additional Permittinq
The scope of services for this Sub-Task are as outlined in Task 3 of EXHIBIT B.
ADD the Deliverables outlined in EXHIBIT B under TASK 5 of the Agreement.
B. TIME OF COMPLETION
The scope of services under this Amendment shall be completed within 90 days following the
issuance of the notice-to-proceed by the City, per Assumption #I delineated in EXHIBIT B and
incorporated herein.
C. PAYMENT AND COMPENSATION
Compensation for the aforementioned AIE additional services shall be as outlined in Article 7 of
the Agreement. The total labor fee proposed for this scope of work shall be for a not-to-exceed
amount of $1 35,112.97 and an additional not-to-exceed amount of $63,605.00 for reimbursable
expenses, for a total not-to-exceed amount of $1 98,717.97; resulting in a revised contract fee of
$3,118,090.97. Invoicing will be monthly and based on the percentage of work completed by the
invoice date.
Original Contract Value
Amendment No. I
Amendment No. 2
Amendment No. 3
Amendment No. 4
Amendment No. 5
Amendment No. 6
Amendment No. 7
Amendment No. 8
Amendment No. 9
Amendment No. 10
Amendment No. 11
Amendment No. 12
Amendment No. 13
Amendment No. 14
Amendment No. 15
Amendment No. 16 $2,947
Amendment No. 17 $1 5,344
Amendment No. 18 $15,196
Amendment No. 19 $1 08,000
Amendment No. 20 $0
Amendment No. 21 $1 98.71 7.97
Total Revised Contract Value: $3,118,090.97
TiAGENDAi2011!4-13-lt\Bayshore - CH2tdHill Amendment No. 20 and 21!Bayshore - CH2MHill Amendments No. 21 -
AMENDMENT.doc
EXHIBIT B
Amendment No. 21
To The Professional Services Agreement
Between
The City of Miami Beach, FL
And
CH2M HlLL
Dated May 16,2001
For Additional Design Services for the Right-of-way
Infrastructure Improvements Program Neighborhoods
No. 8, A, B and C - Central BayshorelLower North Bay
RoadILake Pancoast
Storm Drainage Design Modifications and Miami Dade DERM
Tree Removal Permitting Services
This Amendment No. 21, to the above referenced Agreement is made and
entered this day of , 201 1, by and between the CITY OF
MIAMI BEACH, a municipal corporation existing under the laws of the State of
Florida, having its principal offices at 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami
Beach, FL, 33139, (hereinafter referred to as the CITY) and CH2M HILL, a
Florida Corporation, having its principal office located at 800 Fairway Drive, Suite
350, Deerfield Beach, FL 33441 (hereinafter referred to as the CONSULTANT).
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
During the scope development for the environmental permitting of the
Neighborhood No. 8B design, Bayshore Package B, Lower North Bay Road
project, the ClTY stated they would process the Miami-Dade Department of
Environmental Resources Management (DERM) Tree Removal Permit. As of
January 201 1, the ClTY has requested that CH2M HlLL (CONSULTANT)
prepare a Task Order amendment to do this work for the Bayshore
Neighborhood No. 8A, 8B, 8C and 8D projects.
In addition, as a consequence of ongoing implementation of policies and
standards being developed by the CITY'S new stormwater master plan and
requests by the City Commission for the City of Miami Beach Public Works
Department (PW) to provide a level of service review, PW has requested
revisions to the current design of the stormwater collection and disposal systems
proposed for the Bayshore Neighborhood No. 8A, 8B, and 8C projects.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
Task 1 - Bayshore Neighborhoods No. SA, SB, 8C and 8D Tree Removal
Permitting
The CONSULTANT, along with representatives from the CITY shall conduct site
visits as necessary to provide documentation which meets all the requirements
as denoted in DERM1s Tree Removal Permit Application and Tree Survey
Guidelines and Specifications. The purpose of the field visits will be to obtain
additional information to supplement the existing information shown on the
current bid documents (i.e, demolition/encroachments listlplan). The information
obtained will be incorporated into the current set of plans for the DERM Tree
Removal Permit Application submittal. CONSULTANT will obtain this information
by walking the project sites.
Documentation shall contain the following information:
1. Location and identification of all non-exempt trees within the project area
on a plan signed and sealed by a registered landscape architect.
A key in table format, delineating the following for each non-exempt tree:
a, identification number
b. Scientific and/or common name
c. Diameter at breast height (DBH)
d. Canopy diameter or square footage
e. Label showing tree as "to remain", "to be relocated", or "to be
removed" (ET2's)
For specimen size trees to be removed, known as Encroachment Type 2's
(ET2's) or relocated, documentation shall also include a tree health
analysis, tree photo, and site photo.
The CONSULTANT will evaluate and obtain information for any new plantings
that have occurred after the original survey was completed and will need to be
designated as ET2's and incorporated into the DERM Tree Removal Application
documentation. CONSULTANT shall flag trees for location by Subconsultant
Surveyor. Subconsultant Surveyor will locate these in the field so
CONSULTANT can add to demolition plans.
Task 2 - Design Modifications
The CONSULTANT will provide design services to revise and update the
contract documents for each of the projects as directed by PW or as authorized
by the CITY. For this amendment, it is assumed that PW stormwater related
requirements authorized for the Lower North Bay Road project will be duplicated
for the Central Bayshore and Lake Pancoast projects with the only difference
being the level of effort required by the specific project.
Activities include:
Evaluation of and response to PW review comments;
Evaluation of PW comments and potential impact on the existing
design and permits. Possible modifications include limited extensions
of the stormwater collection system in response to neighborhood
requests, upsizing of proposed collection storm sewers or outfalls if
justified and if access to the outfalls becomes available, increasing the
width of proposed valley gutters, extending valley gutters up the side
streets and modifications to the pump stations. Potential changes are
based on the PW review comments dated February 17, 201 1 ;
Update design calculations resulting from proposed modifications to
demonstrate compliance with LOS criteria - that the proposed pump
station, injection well design and collection system are sufficient and
that flooding would not be expected to occur at the road crown or
within 15 feet of a structure during a 7.5 in124 hr storm event;
Evaluation of and potential modifications to the stormwater outfalls,
including the disposition of backwater control devices and the
replacement of the outfall at 2318 Lower North Bay Road including
survey services;
Identify and justify road grades and longitudinal slopes that are less
than 0.3% and sidewalks that are lower than the edge of pavement,
determine if these areas be drained by other means and provide
recommendations;
Include provisions in the contract documents for full depth roadway
restoration in areas (determined during construction) where the
existing road base is determined to be insufficient and where milling
and repaving may be inadequate to insure acceptable pavement
design life;
0 Design an irrigation plan for the end of 23rd Street in Package B to
replace the existing irrigation system that will be damaged by the
,construction of the stormwater pump station. The irrigation system will
be shown on an appropriate drawings sheet for work in this area;
Revise drawing no's DM-14, PGD-14 and PM-14 of the Package 8A
set to be consistent with proposed alignment and traffic flow changes
at the Pinetree Drive and Flamingo Drive intersection as shown in a
Perez and Assoc. drawing dated August 5, 201 0;
Participate in the Value Engineering (VE) reviews for the Bayshore 8A,
8B and 8C projects. Evaluate the contractor's proposals for each
project and provide recommendations to the City with respect to their
conformance with the contract documents and design intent. Accepted
recommendations will be incorporated into the Contract Documents
under the provisions of the tasks defined by Services During
Construction.
Task 3 - Permitting
As part of this task, the CONSULTANT shall prepare and complete the DERM
Tree Removal Application for the CITY'S signature and submit the application to
DERM with revised demolition plans showing all information required by this
permit agency.
Specific activities will include:
Submit permit application forms to ClTY for their review.
lncorporate comments/revisions from ClTY and then submit to DERM.
Conduct an onsite meeting with DERM to review trees.
Provide response to requests for additional information, if requested by
DERM.
lncorporate comments/revisions from DERM, if required.
Provided for a Registered Landscape Architect to sign and seal plans,
if necessary.
Calculate mitigation cost required for vegetation to be removed. Verify
if mitigation can consist only of fee payments to Tree Trust or if
necessary, prepare mitigation plans for each project package.
CONSULTANT will communicate and coordinate with regulatory
agencies as required to obtain permit approval.
In addition to DERM tree removal permits, Task 2 drainage design revisions may
require additional permitting or amendment of existing DERM if outfalls are
upsized or otherwise modified.
Specific activities will include:
Submit permit application forms to ClTY for their review.
lncorporate comments/revisions from ClTY and then submit to DERM.
Design revisions will be modifications to the existing design and not
complete redesign of the stormwater systems.
Provide response to requests for additional information, if requested by
DERM.
lncorporate comments/revisions from DERM, if required.
CONSULTANT will communicate and coordinate with regulatory
agencies as required to obtain permit approval.
Deliverables:
1. Completed Application Forms and demolition plans showing the
names, measurements of the trees to be removed as shown on current
bid documents.
2. All permit deliverables will include 3 full-size sets, 3 half-size sets and
one electronic PDF.
Assumptions:
I. Tasks 1-3 of the scope of work will be completed no later than 90 days
following the notice to proceed (NTP) from City, and the CITY'S timely
review of deliverables. Within two weeks of receipt of the NTP,
CONSULTANT will propose a delivery schedule for the CITY'S review.
Any delays by ClTY beyond the dates stated above may require scope
and fee revisions.
2. Task 3 design revisions do not anticipate the requirement to change
the grade of sidewalks or perform major re-design of the systems as
they are currently designed - in particular changes that would result in
the need to re-permit aspects of the project. Expected revisions are
based on discussions with PW, CIP and ClPOC representatives and
as directed by the CITY. Changes to the design documents will be
prepared for inclusion by change order into the project work.
Preparation of the actual change orders are covered by other
agreement(s). If the level of re-design exceeds what is anticipated, the
CONSULTANT shall advise the ClTY that additional amendment to
this contract may be required.
3. CONSULTANT will not attend any meetings with HOAs or individual
homeowners regarding the disposition of the ET2's to be removed.
4. ClTY will pay.all permitting fees.
5. Project scope and fee is based on attached estimated list in
Attachment A.
6. CITY will provide written application comments within two weeks of
receipt of package. CONSULTANT will respond to comments in
writing within one week of receipt from CITY.
7. Existing Conditions (EC) drawings will be revised with additional
survey information as included in attached scope of work from
Surveyor Subconsultant.
8. Travel expenses will be reimbursed by the CITY.
9. CH2M HILL shall not be responsible for Regulatory Agency delays, or
any delay caused beyond our control.
PAYMENT AND COMPENSATION
The total fee proposed for the scope of work described above shall be a time
basis fee in the amount of $198,717.97, including an allowance for reimbursable
expenses and survey services which cannot be defined until the initial field work
is completed. The total survey allowance budgeted for the proposed work is
$35,000 and is included in the proposed reimbursable expenses.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement
No.21, to be executed in their name by their duly authorized officials of the date
first set forth above.
Item
Task I - Tree Removal
Task 2 - Design Modifications
Task 3 - Additional Permitting
Reimbursable Expenses
Total Amendment No. 21
Amount
$36,020.52
$58,010.69
$41,081.76
$63,605.00
$1 98,717.97
Table 1 Storm Drainage Design Modifications and Miami Dade DERM Tree Removal Permitting Services Labor and Expenses Package A Package B Package C Package D Total Task I-Tree Removal Labor $ 18,730.67 $ 5,485.88 $ 6,318.09 $ 5,485.88 $ 36,020.52 Expenses $ 19,448.00 $ 5,610.00 $ 6,732.00 $ 5,610.00 $ 37,400.00 Total $ 38,178.67 $ 11,095.88 $ 13,050.09 $ 11,095.88 $ 73,420.52 $ 73,420.52 Task 2-Design Modifications Labor $ 29,705.47 $ 18,403.39 $ 9,901.83 $ 58,010.69 Expenses $ 3,010.56 $ 1,865.78 $ 1,003.66 $ 5,880.00 Total $ 32,716.03 $ 20,269.17 $ 10,905.49 $ 63,890.69 $ 63,890.69 Task 3-Additional Permitting Labor $ 16,202.50 $ 9,739.21 $ 5,400.84 $ 9,739.21 $ 41,081.76 Expenses $ 8,016.11 $ 4,818.43 $ 2,672.03 $ 4,818.43 $ 20,325.00 Total $ 24,218.61 $ 14,557.64 $ 8,072.87 $ 14,557.64 $ 61,406.76 $ 61,406.76 Total Fee - Amendment 21 $ 198,717.97 Bayshore Package "A, "B", "C" and "DAdditional Fee $ 198,717.97 Fee calc-amend2l-rev-des-tree
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
City Commission Meeting
City Hall, Commission Chambers, 3rd Floor, 1700 Convention Center Drive
April 13,2011
Mayor Matti Herrera Bower
Vice-Mayor Jonah Wolfson
Commissioner Jorge Exposito
Commissioner Michael Gongora
Commissioner Jerry Libbin
Commissioner Edward L. Tobin
Commissioner Deede Weithorn
City Manager Jorge M. Gonzalez
City Attorney Jose Smith
City Clerk Robert E. Parcher
Visit us at www.miamibeachfl.gov for agendas and video "streaming" of City Commission Meetings.
ATTENTION ALL LOBBYISTS
Chapter 2, Article VII, Division 3 of the City Code of Miami Beach entitled "Lobbyists" requires the
registration of all lobbyists with the City Clerk prior to engaging in any lobbying activity with the City
Commission, any City Board or Committee, or any personnel as defined in the subject Code sections.
Copies of the City Code sections on lobbyists laws are available in the City Clerk's office. Questions
regarding the provisions of the Ordinance should be directed to the Office of the City Attorney.
REGULAR AGENDA
R2 - Competitive Bid Reports
R2A Request For Approval To Purchase Budgeted Replacement Vehicles And Equipment Pursuant To
Florida State Contract No. 10-1 8-0907, 10-09-0907, 760-000-1 0-1 And GSA Contract GS30F-
1028G In The Amount Of $2,563,152.47. (Page 363)
(Fleet Management)
R5 - Ordinances
R5A An Ordinance Amending The Code Of The City Of Miami Beach, By Amending Chapter 2, Entitled
"Administration," By Amending Article Ill, Entitled "Agencies, Boards And Committees," By Amending
Division 2, Entitled "Disability Access Committee," By Amending Sec. 2-31(d) To increase The
Number Of Members From Seven (7) To Fourteen (14) And Amending The Quorum Requirement;
Providing For Codification, Repealer, Severability, And An Effective Date. 10:16 a.m. Second
Reading Public Hearing (Page 377)
(Requested by Commissioner Edward L. Tobin)
(Legislative Tracking: City Clerk's Office)
(Continued from March 9,201 IIReferred to Neighborhood/Community Affairs Committee)
Regular Agenda, April 13,201 1
R5 - Ordinances (Continued)
R5B An Ordinance Amending Article Ill, Division 28 Of The City Code, Entitled "Capital Improvement
Projects Oversight Committee;" Amending Section 2-190.127, Entitled "Establishment; Purpose;
Membership," By Adding A Non-Voting Ex-Officio Member Who Is Either A Member Of The Disabled
Community Or Has Special Knowledge Of Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) Issues; And
Providing For Codification; Repealer; Severability; And An Effective Date. 10:17 a.m. Second
Readinn Public Hearing (Page 381)
(Requested by Mayor Matti Herrera Bower)
(Legislative Tracking: City Attorney's Office)
(Continued from March 9, 201 IIReferred to Finance & Citywide Projects Committee)
R5C An Ordinance Amending The Code Of The City Of Miami Beach, By Amending Chapter 2,
"Administration," Article II, "City Commission," By Enacting A New Section 2-1 2, "Meeting Agendas,"
Requiring Proposed Ordinances And Charter Amendments That Appear On A City Commission Or
Commission Committee Agenda To Have A Commissioner Sponsor Identified; Providing For
Repealer; Codification; Severability; And An Effective Date. 10:20 a.m. Second Reading Public
Hearing (Page 385)
(Requested by Vice-Mayor Jonah Wolfson)
(Legislative Tracking: City Attorney's Office)
(Continued from March 9, 201 IIReferred to Land Use & Development Committee)
R5D An Ordinance Amending The Code Of The City Of Miami Beach, By Amending Chapter 106, "Traffic
And Vehicles," Article 11, "Metered Parking," Division 1, "Generally" Section 106-55 (h)(2), "Permanent
Parking Space Removal" To Amend The Criteria And Procedure For Permanent Parking Space Or
Loading Zone Removal, Providing For Codification, Repealer, Severability And An Effective Date.
10:30 a.m. Second Readinq Public Hearing (Page 391)
(Requested by Mayor Matti Herrera Bower)
(Legislative Tracking: Planning Department)
(Continued from March 9,201 1)
R5E Alton Road Historic District Buffer Overlay
An Ordinance Amending Chapter 142, "Zoning Districts And Regulations," Article Ill, "Overlay
Districts," Creating Division 8 "Alton Road - Historic District Buffer Overlay," By Including Section 142-
858 "Location And Purpose," And Section 142-859 "Development Regulations,: Including Among
Other Provisions Regulations On Maximum Floor Area Ratio; Maximum Building Height; Minimum
Setbacks; Building Separation; Demolition Or Additions To Contributing Buildings In An Historic
District; And Land Use Regulations For Location Of Retail Uses, Restaurants, Bars, Entertainment
Establishments, Alcoholic Beverage Establishments And Similar Uses; Requiring Conditional Use
Approval Of Such Uses In Excess Of 20,000 Sq. Ft.; And Prohibiting Alcoholic Beverage And
Entertainment Establishments In Open Areas With Exceptions As Prescribed In The Ordinance.
11:OO a.m. First Readinn Public Hearing (Page 397)
(Requested by City Commission in 2009)
(Legislative Tracking: Planning Department)
(Continued from March 9,201 IIReferred to Land Use & Development Committee)
Regular Agenda, April 13,201 1
R5 - Ordinances (Continued)
R5F Adoption of Proposed Amendments To The City's Comprehensive Plan
An Ordinance Adopting Amendments To The City's Comprehensive Plan To Include New Or Revised
And/or Updated Goals, Objectives And Policies In The Following Elements; Future Land Use,
Transportation, Housing, Infrastructure, Conservation1 Coastal Zone Management, Recreation And
Open Space, Capital Improvements, Intergovernmental And Historic Preservation; All In Relation To
Certain Items Identified In The City's 2005-2007 Evaluation And Appraisal Report (EAR) lncluding
Responses To The Objections, Recommendation And Comments Report (ORC); And Authorizing
And Directing The City Administration To Submit The Adopted Amendments To The Florida
Department Of Community Affairs And Any Other Required State And Local Agencies; Providing For
Repealer, Severability, Codification And An Effective Date. 11:IS a.m. Second Reading Public
Hearing (Page 407)
(Requested by City Commission in 2009)
(Legislative Tracking: Planning Department)
(First Reading on September 15, 2010)
R5G An Ordinance Amending The Code Of The City Of Miami Beach, By Amending Chapter 74, Entitled
"Peddlers And Solicitors," By Amending Article Ill, Entitled "Panhandling On Public Property," By
Amending Section 74-76, Entitled "Definitions," By Providing Definitions For Financial Institution And
For High Volume Intersections; And By Amending Section 74-78, Entitled "Panhandling On Public
Property," By Adding Additional Locations Where Soliciting Or Panhandling On Public Property Will
Be Considered Unlawful; Providing For Repealer; Severability; Codification; And An Effective Date.
First Reading (Page 453)
(Requested by Commissioner Michael Gongora)
(Legislative Tracking: Code Compliance)
R5H An Ordinance Amending Chapter 2, Article Ill, Division 26, Sections 2-1 90.1 07 And Section 2-1 90.1 10
Of The City Code, Establishing The City's Community Development Advisory Committee, To Amend
The City Affiliation Requirements For Membership On The Community Development Advisory
Committee; Providing For Repealer, Severability, And An Effective Date. First Reading (Page461)
(Requested by Commissioner Deede Weithorn)
(Legislative Tracking: Real Estate, Housing & Community Development)
R51 An Ordinance Amending The Code Of The City Of Miami Beach, By Amending Chapter 106, Entitled
"Traffic And Vehicles," By Amending Article II, Entitled "Metered Parking," By Amending Division 1,
Entitled "Generally," By Amending Section 106-55, Entitled "Parking Rates, Fees, And Penalties" To
Provide Rates And Criteria For The Preferred Parking Lot Located At 18th Street And Meridian
Avenue, Including Providing Penalties And Amending The Fees For The Lot For Food And Beverage
Social Events At The Miami Beach Convention Center From $15.00 To $10.00, Providing For
Codification, Repealer, Severability, And An Effective Date. First Reading (Page 467)
(Requested by Finance & Citywide Projects Committee)
(Legislative Tracking: Parking Department)
Regular Agenda, April 13,201 1
R7 - Resolutions
R7A A Resolution Approving, Following A Duly Noticed Public Hearing, The Placement Of A Memorial
Plaque On The Bus Shelter Located At 3801 Collins Avenue, In Memory Of Mr. Harold Tillman, In
Accordance With Section 82-504 Of The City Code. 10:15 a.m. Public Hearing (Page 477)
(Public Works)
R7B A Resolution Approving, Following A Duly Noticed Public Hearing, The Following Agreements
Pertaining To The Proposed Lease Agreement (The Lease), Having A Term Of Nine (9) Years And
364 Days, Between The City And Pennsylvania Avenue LLC, D/B/A Gigi, For The Use Of
Approximately 7000 Square Feet Of Ground Level Retail Space At The Pennsylvania Avenue
Garage, 1661 Pennsylvania Avenue, Miami Beach, Florida, For A Restaurant (Primary Use), With
Ancillary Uses To Include A Bakery, BarICafe, And Book And Gift Shop: 1.) A Pre-Lease Due
Diligence Review Agreement; 2.) A Letter Of Intent (LOI), Setting Forth The Substantive Business
Terms Of The Lease; And 3.) A Draft, In Substantial Form, Of The Proposed Lease; Authorizing The
City Manager To Execute The Pre-Lease Due Diligence Review Agreement And The LOI, And
Further Authorizing The Mayor And City Clerk To Execute The Final Lease, Based Upon The
Business Terms In The LO1 And Subject To Final Review By The City Manager And City Attorney's
Office; And Further Waiving, By 517th~ Vote, The Competitive Bidding And Appraisal Requirements
(As Permitted Pursuant To Section 82-39 Of The City Code), Finding Such Waiver To Be In The Best
Interest Of The City. 11 :30 a.m. Public Hearinq (Page 485)
(Real Estate, Housing & Community Development)
R7C A Resolution Approving An Agreement Between The City And Broward Stage Door Theater For The
Operation And Management Of The Byron Carlyle Theater Pursuant To Request For Proposals No.
24-0911 0 And Authorizing The Mayor And City Clerk To Execute Said Agreement Having An Initial
Term Of Five (5) Years, Commencing On February 1,201 1, And Ending On January 31,2015, With
An Additional Five (5) Year Option Term At The City Sole And Absolute Discretion. (Page 507)
(Tourism & Cultural Development)
(Memorandum & Resolution to be Submitted in Supplemental)
R9 - New Business and Commission Requests
R9A Board And Committee Appointments. (Page 51 1 )
(City Clerk's Office)
R9A1 Board And Committee Appointments - City Commission Appointments. (Page 51 5)
(City Clerk's Office)
R9A2 Appointment Of Eugenio Cabreja For Tenant Commissioner To The Housing Authority.
(Page 521)
(Requested by Mayor Matti Herrera Bower)
R9B1 Dr. Stanley Sutnick Citizen's Forum. (12:30 p.m.) (Page 523)
R9B2 Dr. Stanley Sutnick Citizen's Forum. (5:30 p.m.)
Regular Agenda, April 13,201 1
R9 - New Business and Commission Requests (Continued)
R9C Discussion Regarding Changing The Flamingo Park Master Plan To Include A Bathroom In The Tot
Lot; And Discuss The Design Of The Tennis Club House And Tennis Courts. (Page 525)
(Requested by Commissioner Edward L. Tobin)
(Deferred from March 9,201 1)
R9D Discussion Regarding Including Monthly Crime Statistics As A Standard Agenda Item On The
Neighborhood/Community Affairs Committee. (Page 527)
(Requested by Commissioner Edward L. Tobin)
R9E The Committee Of The Whole Will Meet During Lunch Recess Of The April 13, 2011 City
Commission Meeting At The City Manager's Office Large Conference Room To Discuss Interim
Status Report Of Internal Audits. (Page 529)
(Budget & Performance Improvement)
R9F The Committee Of The Whole Will Meet During Lunch Recess Of The April 13, 2011 City
Commission Meeting At The City Manager's Large Conference Room To Discuss Status Of Pending
Legislation Currently Before The Florida Legislature. (Page 539)
(Economic Development)
(Memorandum to be Submitted in Supplemental)
R9G Discussion Of Proposed Amendments Lessening The Intensity Of The 1-1 Light Industrial District; And
The Stay Of Proceedings Resulting From Appeals Of Administrative Decisions To The Board Of
Adjustment. (Page 541)
(Requested by Land Use & Development Committee)
(Legislative Tracking: Planning Department)
R9H Discussion Regarding The Dunlop Orange Bowl Tennis Tournament. (Page 543)
(Requested by Commissioner Edward L. Tobin)
R91 Discussion Regarding The Safety Issues With The Funkshion Fashion Event Held In City Of Miami
Beach. (Page 545)
(Requested by Commissioner Jerry Libbin)
R9J Discussion Regarding The Ridership Of The South Beach Local (SBL). (Page 547)
(Requested by Commissioner Jerry Libbin)
R9K Discussion Regarding The Viability Of The City Of Miami Beach Taking Over Towing Services Within
The City. (Page 551)
(Requested by Commissioner Edward L. Tobin)
R9L Discussion Regarding The Local Belle Isle Bus Route. (Page 553)
(Requested by Commissioner Edward L. Tobin)
Regular Agenda, April 13,201 1
R9 - New Business and Commission Requests (Continued)
R9M Discussion Regarding A Resolution To Support The Passage Of HB 281 And SB 880 By The Florida
Legislature, Which Would Require Taxpayers Who Appeal The Market Value Of Their Property To
Pay A Portion Of The Tax Liability While Their Appeal Is Being Addressed. (Page 555)
(Requested by Mayor Matti Herrera Bower)
R9N Discussion Regarding Prior Resolution Prohibiting Removal Of Green Space For Additional Bike
Lanes. (Page 561)
(Requested by Vice-Mayor Jonah Wolfson)
Reports and informational ltems
Reports and Informational ltems (see LTC #075-2011)
End of Regular Agenda
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33 139, www.rniarnibeachfl.gov
HOW A PERSON MAY APPEAR BEFORE THE ClTY COMMISSION OF
THE ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA
THE REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETINGS OF THE CITY COMMISSION ARE ESTABLISHED BY RESOLUTION. SCHEDULED
MEETING DATES ARE AVAILABLE ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE, DISPLAYED ON MBN 77, AND ARE AVAILABLE IN THE ClTY
CLERK'S OFFICE. COMMISSION MEETINGS COMMENCE NO EARLIER THAN 9:00 A.M. GENERALLY THE ClTY
COMMISSION IS IN RECESS DURING THE MONTH OF AUGUST.
1 . DR. STANLEY SUTNICK CITIZENS' FORUM will be held during the first Commission meeting each month. The Forum is split
into two (2) sessions, 1 2:30 p.m. and 5:30 p.m., or as soon as possible thereafter, provided that the Commission Meeting
has not already adiourned prior to the time set for either session of the Forum. In the event of adiournment prior to the Stanley
Sutnick Citizens' Forum, notice will be posted on MBN 77, and posted at City Hall. Approximately thirty (30) minutes will be
allocated for each session, with individuals being limited to no more than three (3) minutes or for a time period established by
the Mayor. No appointment or advance notification is needed in order to speak to the Commission during this Forum.
2. Prior to every Commission meeting, an Agenda and backup material are published by the Administration. Copies of the
Agenda may be obtained at the City Clerk's Office on the Monday prior to the Commission regular meeting. The complete
Agenda, including all backup material, is available for inspection beginning the Monday prior to the Commission meeting at
the City Clerk's Office and at the following Miami Beach Branch Libraries: Main, North Shore, and South Shore. The
information is also available on the City's website: www.miamibeachfl.gov the Friday prior to a Commission Meeting.
Any person requesting placement of an item on the Agenda must provide a written statement with his/her complete address
and telephone number to the Office of the City Manager, 1700 Convention Center Drive, 4th Floor, Miami Beach, FI 33 139,
briefly outlining the subject matter of the proposed presentation. In order to determine whether or not the request can be
handled administratively, an appointment may be scheduled to discuss the matter with a member of the City Manager's staff.
"Requests for Agenda Consideration" will not be placed on the Agenda until after Administrative staff review. Such review will
ensure that the issue is germane to the City's business and has been addressed in sufficient detail so that the City Commission
may be fully apprised. Such written requests must be received in the City Manager's Office no later than noon on Monday of
the week prior to the scheduled Commission meeting to allow time for processing and inclusion in the Agenda package.
Presenters will be allowed sufficient time, within the discretion of the Mayor, to make their presentations and will be limited to
those subjects included in their written requests.
4. Once an Agenda for a Commission Meeting is published, persons wishing to speak on item(s) listed on the Agenda, other than
~ublic hearing items and the Dr. Stanley Sutnick Citizens Forum, should call or come to City Hall, Office of the City Clerk,
1700 Convention Center Drive, telephone 673-741 1 , before 5:00 p.m., no later than the day prior to the Commission meeting
and give their name, the Agenda item to be discussed, and if known, the Agenda item number.
5. All persons who have been listed by the City Clerk to speak on the Agenda item in which they are specifically interested, and
persons granted permission by the Mayor, will be allowed sufficient time, within the discretion of the Mayor, to present their
views. When there are scheduled public hearings on an Agenda item, IT IS NOT necessary to register at the City Clerk's
Office in advance of the meeting. All persons wishing to speak at a public hearing may do so and will be allowed sufficient
time, within the discretion of the Mayor, to present their views.
6. If a person wishes to address the Commission on an emergency matter, which is not listed on the Agenda, there will be a
period allocated at the commencement of the Commission Meeting when the Mayor calls for additions to, deletions from, or
corrections to the Agenda. The decision as to whether or not the matter will be heard, and when it will be heard, is at the
discretion of the Mayor. On the presentation of an emergency matter, the speaker's remarks must be concise and related to a
specific item. Each speaker will be limited to three minutes, or for a longer or shorter period, at the discretion of the Mayor.
201 1 Schedule of City of Miami Beach
City Commission and Redevelopment Agency (RDA) Meetings
Meetings begin at 9:00 a.m., and are held in the City Commission Chambers, Third Floor, City Hall,
1 700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida.
Commission Meetings Alternate Meetings
January 19 (Wednesday) January 26 (Wednesday)
February 9 (Wednesday) February 16 (Wednesday)
March 9 (Wednesday) March 16 (Wednesday)
April 1 3 (Wednesday) April 27 (Wednesday]
May 1 1 (Wednesday) May 18 (Wednesday]
June 1 (Wednesday)
July 13 Wednesday) July 20 Wednesday)
August - Cify Commission in recess
September 14 (Wednesday)
October 1 9' (Wednesday] October 26 (Wednesday)
November 2 (Wednesday] - Election related only
November 16 (Wednesday] - If Run-off Election only
December 14 (Wednesday] December 2 1 (Wednesday)
F:\CLER\$ALL\a City Commission\201 1 Schedule of City of Miami Beach.docx
CITY CLERK’S OFFICE
LOBBYISTS LIST
April 13, 2011
LOBBYIST NAME RETAINED BY DATE REGISTERED DISCLOSURE
Proposed Parking Impact Fee Ordinance
Alexander I. Tachmes Brilla AJ RMB/The Raleigh 03/22/2011 $495.00
Alton Road Historic District Buffer Overlay
Neisen Kasdin Jimmy Resnick 08/19/2010 $580.00
Michael Larkin Bais Menachem, Inc. 09/07/2010 $425.00
C:\Documents and Settings\centvalk\Desktop\2011Agenda\Lobbyist List 4-6-2011.doc
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
Request For Approval To Purchase Budgeted Replacement Vehicles And Equipment Pursuant To Florida State
Contract No. 10-18-0907, 10-09-0907, 760-000-1 0-1 And GSA Contract GS-30F-1028G In The Amount Of
$2,563,152.47.
4
Ensure well-maintained infrastructure. lmprove parking availability. Maintain Miami Beach publicareas & rights
of way citywide. Increase satisfaction with family recreational activities. Ensure well-maintained facilities.
lmprove cleanliness of Miami Beach r~ghts of way especially in business areas. Increase community
satisfaction with City Government.
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.):
55% of residents, 48% of businesses rated the condition of roads as excellent or good, and 64% of residents, 66% of
businesses rated the condition of sidewalks as excellent or good. 21% of residents and 28% of businesses rated the
availability of parking across MB as about the right amount. 83% of residents and 81% of businesses rated the
landscape maintenance in rights of way and public areas as excellent or good. 73% of residents and 46% of
businesses rated the availability of family friendly activities as about the right amount. 87% of residents and 85% of
businesses rated the appearance and maintenance of the City's public buildings as excellent or good. 71% of
residents and 66% of businesses rated the cleanliness of streets in businesslcommercial areas as excellent or good.
91% of domesticvisitors and 81 % of international visitors indicated they definitely would orvery likely would return to
Miami Beach in the future. 97% of residents and 95% of businesses rated the overall quality of fire, EMR, Ocean
Rescue preparedness as excellent or good. 79% of residents and 82% of businesses rated well-designed capital
projects as excellent or good.
Issue: I Shall the Mayor and City Commission approve the purchase?
Item Summary/Recommendation:
One (1) 2011 Ford Ranger, one (1) 2011 Ford F-250 and one (1) 2011 Ford F-350 are approved budgeted
replacements and will be funded by the Public Works Water Division Enterprise Fund Capital Account No. 425-
0410-000673. Two(2) 201 1 Ford F-250, one(1) 201 1 Ford F-150 and two (2) 201 1 Ford F-350 are approved budgeted
replacements and will be funded by the Public Works Sewer Operations Division Enterprise Fund Capital Account
No. 425-0420-000673. Four (4) 201 1 Ford Ranger, one (1) 201 1 Ford F-250, one (1) 201 1 Ford E-250 Cargo Van,
one (1) 2011 Ford F-150, three (3) 2012 Ford Focus and two (2) 2011 Ford Escape are approved budgeted
replacements and w~ll be funded by the Parking On Street Fund Capital Account No. 480-0462-000673. Two (2)
201 1 Ford F-250, one (1) 201 1 E-250 Cargo Van and one (1) 2010, Ford E-350 Cargo Van are approved budgeted
replacements and will be funded by the Property Management Account No. 520-1720-000673. One (1) 2012
Freightliner M2 Chassis, One 201 1 (1) Ford F-150 are approved budgeted replacements and will be funded by the
Public Works Sanitation Division Enterprise Fund Capital Account No. 435-0430-000673. One (1) 201 1 Ford F-150 is
an approved budgeted replacement and will be funded by the Public Works Sanitation Division Enterprise Fund
Capital Account No. 435-9962-000673. Five (5) 201 1 Ford F-150, four (4) 201 1 Ford Rangers, one (I) 201 1 Ford F-
250, three (3) 201 1 Ford Explorer, three (3) 2012 Ford Focus, one (1) 201 1 Ford E-350 Club Wagon, two (2) Bobcat
3400s, one (1) John Deere 410J Backhoe, six (6) John Deere 6251 XUV Gators, one (1) Caterpillar 450E Backhoe,
one (1) Ford F-550 Aerial Lift Device, two (2) Smithco Field Conditioners, one(1) Pierce Velocity Custom Pumper,
one (1) Pierce Saber Rescue AirILight Truck, three (3) Kawasaki 4010 Mules, one (1) Caterpillar PD500-D Lift Truck,
and one (1) Caterpillar PD8000 Lift Truck are approved budgeted replacements and will be funded by the Fleet
Management Fund Capital Account No. 510-1 780-000673.
The Administration recommends approving the purchase.
I I I I
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking: I Andrew E. Terpak I
CtQENIEB ITEM
mre q-13-11
MIAMIBEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33 139, www.miarnibeochfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
DATE: April 13, 201 1 3
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR APPROVAL TO PURCHASE BUDGETED REPLACEMENT
VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT PURSUANT TO FLORIDA STATE CONTRACT
NO. 10-1 8-0907, 10-09-0907, 760-000-1 0-1 AND GSA CONTRACT GS-30F-
1028G IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,563,152.47.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Approve the purchase.
FUNDING
$ 59,879.00 Funding is available from the Public Works Water Division Enterprise Fund
Capital Account No. 425-041 0-000673.
$179,288.00 Funding is available from the Public Works Sewer Division Enterprise Fund
Capital Account No. 425-0420-000673.
$195,338.00 Funding is available from the Parking On-Street Fund Capital Account No.
480-0462-000673.
$ 79,767.00 Funding is available from the Property Management Account No. 520-1720-
000673.
$ 125,405.00 Funding is available from the Public Works Sanitation Division Enterprise
Fund Capital Account No. 435-0430-000673.
$ 16,963.00 Funding is available from the Public Works Sanitation Division Enterprise
Fund Capital Account No. 435-9962-000673.
$1,906,512.47 Funding is available from the Fleet Management Fund Capital Account No.
51 0-1 780-000673.
ANALYSIS
See attachments:
BACKGROUND
1. All vehicles and equipment are scheduled for review and or replacement based on a
pre-determined schedule using the average life expectancy based on industry
standards and type of service for which the vehiclelequipment is being used.
Commission Memorandum
April 13, 2010
Page 2
2. Each year the Fleet Management capital budget for replacements is adjusted in
accordance with the schedule.
3. Once the vehicle(s) reach the planned replacement schedule, the vehiclelequipment
is physically inspected.
4. All information related to the vehicle is reviewed i.e. age, mileage/hours,
maintenance cost, depreciation value, residual value, accident record and overall
condition are taken into consideration.
5. Determination is made whether the vehicle(s) should be replaced or can safely
remain in the fleet for an additional time period and still be cost effective to maintain.
6. The vehicles and equipment that are being replaced are based on the Fleet
Management approved budget for FY10/11 and does not exceed the overall
budgeted amount for the fiscal year.
7. Exceptions do occur when approved funds from a previous year are encumbered
and carried forward. This usually is a result of the need to revise specifications
based on current situation and customer requirements.
8. Manufacturers may phase out makes and models due to exceeding their capacity to
fill orders in any particular model year. Specifically the latter situation typically
benefits the City by receiving a newer model vehicle with previous model year
pricing.
VehiclelEquipment Efficiency Program
Economic conditions and rising fuel prices has driven Fleet Management to review vehicle
and equipment efficiency. Implementation of rightsizing and downsizing is a key priority for
both Fleet Management and end user departments. Over the last couple of years, the City
has purchased 'flex fuel' vehicles, departments have gone from full size sedans to midsize
and even compact cars. Departments have also re-structured how to conduct their
operations more efficiently. As of this date we have downsized 107 vehicles within Police
and Fire Department. Building and Code Compliance departments and others have
eliminated 102 vehicles and equipment over the last several years.
Additional Vehicle Assessment
Beyond the typical vehicle analysis that is conducted, Fleet Management in conjunction with
the affected Departments has adopted a temporary added level of review to assist in helping
to balance the budget. The additional review is intended to assure that the vehicle is
absolutely needed in order to perform the functions of the respective Department and if so,
can the vehicle be deferred safely for an additional year. This added review is a temporary
measure as eventually maintenance costs will increase as the fleet ages, to the point that
the policy becomes counterproductive. This additional review was started in fiscal year
08/09. It is a balancing act to determine if the deferral will cost more in added maintenance
cost versus the savings from the deferral and is shown in the accompanying attachments as
'Original Replacement Schedule'. Fifty Five (55) of the Sixty Five (65) total vehicles being
purchased exceeded their Life Expectancy equating to 85%. Forty Five (45) are more than
two (2) years past their Life Expectancy equating to 70%.
Commission Memorandum
April 13, 2010
Page 3
VehiclelEquipment Acquisitions
In preparing the annual fleet acquisitions list, Fleet Management analyzes contract pricing
when such contracts are available and within the guidelines of the City Procurement Policy.
The analysis of the State wide contracts is critical as this review affects the decision to use
the contracts or pursue a separate bid. Historically, and again in this fiscal year, the review
indicates that use of the large State wide contracts are much more advantageous to the City
than bidding on our own. When the Contracts are compared to the manufacturer's
suggested retail price (MSRP), the pricing historically and also in this year, is significantly
lower because certain Fleet dealers, usually high volume factory recognized, receive a "price
concession" from the vehicle manufacturers when bidding on government contracts.
Upfitting of Vehicles and Equipment
Upfitting of vehicles and equipment is accomplished through the OEM (Original Equipment
Manufacturer) or a third party vendor. Cost comparison and warranty coverage is
researched by Fleet Management and Fleet will make the decision based on what is in the
best interest for the City.
Extended Warranties
As a general rule sedan and light truck factory extended warranties are not purchased.
Through our Fleet Management tracking system we continually conduct routine analysis to
evaluate whether the City would benefit from the expense of an extended warranty based on
the cost of operation of a particular make or model vehicle.
First year models and specialized vehicles receive more consideration based on the
complexity of the vehicle. In the case of a Police or Fire take home vehicle we made a
conscious decision to not purchase extended warranties as of 2003 because the vehicle has
been proven to perform well up to the 85,000 miles and beyond with no major repairs. To
date we have saved $1,517,550 in warranty.
Fleet Dealers vs. Retail Dealers
The majority of all car and truck dealers choose not to participate in "Fleet" deals. This is
because the base profit margin is so low it will not support a retail dealership operational
cost. Most Fleet dealers bid so low that if a municipality like ours, who purchases a "base"
unit with minimal or no options the dealer could stand to lose $200 to $500 per vehicle on
each unit sold.
Benefits of State and Contract Pricing
Fleet Management typically utilizes Contracts from the State of Florida, Florida Sheriffs
Association (FSA) and Government Services Association (GSA). Historically the Florida
Sheriffs Association has been the primary contract used because they have consistently
offered vehicles, equipment and services at the lowest cost to the City. FSA "request for
bid" is sent to over 20 dealers throughout the state for police vehicles. The results are a
2,000 page contract document which covers everything from AWs, motorcycles, police
cars, rescue vehicles to waste haulers.
Commission Memorandum
April 13, 2010
Page 4
Police Vehicles and Fire apparatuses being the bulk of the contract. This contract is a good
example where the City benefits from the aggregate purchasing power of FSA, which are
over6,OOO units statewide annually. In the absence of an approved available contract Fleet
Management will formally bid any vehicle or equipment over $25,000. In the current
acquisition the City will save $566,645 based on contract price versus MSRP.
Surplus Vehicles and Equipment
Once a vehicle or equipment is identified as "surplus" it is generally scheduled for sale at
public auction or in some instances the vehiclelequipment may be used as a trade-in,
offered to other law enforcement agencies at fair market value, whichever is in the best
interest of the City. This process effectively reduces the City's cost of ownership and
completes the vehicles life cycle. The process that is utilized by the City extracts the
remaining values from the vehicles and is applied to future purchases to reduce the new
acquisition cost.
Occasionally you will see a vehicle being replaced that has already been sent to auction.
This is usually as a result of a vehicle being dead lined prior to replacement as the repair
costs would exceed the value of the vehicle, the remaining service life is less than one (1)
year andlor the vehicle is unsafe to operate.
Recommendation
All of the vehicles recommended for replacement have been evaluated to determine if the
piece is still necessary for the functions performed and if its condition warrants deferred
replacement. Given the age, high maintenance cost and down time, none of these vehicles
can be deferred. Upon approval by the commission, the City Manager will direct Fleet
Management at his discretion the vehicles and equipment that will receive final approval for
purchase.
CONCLUSION
Based on the aforementioned, the Administration recommends that the City Commission
approve the purchase of the budgeted replacement vehicles and equipment pursuant to
Florida State Contract No. 10-1 8-0907, 10-09-0907, 760-000-1 0-1 and GSA contract GS-
30f-1028G in the amount of $2,563,152.47.
Fleet Management
Quick Fact Sheet
April 13'~ 2011 Commission Memo Highlights
Number of Vehicles and Equipment being Purchased (Comm Memo 04/13/11)
Number of Vehicles which exceeded their Life Expectancy
Number of Vehicles which exceeded their Life Expectancy more than 2 years
Total Cost of Vehicles and Equipment being Purchased
Major Purchases
Pierce Saber Rescue airllight truck $421,072
Pierce Velocity Custom Pumper $654,493
Freightliner M2 Chassis Lightning Loader $108,442
Caterpillar 450E Backhoe $118,945
$1,302,952
Average Savings using State Contracts for Vehicle / Equipment Acquisitions
(Base Price to MSRP)
General Information
Total Fleet Rolling Stock*
Number of Sedans and Light Trucks
Number of Heavy Trucks and Special Equipment
Number of Motorcycles (leased)
Number of Flex Fuel Vehicles - Sedans and Light Trucks
Number of Hybrids
Number of Vehicles that have been Downsized (Police and Fire)
Number of Vehicles/Equipment Eliminated over the last several years
Number of Vehicles presently that have exceeded their Life Expectancy
Total Savings to Date by NOT Purchasing Extended Warranties (Police Pursuit)
Average Recovery Cost on Surplus Vehicles thru Auction
*Average inventory due to new acquisitions and removal of surplus.
Line - Item # DEPARTMENT VehiclelEquipment Description QTY - COST FUNDING SOURCE VENDOR CONTRACT Public Works - Streets Division 201 1 John Deere 410J Backhoe 201 1 Ford Ranger Nortrax Inc. Hub City Ford FSA 10-1 8-0907 FSA 10-1 8-0907 Public Works -Water Division 201 1 Ford Ranger with Topper 201 1 Ford F-250 Utility Body 201 1 Ford F-350 Crew Cab Hub City Ford Duval Ford Duval Ford FSA 10-1 8-0907 FSA 10-1 8-0907 FSA 10-1 8-0907 Public Works - Sewer Operations Division 201 1 Ford F-250 201 1 Ford F-250 Utility Body 201 1 Ford F-150 201 1 Ford F-350 Utility Body 2012 Freightliner M2 Chassis with Crane FSA 10-1 8-0907 FSA 10-1 8-0907 FSA 10-1 8-0907 FSA 10-1 8-0907 FSA 10-1 8-0907 Duval Ford Duval Ford Duval Ford Duval Ford Atlantic Truck Public Works - Property Management Division 201 1 Ford F-250 Utility Body 201 1 Ford E-250 Cargo Van 201 1 Ford E-350 Cargo Van FSA 10-1 8-0907 FSA 10-1 8-0907 FSA 10-1 8-0907 Duval Ford Alan Jay Ford Lincoln Mercury Alan Jay Ford Lincoln Mercury Public Works - Sanitation Division 201 1 Ford F-150 2012 Freightliner M2 Chassis with Petersen T3 Loader Duval Ford Atlantic Truck FSA 10-1 8-0907 FSA 10-1 8-0907 Parks and Recreation Department Greenspace Management Division 201 1 John Deere 6251 XUV Gator 201 1 Caterpillar 450E Backhoe 201 1 Bobcat 3400 Utility Vehicle 201 I Ford F-150 4x4 201 1 Ford Ranger with Extended Cab 201 1 Ford F-150 201 1 Ford F-250 Crew Cab 4x4 201 1 Caterpillar PD5000-D 201 1 Ford F-550 Chassis with Altec Aerial Lift Device John Deere Company Kelly Tractor Company Bobcat Company Duval Ford Hub City Ford Duval Ford Duval Ford Kelly Tractor Company Altec Industries FSA 10-1 8-0907 FSA 10-1 8-0907 FSA 10-1 8-0907 FSA 10-1 8-0907 FSA 10-1 8-0907 FSA 10-1 8-0907 FSA 10-1 8-0907 FSA 10-1 8-0907 GSA GS-30F-1028G
Line - DEPARTMENT - QTY COST FUNDING VENDOR CONTRACT Item # VehiclelEuuipment Description SOURCE Parks and Recreation Department Recreation Division 25 201 1 Smithco Field Conditioner 2 $ 25,841 .I4 510-1780-000673 Golf Ventures FS 760-000-1 0-1 26 201 1 Bobcat 3400 Utility Vehicle 1 $ 9,821 .OO 510-1 780-000673 Bobcat Company FSA 10-1 8-0907 27 201 1 Ford F-150 1 $ 16,963.00 510-1780-000673 Duval Ford FSA 10-1 8-0907 28 201 1 Ford F-150 Long Bed 1 $ 17,648.00 51 0-1780-000673 Duval Ford FSA 10-1 8-0907 29 2012 Ford Focus 1 $ 14,758.00 510-1780-000673 Bartow Ford Company FSA 10-1 8-0907 Parking On-Street Department 30 201 1 Ford Ranger 31 201 1 Ford F-250 Utility Body 32 201 1 Ford E-250 Cargo Van 33 201 1 Ford F-150 34 201 1 Ford Escape 35 201 1 Ford Ranger 36 201 1 Ford Ranger Extended Cab 37 2012 Ford Focus Hub City Ford FSA 10-1 8-0907 Duval Ford FSA 10-1 8-0907 Alan Jay Ford Lincoln Mercury FSA 10-1 8-0907 Duval Ford FSA 10-1 8-0907 Hub City Ford FSA 10-1 8-0907 Hub City Ford FSA 10-1 8-0907 Hub City Ford FSA 10-1 8-0907 Bartow Ford Company FSA 10-1 8-0907 Fire Department 38 201 1 Pierce Velocity Custom Pumper I $ 654,493.00 51 0-1 780-000673 Pierce Manufacturing, Inc. FSA 10-09-0907 39 201 1 Pierce Saber Rescue AirILight Truck 1 $ 421,072.00 51 0-1 780-000673 Pierce Manufacturing, Inc. FSA 10-09-0907 40 201 1 Ford Explorer AWD 2 $ 51,892.00 51 0-1 780-000673 Hub City Ford FSA 10-1 8-0907 Fire Department - Ocean Rescue Division 41 201 1 Kawasaki 401 0 Utility Vehicle 3 $ 34,844.55 51 0-1780-000673 Ameri-Recreational Sports, LLC FSA 10-1 8-0907 Fleet Management Department 42 201 1 Caterpillar PD8000 Lift Truck 1 $ 45,289.00 51 0-1 780-000673 Kelly Tractor Company FSA 10-1 8-0907 Police Department 43 201 1 Ford Explorer I $ 30,211 .OO 51 0-1 780-000673 Hub City Ford FSA 10-1 8-0907 Police Department Support Services Division 44 201 1 Ford E-350 Club Wagon 1 $ 25,182.00 51 0-1 780-000673 Hub City Ford FSA 10-1 8-0907 CIP Department 45 2012 Ford Focus 1 $ 14,758.00 51 0-1 780-000673 Bartow Ford Company FSA 10-1 8-0907 Arts Culture & Entertainment Department 46 2012 Ford Focus 1 $ 14,758.00 510-1 780-000673 Bartow Ford Company FSA 10-1 8-0907 Total Vehicle Acquisitions 65 $ 2,563,152.47 Total Cost
Vehicle and Line Eauipment Description - Item # Oriainal Life to Date Orininal Mileaae Condition Trade Cost - MRA** Replacement /Hours - In Cost - Schedule Public Works - Streets Division 1 4548 2002 John Deere 410G $74,509.00 $46,574.00 Sep 201 1 4,346 Fair $18,000.00 2 4239 2004 Chev. Cavalier $1 2,569.00 $ 7,127.00 Apr 2010 60,036 Poor $0.00 Public Works -Water Division 3 4501 2000 Ford Ranger $1 3,433.00 $ 8,183.00 Jul2006 70,702 Poor $0.00 4 4505 2001 Ford F-250 $23,260.00 $16,165.00 May 2007 55,653 Poor $0.00 5 4528 2002 Ford F-350 $25,255.00 $1 5,187.00 Oct 2007 60,953 Poor $0.00 Public Works Department Sewer Operations Division 6 0733 2000 Chevrolet CK2500 $19,855.00 $ 9,334.00 May 2006 31,560 Poor $0.00 7 0738 2000 Chevrolet CK2500 $22,950.00 $14,589.00 Jun 2006 61,210 Poor $0.00 8 0740 1999 Ford F-150 $1 5,300.00 $ 9,696.00 Feb 2005 44,965 Poor $0.00 9 4500 2000 Chevrolet CK2500 $24,976.00 $1 7,877.00 Jul2006 52,746 Poor $0.00 10 4519 2001 Ford F-350 $28,283.00 $1 9,496.00 Aug 2007 46,652 Poor $0.00 1 1 0635 1998 Ford F-700 $32,795.00 $39,574.00 Oct 2007 70,777 Poor $4,000.00 Public Works Department Properh, Manaaement Division 12 0452 2000 Ford F-250 $22,094.00 $12,747.00 Nov 2005 56,557 Poor $0.00 13 0453 2000 Ford F-250 $22,084.00 $ 7,222.00 Nov 2005 47,933 Poor $0.00 14 1 568 2006 Ford E-250 $1 7,235.00 $14,696.00 May 2012 17,601 Poor $0.00 15 4524 2001 Chevrolet CG21405 $20,907.00 $ 6,558.00 Aug 2007 30,680 Poor $0.00 Public Works Department Sanitation Division 16 0377 2002 Sterling Acterra $79,827.00 $1 04,508.00 Jul2008 85,796 Fair $12,500.00 17 4652 2004 Ford F-150 $13,641 .OO $ 18,489.00 Jul2010 83,635 Poor $0.00 18 4554 2003 Ford F-150 $1 8,958.00 $ 11,630.00 Oct 2008 43,789 Poor $0.00 Parks and Recreation Department Greenspace Mananement Division 19 0591 2007 John Deere Gator $10,179.00 $ 7,297.00 Nov 201 0 --- Auctioned $0.00 20 0592 2006 John Deere Gator $ 7,823.00 $ 3,270.00 Dec 201 0 1,026 Poor $0.00 21 0593 2006 John Deere Gator $ 6,484.00 $ 808.00 Dec 201 0 1,351 Poor $0.00 22 0779 2008 EZ-GO MPT 1200G $ 5,389.00 $ 3,537.00 May 201 1 --- Poor $0.00 23 0780 2008 EZ-GO MPT 1200G $ 5,389.00 $ 3,581.00 May 201 1 --- Poor $0.00 24 0781 2008 EZ-GO MPT 1200G $ 5,389.00 $ 3,089.00 May 201 1 --- Poor $0.00 25 4514 2001 John Deere 710D $101,102.00 $105,092.00 Jul2011 4,660 Poor $10,000.00 **Maintenance, Repair, Accident
Line - Item # - Vehicle and Eauipment Description Oriainal Life to Date Cost - MRA** Cost - Parks and Recreation Department Greenspace Mananement Division 0515 2008 Bobcat 2200G $ 9,731.00 $ 6,474.00 4540 2002 Ford F-150 $ 18,225.00 $ 14,679.00 4569 2003 Ford F-150 $ 14,399.00 $ 11,033.00 4572 2003 Ford F-150 $ 14,399.00 $ 5,240.00 4576 2003 Ford F-150 $ 14,499.00 $ 9,406.00 4574 2003 Ford F-150 $ 14,404.00 $ 11,365.00 4575 2003 Ford F-150 $ 14,399.00 $ 10,692.00 4583 2003 Ford F-250 $ 25,904.00 $ 16,309.00 0547 2001 Ford F-550 $ 75,522.00 $ 80,766.00 0552 1996 Cat DP40-D2 Lift Truck $ 27,432.00 $ 14,110.00 Parks and Recreation Department Recreation Division 36 0504 2004 Smithco Field Conditioner $ 8,477.00 $ 5,375.00 37 0505 2005 Smithco Field Conditioner $ 9,339.00 $10,116.00 38 0585 2002 John Deere Gator $ 7,483.00 $ 8,468.00 39 2528 2002 Ford F-150 $18,213.00 $ 13,188.00 40 4570 2003 Ford F-150 $ 14,109.00 $ 7,079.00 41 4223 2003 Chev Cavalier $ 12,529.00 $ 2,980.00 Parkina On-Street Department 1426 2001 Ford Ranger 1431 2002 Ford F-350 1534 2002 Ford E-250 1535 2003 Ford F-150 1420 2001 Ford Ranger 1421 2001 Ford Ranger 1422 2001 Ford Ranger 1423 2001 Ford Ranger 1425 2001 Ford Ranger 1433 2003 Chevrolet Cavalier 4233 2004 Chevrolet Cavalier 4250 2004 Chevrolet Cavalier Oriainal Mileaae Condition Trade Re~lacement /Hours In - Schedule Apr 201 1 Jun 2008 Feb 2009 Feb 2009 Feb 2009 Feb 2009 Feb 2009 Mar 2009 May 201 1 Jan 2003 Poor $0.00 Poor $0.00 Poor $0.00 Auctioned $0.00 Poor $0.00 Poor $0.00 Poor $0.00 Poor $0.00 Poor $9,000.00 Poor $0.00 Jan 2009 235 Poor $0.00 May 2009 497 Poor $0.00 Jan 2007 ----- Poor $0.00 Jun 2008 59,424 Poor $0.00 Feb 2009 67,663 Poor $0.00 Apr 2009 24,034 Auctioned $0.00 Apr 2007 Dec 2007 Aug 2008 Oct 2008 Apr 2007 Apr 2007 Apr 2007 Apr 2007 May 2007 Oct 2008 Dec 2009 Jul2010 Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor Auctioned Auctioned Auctioned **Maintenance, Repair, Accident
Oriainal Replacement Schedule Mileaae /Hours Condition Trade In - Vehicle and Line Equipment Description - Item # - Oriainal Cost - Life to Date MRA* Cost - Fire Department 54 0005-5 1995 Saulsbury D9500 55 001 6-5 1995 Air Support Truck 56 2718 2003 Ford Crown Victoria 57 71 9 2003 Ford Crown Victoria Fair $10,000.00 Good $38,000.00 Poor $0.00 Poor $0.00 Jun 2010 Apr 2005 Jul2007 Jut 2007 Fire Department Ocean Rescue Division 58 2024 2008 Bobcat 2200G $ 9,098.00 59 2026 2008 Bobcat 2200G $ 9,098.00 60 2029 2008 Bobcat 2200SG $ 11,334.00 Apr 201 1 Apr 201 I Apr 201 1 Poor $0.00 Poor $0.00 Poor $0.00 Fleet Manaaement Department 61 0814 1996 Caterpillar DP40-D2 $ 27,432.00 Jan 2003 Poor $2,500.00 Police Department 62 2520 2002 Ford Explorer Poor $0.00 Apr 2006 Police Department Support Services Division 63 0233 2003 Freightliner 2500 $ 30,646.00 Nov 201 0 Poor $0.00 CIP Department 64 4168 2003 Chev Cavalier Feb 2009 Poor $0.00 Arts Culture and Entertainment Department 65 4215 2003 Chev Cavalier $ 12,529.00 Poor $0.00 Apr 2009 **Maintenance, Repair, Accident
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
An Ordinance Amending The Code Of The City Of Miami Beach, By Amending Chapter 2, Entitled
"Administration," By Amending Article Ill, Entitled "Agencies, Boards And Committees," By Amending
Division 2, Entitled "Disability Access Committee," By Amending Sec. 2-31 (D) To Increase The Number
Of Members From Seven (7) To Fourteen (14) And Amending The Quorum Requirement; Providing For
Codification, Repealer, Severability, And An Effective Date..
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
NIA
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): NIA
Issue: . - - -. - .
Shall the Mayor and City Commission amend the City Code by amending Sec. 2-31 (D) to increase the
number of members from seven (7) to fourteen (14) and increase the quorum from three (3) to eight (8)
members?
Item SummarylRecommendation:
SECOND READING PUBLIC HEARING I Open and Continue the public hearing to May 11, 201 1 Commission Meeting. I
This ordinance was approved on first reading at the February 9,201 1, Commission meeting with a referral
to the NeighborhoodlCommunity Affairs Committee (NCAC). The item is still pending to be heard by the
NCAC..
The Disability Access Committee (DAC) voted unanimously to increase its board membership from seven
(7) members to fourteen (14) members and to change the quorum requirement from three (3) members to
eight (8) members.
At the request of the DAC, the proposed amendment was referred to the NeighborhoodlCommunity Affairs
Committee (NCAC) by the City Commission on July 14, 2010. At the NCAC meeting of December 14,
201 0, the Committee moved to recommend to the City Commission increasing the members of the DAC
from seven (7) to fourteen (14) and increasing the quorum from three (3) to eight (8) members.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
I Neighborhood1 Community Affairs Committee meeting of 12/14/2010 and accepted by the City .I I commission on January 19,201 1.
u I 3 1
OBPl Total 1
Financial Impact Summary: the estimated value of an annual citywide decal is $492.75. The annual
estimated value for seven additional parking decals will bring a cost to the City of $3,449.25 assuming all
Financial Information:
I members apply for the decal.
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking: I Robert Parcher, Ext 6451
Account
AGEUD-A ITEM RCA
Amount Source of
Funds:
I.
I
2
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 331 39, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager w' SECOND READING
DATE: April 13, 201 1 PUBLIC HEARING
SUBJECT: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE-ODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, BY
AMENDING CHAPTER 2, ENTITLED "ADMINISTRATION," BY AMENDING
ARTICLE Ill, ENTITLED "AGENCIES, BOARDS AND COMMITTEES," BY
AMENDING DIVISION 2, ENTITLED "DISABILITY ACCESS COMMITTEE," BY
AMENDING SEC. 2-31(D) TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF MEMBERS FROM
SEVEN (7) TO FOURTEEN (14) AND AMENDING THE QUORUM REQUIREMENT;
PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION, REPEALER, SEVERABILITY, AND AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Open and Continue the public hearing to May 11, 201 1 Commission Meeting.
BACKGROUND
This ordinance was approved on first reading at the February 9, 201 1, Commission meeting
with a referral to the NeighborhoodlCommunity Affairs Committee (NCAC). The item is still
pending to be heard by the NCAC.
The Disability Access Committee (DAC) voted unanimously to increase its board membership
from seven (7) members to fourteen (14) members and to change the quorum requirement from
three (3) members to eight (8) members.
At the request of the DAC, the proposed amendment was referred to the Neighborhood1
Community Affairs Committee (NCAC) by the City Commission on July 14, 2010. At the NCAC
meeting of December 14, 2010, the Committee moved to recommend to the City Commission
increasing the members of the DAC from seven (7) to fourteen (14) and increasing the quorum
from three (3) to eight (8) members.
Subsequently, at the January 19, 201 I Commission Meeting, the City Commission approved,
via acceptance of the NCAC report, the recommended changes.
CONCLUSION
As requested, the ordinance amends the Code of the City of Miami Beach, by amending
Chapter 2, Article Ill, "Agencies, Board and Committees," Division 2, "Disability Access
Committee" Sec. 2-31(d) to increase the board membership from seven (7) members to
fourteen (14) members and to increase the quorum from three (3) to eight (8) members.
JMGIREP
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CODE OF THE ClTY OF MIAMI
BEACH, BY AMENDING CHAPTER 2, ENTITLED
"ADMINISTRATION," BY AMENDING ARTICLE Ill, ENTITLED
"AGENCIES, BOARDS AND COMMITTEES," BY AMENDING
DIVISION 2, ENTITLED "DISABILITY ACCESS COMMITTEE," BY
AMENDING SEC. 2-31(D) TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF
MEMBERS FROM SEVEN (7) TO FOURTEEN (14) AND AMENDING
THE QUORUM REQUIREMENT; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION,
REPEALER, SEVERABILITY, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the Disability Access Committee (DAC) voted unanimously to increase its
board membership from seven (7) members by adding an additional seven (7) members for a
total of fourteen (14) members; and
WHEREAS, the item was referred to the Neighborhood/Community Affairs Committee
(NCAC) by the City Commission on July 14, 2010 to discuss an amendment to increase the
membership on the Disability Awareness Committee and, at its December 14, 2010 meeting,
the NCAC moved to recommend to the City Commission the increase in the number of
members of the DAC from seven (7) to fourteen (14); and
WHEREAS, at the January 19, 2011 City Commission meeting, the City Commission
approved the recommendation to increase the number of members of the DAC from seven (7)
to fourteen (14) members, which also requires an amendment to the DAC's quorum
requirement.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF
THE ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA:
SECTION 1. That Section 2-31 (d) of Chapter 2 of the City Code is hereby amended as follows:
Chapter 2
ADMINISTRATION
* * *
Article Ill. Agencies, Boards And Commipees
* * *
Division 2. Disability Access Committee
Sec. 2-31. - Established; purpose; composition.
* * *
(d) Composition. The disability access committee shall be composed of fourteen voting
members \.I'.n~the mayor and each city commissioners shall make
two direct ao~ointments. A quorum shall consist of tkree eiaht members. Formal action of the
board shall require at least #we eight votes. Consideration shall be given, but not limited to, the
following categories: persons having mobility impairment; deaf and/or hard-of-hearing persons
in the community; blind andlor vision-impaired persons in the community; mental, cognitive or
developmental disabilities; and the industries of tourism and convention, retail, hospitality
(restaurant or hotel), and health care (or rehabilitation). The city attorney's office shall provide
legal counsel.
SECTION 2. CODIFICATION.
It is the intention of the City Commission, and it is hereby ordained that the provisions of
this ordinance shall become and be made part of the Code of the City of Miami Beach as
amended; that the sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or re-lettered to accomplish
such intention; and that the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section" or other appropriate
word.
SECTION 3. REPEALER.
All ordinances or parts of ordinances and all sections and parts of sections in conflict
herewith are hereby repealed.
SECTION 4. SEVERABILITY.
If any section, subsection, clause or provision of this Ordinance is held invalid, the
remainder shall not be affected by such invalidity.
SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE.
Passed and adopted this day of ,201 1
This Ordinance shall take effect the - day of ,201 1
ATTEST:
MAYOR MATTI HERRERA BOWER
ROBERT PARCHER, CITY CLERK
T:\AGENDA\2011\2-09-1 I\DAC ordinance.docx
APPROVED AS TO
I I
M\lAMI BEACH
OFFICE OF THE ClTY ATTORNEY
JOSE SMITH, CITY A~RNEY COMMlSSlON MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera of the City Commission
FROM: Jose Smith, City
CC: Jorge Gonzalez, City ~Ga~er SECOND READING
PUBLIC HEARING
DATE: April 13, 201 1
SUBJECT: An Ordinance Amending Capital Improvement Projects Oversight
Committee (CIPOC)
[Sponsored by Mayor Matti Herrera Bower]
At the request of Mayor Matti Herrera Bower, the City Attorney's Office has prepared the
attached Ordinance which was submitted for discussion at the January 19, 2011 City
Commission meeting and was referred to the Finance Committee. The Ordinance amends the
City Code provisions establishing and creating the CIPOC by adding a non-voting ex-officio
member to the Committee who is either a member of the disabled community or has special
knowledge of Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) issues. The proposed Ordinance was
considered by the Finance Committee at its meeting on March 24, 2011 at which time it
recommended that the non-voting ex-officio member be appointed by the City Commission from
a list of three (3) nominees from the City's Disability Committee. The attached proposed
Ordinance incorporates the recommendation of the Finance Committee.
F:\ATTO\AGUR\RESOS-ORD\MEMOS\CIPOC Ordinance (Amendment to Ordinance (Second Reading 4-13-1 I)).doc
I Agenda Item 6- !3
Date 9-13 -11
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF
THE ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING ARTICLE Ill,
DIVISION 28 OF THE ClTY CODE, ENTITLED "CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE;"
AMENDING SECTION 2-190.127, ENTITLED "ESTABLISHMENT;
PURPOSE; MEMBERSHIP," BY ADDING A NON-VOTING EX-
OFFlClO MEMBER WHO IS EITHER A MEMBER OF THE
DISABLED COMMUNITY OR HAS SPECIAL KNOWLEDGE OF
AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA) ISSUES; AND
PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; REPEALER; SEVERABILITY;
AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, currently, the Capital Improvement Projects Oversight Committee consists of
nine (9) voting members who serve in an advisory capacity to the City Commission and
Administration in matters pertaining to the oversight and successful implementation of capital
improvement projects in the City; and
WHEREAS, it is deemed beneficial to expand the membership of the Committee to include
an additional non-voting ex-officio member who is either a member of the disabled community or
has special knowledge of Americans with Disabilities Act issues to provide accessibility-related input
to the Committee.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF
THE ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA:
SECTION 1.
That Chapter 2, Article Ill, Division 28, Section 2-190.127 of the Code of the City of Miami
Beach, Florida, is hereby amended as follows:
DIVISION 28. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS OVERSIGHT COMMllTEE
Sec. 2-190.127. Establishment; purpose; membership.
(a) The mayor and city commission hereby establish a capital improvement projects oversight
committee for the purpose of serving as an advisory body to the city commission and city
administration in matters pertaining to the oversight and successful implementation of capital
improvement projects initiated and undertaken by the City of Miami Beach including, without
limitation, the proposed obligation bond funded projects approved by the mayor and city
commission pursuant to Resolution Nos. 99-23299, 99-23300, and 99-23301, adopted on
September 17,1999, and as same may be amended from time to time.
(b) The capital improvement projects oversight committee shall consist of nine voting members,
eight of whom shall be appointed by the city commission as a whole (at-large appointees)
and one non-voting ex-officio member who shall be an at-larqe apoointee selected from
three nominees ~roposed bv the city's accessibilitv committee or its successor committee;
provided however, that the mavor or anv citv commissioner mav supplement the committee's
suqqested nominees and. if a member is not approved from the accessibilitv committee's
recommended nominees or anv of the nominees proposed bv the mavor or the individual citv
commissioners, then the accessibilitv committee shall submit new nominees for
consideration until a suitable replacement has been found to fill the existinq vacancy. The
membership of the capital improvement projects oversight committee shall further be
comprised as follows:
(1) The mayor or hislher designee, who shall sit as a voting member of the committee,
and shall also serve as chairperson of the committee;
(2) At least two members shall be selected with experience in one of the following
technical fields:
a. Engineering;
b. Architecture andlor landscape architecture; or
c. Historic preservation;
(3) At least two members shall be selected with experience in one of the following
technical fields:
a. Constructionlgeneral contractor; or
b. Developer;
(4) Two members shall be selected with experience in the following technical field
andlor the following category:
a. Capital budgeting andlor finance; or
b. Citizen-at-large; &
(5)
. . Two members shall be selected from any of the technical experience
-forth in subsections (2) or (3) above;; and
L61 The non-votinq ex-officio member shall be either a member of the disabled
communitv or a person with special knowledge of Americans with Disabilities Act
IADA) issues in order to provide accessibilitv-related input to the committee.
SECTION 2. REPEALER
All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith be and the same are hereby
repealed.
SECTION 3. SEVERABILITY
If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is held to be invalid or
unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, then said holding shall in no way affect the
validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance.
SECTION 4. CODIFICATION.
It is the intention of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami Beach, and it is
hereby ordained that the provisions of this ordinance shall become and be made a part of the Code
of the City of Miami Beach, Florida. The sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or relettered
to accomplish such intention, and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section", "article," or
other appropriate word.
SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE
This Ordinance shall take effect ten days following adoption.
PASSED and ADOPTED this day of ,2011.
ATTEST:
MAYOR
CITY CLERK
F:\atto\AGUR\RESOS-ORD\CIPOC Ordinance (Amendment to Ordinance 12-2-1 O).doc
APPROVED AS TO /7 FMIM & LANGUAGE
MIAMIBEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33 139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti H. Bower and Memberqpf the City Commission
FROM: Jose Smith, City
DATE: A~ril 13, 201 1 SECOND READING AND
PUBLIC HEARING
SUBJECT: AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE CODE OF THE ClTY OF MIAMI
BEACH, BY AMENDING CHAPTER 2, "ADMINISTRATION," ARTICLE II, "CITY
COMMISSION," BY ENACTING A NEW SECTION 2-12, "MEETING
AGENDAS," REQUIRING PROPOSED ORDINANCES THAT APPEAR ON A
ClTY COMMISSION OR COMMISSION COMMITTEE AGENDA TO HAVE A
COMMISSIONER SPONSOR IDENTIFIED; PROVIDING FOR REPEALER;
CODIFICATION; SEVERABILITY; AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
RECOMMENDATION
The City Commission should open and continue this item pending completion of discussion at the Land
Use and Development Committee, which continued the item.
BACKGROUND
The subject ordinance was originally placed on the January 19, 201 1 agenda of the City Commission at
the request of Commission Wolfson. The Commission approved the ordinance on first reading. The
ordinance was discussed at the Land Use and Development Committee meeting of February 23,201 1,
and the Committee continued the item for further discussion to its March meeting, at which time it was
further continued for additional discussion.
The adoption of proposed ordinances is a legislative function vested by the City Charter in the City
Commission. The placement of ordinances on the City Commission agenda, or the agenda of City
Commission Committees, should have some oversight by the Mayor and members of the City
Commission. This oversight is efficiently and effectively accomplished by requiring the identification of a
Commission sponsor of any proposed ordinances at the time of its placement on the City Commission or
City Commission Committee agendas. Consistent with the City of Miami Beach Charter, this ordinance
will help uphold the principles of separation of powers, and checks and balances, and improve
transparency in government.
The Commission should consider the following exceptions to the ordinance:
1. Applications for amendments to the land development regulations filed by appointed boards or
property owners pursuant to section 1 18-1 62(a) or (b) of the City Code. These amendments arise from
consensus of the appointed land use boards, or from private applications from property owners.
2. Resolutions, discussion items, and referrals to boards or committees. If the concern is the
placement of items for first reading on a City Commission agenda by the Administration or the City
Agenda Item SC
Date $4-/3-//
March 9,201 1
Sponsorship Ordinance
Second Reading and Public Hearing
Page 2 of 2
Attorney's Office without review first by one or more members of the City Commission, these exceptions
identify items that don't require immediate legislative action by the City Commission, but rather involve
the referral of such items for further discussion by Commission Committees or the City's land use
boards.
One of the responsibilities of the City Attorney, according to the Charter, is to recommend to the City
Commission for adoption, "such measures as he or she may deem necessary or expedient." City
Charter, Section 3.01(e). As for amendments to the land development regulations, the City Code
requires: "Matters submitted by the city manager or city attorney shall first be referred to the city
commission." City Code, Section 1 18-1 62(a). Allowing the City Attorney, and by cooperation with the
City Manager, to put such items on the agenda for referral as may be "necessary or expedient," this
exception allows the City Attorney to fulfill his or her obligation without unnecessary procedural
complication.
Whether these amendments should also obtain a City Commission sponsor before proceeding is a policy
decision for the City Commission to make.
FISCAL IMPACT
In accordance with Charter Section 5.02, which requires that the "City of Miami Beach shall consider the
long term economic impact (at least 5 years) of proposed legislative actions," this shall confirm that the
City Administration evaluated the long term economic impact (at least 5 years) of this proposed
legislative action. The proposed ordinance, if enacted, would not have any long term economic impact
(at least 5 years) on the City or its budget.
CONCLUSION
The City Commission should open and continue this item pending completion of discussion at the Land
Use and Development Committee, which continued the item.
T:\AGENDA\2011\A-I 3-1 l\Sponsorship Ordinance Commn Memo 4-4-1 1 .doc
MIAMIBEACH
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR AND COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
Robert Parcher
Jose Smith, Esq.
FROM: Jonah Wolfson, Commission
DATE: January 10,201 1 u
SUBJECT: Agenda Item - Ordinance Regarding
Meeting Agendas
Please place the attached ordinance on the agenda for first reading. The ordinance
requires all legislation that is placed on any agenda of the City Commission to have a
commission sponsor. The City Charter is consistent with fhis concept as the Commission
is the only law making branch mentioned in that document.
If you have any questions, please contact Leonor Hernandez at extension 6437.
2- 12. Meeting Agendas.
Anv 13rouosed legislation or ordinance that appcars on the agenda of a City Com~~lission
Mcetin~ for discussion andlor approval by the Mayor and City Commission must have
the name of the Mayor andlor a City Com~nissioner olaccd aron~i~le~ztlv next to it as the
snonsor of the Ierrislation. This recluirernei~t also applies to ally agenda of a Comn~ittee of
tile City Commission.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF
MlAMl BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE CODE OF THE ClTY OF MlAMl
BEACH, BY AMENDING CHAPTER 2, "ADMINISTRATION," ARTICLE II,
"CITY COMMISSION," BY ENACTING A NEW SECTION 2-12, "MEETING
AGENDAS," REQUIRING PROPOSED ORDINANCES AND CHARTER
AMENDMENTS THAT APPEAR ON A CITY COMMISSION OR COMMISSION
COMMITTEE AGENDA TO HAVE A COMMISSIONER SPONSOR
IDENTIFIED; PROVIDING FOR REPEALER; CODIFICATION; SEVERABILITY;
AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the consideration and adoption of proposed ordinances and charter
amendments are a legislative function vested by the City Charter in the City Commission; and
WHEREAS, the placement of ordinances and charter amendments on the City
Commission agenda, or the agenda of City Commission Committees, should have some
oversight by the Mayor and members of the City Commission; and
WHEREAS, this oversight is efficiently and effectively accomplished by requiring the
identification of a Commission sponsor of any proposed ordinances and charter amendments at
the time of their placement on the City Commission or City Commission Committee agendas.
WHEREAS, consistent with the City of Miami Beach Charter, this ordinance will help
uphold the principles of separation of powers, and checks and balances, and improve
transparency in government; and
WHEREAS, this ordinance accomplishes the above objectives.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS
OF THE COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF MlAMl BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION ONE. Chapter 2, "Administration," Article 11, "City Commission," of the Miami Beach
' City Code, is hereby amended by the addition of a new Section 2-12, "Meeting Agendas," as
follows:
Sec. 2-12. Meeting Awendas.
2-1 2. Meeting Agendas.
(a) Statement of Legislative Intent: Consistent with the Citv of Miami Beach Charter, this
ordinance will help uphold the principles of separation of powers and checks and balances. It
will also lend to improving transparencv in government.
(b) Anv proposed ordinance or charter amendment that appears on the agenda of a City
Commission Meeting for discussion and/or approval bv the Mavor and Citv Commission must
have the name of the Mavor and/or a Citv Commissioner placed prominentlv next to it as the
sponsor of the legislation. This requirement also ap~lies to anv agenda of a Committee of the
Citv Commission.
[c) The following are excepted from the requirements of this section:
(1) Applications for amendments to the land development regulations filed by appointed
boards or propertv owners pursuant to section 11 8-1 62(a) or (b) of the Citv Code.
(2) Resolutions, discussion items, and referrals to boards or committees proposed by
the Citv Manager or Citv Attorney.
SECTION TWO. REPEALER.
All ordinances or parts of ordinances and all section and parts of sections in conflict herewith be
and the same are hereby repealed.
SECTION THREE. CODIFICATION.
It is the intention of the City Commission, and it is hereby ordained that the provisions of this
ordinance shall become and be made part of the Code of the City of Miami Beach as amended;
that the sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or relettered to accomplish such
intention; and that the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section" or other appropriate word.
SECTION FOUR. SEVERABILITY.
If any section, subsection, clause or provision of this Ordinance is held invalid, the remainder
shall not be affected by such invalidity.
SECTION FIVE. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Ordinance shall take effect ten days following adoption.
PASSED and ADOPTED this day of , 2011.
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
First Reading:
Second Reading:
MAYOR
APPROVED AS TO
FORM AND LANGUAGE
& FOR EXECUTION
T:\AGENDA\2011\4-13-1 l\Sponsorship Ordinance 03-15-201 1 .doc
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
An ordinance amending the criteria in the City Code for permanent parking space removals.
Key Intended Outcome Supported: I Maintain or Improve Traffic Flow. 1
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.):
74% of residents and 72% of businesses rate the availability of parking across the City as too little or much too
little. Availability of parking was one of the changes residents identified to Make Miami Beach better to live, work
Issue: I Should the City Commission approve an ordinance amending the criteria in the City Code for I
( permanent parking space removals? I
Item SummarylRecommendation:
SECOND READING PUBLIC HEARING
On September 27, 2010, the LUDC discussed strengthening the process by which permanent parking
spaces may be removed from City inventory, for instance by limiting the purpose andlor requiring
Commission approval.
I The Commission approved a proposal on First Reading on December 8,2010. I
At the January 19, 201 1 Commission meeting, the City Commission further directed the Administration
to further modify the proposed ordinance to prohibit such private requests for the removal of a parking
space or loading zone with the exception of those spaces removed specifically to create access to a
parking facility. On March 9, 201 1, the public hearing was again continued, to the April 13, 201 1
meeting, in order to permit staff to finalize language regarding what constituted a public purpose. The
attached ordinance reflects that newly updated language.
Administration Recommendation: Approve the ordinance, as revised, on second and final
hearing.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
I I I
Financial Information:
I L I I I
Total I
Financial Impact Summary:
Source of
Funds:
Citv Clerk's Office Leaislative Tracking: - - I Saul Frances, ext. 6483
1 Dep,)rtment Director Assistqpjfiity Manager Cmanager I
Approved
1
Amount Account
MIAMIBEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 331 39, www.rniarnibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the Cityymmission
FROM: City Manager Jorge M. Gonzalez
DATE: April 13, 201 1 S OND DING PUBLIC HEARING ?I*
SUBJECT: AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE ClTY
OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA AMENDING THE CODE OF THE ClTY OF
MIAMI BEACH, BY AMENDING CHAPTER 106, "TRAFFIC AND
VEHICLES," ARTICLE II, "METERED PARKING," DIVISION 1,
"GENERALLY" SECTION 106-55 (h)(2), "PARKING RATES, FEES, AND
PENALTIES," TO AMEND THE CRITERIA FOR PERMANENT PARKING
SPACE REMOVAL, PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION, REPEALER,
SEVERABILITY AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
The Administration recommends that the Mayor and Commission approve the
amendment of the ordinance, as revised, on second and final public hearing.
FIRST READING ON DECEMBER 8,2010
The Mayor and Commission approved the item on First Reading on December 8, 2010.
The City Commission further revised the proposed amendment to require a five-seventh
(517') vote of the City Commission for the permanent removal of a parking space.
COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING ON JANUARY 19,201 1 and MARCH 9,2011
On January 19, 201 1, the public hearing was opened and continued to March 9, 201 1,
with the Mayor and Commission directing the Administration to further modify the
proposed ordinance to prohibit such private requests for the removal of a parking space
or loading zone with the exception of those spaces removed specifically to create access
to a parking facility. On March 9, 201 1, the public hearing was again continued, to the
April 13, 2011 meeting, in order to permit staff to finalize language regarding what
constituted a public purpose. The attached ordinance reflects that newly updated
language.
ANALYSIS
On September 15, 2010, the Mayor and Commission referred the issue of permanent
parking space removals from City inventory to the Land Use and Development
Committee (LUDC). Subsequently, on September 27, 2010, the LUDC held a
discussion regarding strengthening the process by which permanent parking spaces
may be removed from City inventory, for instance by limiting the purpose andlor
requiring Commission approval.
April 13, 20 1 I
City Commission Memorandum
Parking Space Permanent Removal Code Amendment
Second and Final Public Hearing
Page 2 of 2
Section 106-55 of the City Code regulates parking rates, fees, and penalties generally,
and Section 106-55(h) specifically governs the removal of parking spaces, both
temporarily and permanently. To accommodate construction and other limited needs, the
City may temporarily remove parking meters, at a cost of $100.00 per space ($50.00 for
removal and $50.00 for replacement) plus the applicable daily space rental fees.
It is the policy of the City that permanent parking space removals requests are strongly
discouraged. Section 106-55(h) specifies that the fee for permanent removal of a
parking space is the same as the parking impact fee, or $35,000 per space. As these
requests have become more numerous, the City Commission has directed the
Administration to proceed with an amendment to the City Code prohibiting private
requests for the removal of a parking space or loading zone, with the exception of those
spaces removed specifically to create access to a parking facility.
Therefore, it is recommended that Section 106-55(h)(2) be amended to reflect as
follows, including the language specifying the public purposes for which spaces may be
removed and leaving the language regarding the fee associated with the removal of
parking spaces as it exists in the Code:
Section 106-55(h)(2) Permanent Parking Space or Loading Zone Removal:
Private requests for permanent parking space or loadina zone removal tqaesk
onlv be allowed for the purpose of creating access to an off-street parking facility aw
E,mnnl\r. Reauests for the permanent removal of a parkinn space or
loadinn zone for anv other reason shall be prohibited, except for the removal of
spaces as part of a neighborhood proiect that has an approved Basis of Design
Report, or for bus stops, taxi stands. City-sponsored transportation programs,
and similar public purposes. When ~ermitted. the fee for the private permanent
removal of a parking space shall be the same rate as the parking impact fee, or
$35,000.00 per space.
Fiscal Impact:
The City Code requires a payment of $35,000 for the removal of a parking space, which
is equivalent to the parking impact fee cost per parking space. While the $35,000
payment recuperates the City's capital cost for replacement of said parking space, all
revenues generated by the parking space, in perpetuity, are foregone. The average
revenue per metered parking space is estimated at $2,000, annually. Therefore, the
fiscal impact for the removal of a parking space is estimated at $2,000, annually, in
perpetuity.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF
MlAMl BEACH, FLORIDA AMENDING THE CODE OF THE ClTY OF MlAMl
BEACH, BY AMENDING CHAPTER 106, "TRAFFIC AND VEHICLES,"
ARTICLE II, "METERED PARKING," DIVISION 1, "GENERALLY" SECTION
106-55 (h)(2), "PERMANENT PARKING SPACE REMOVAL" TO AMEND THE
CRITERIA AND PROCEDURE FOR PERMANENT PARKING SPACE OR
LOADING ZONE REMOVAL, PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION, REPEALER,
SEVERABILITY AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, on September 15, 2010, the Mayor and Commission referred the issue of permanent
parking space removals from City inventory to the Land Use and Development Committee (LUDC); and
WHEREAS, on September 27, 2010, the LUDC held a discussion regarding strengthening the
process by which permanent parking spaces may be removed from City inventory, for instance by limiting
the purpose andlor requiring Commission approval; and
WHEREAS, Section 106-55 of the City Code regulates parking rates, fees, and penalties
generally, and Section 106-55(h) specifically governs the removal of parking spaces, both temporarily and
permanently; and
WHEREAS, while it is the policy of the City that permanent parking space removals requests are
strongly discouraged, requests for permanent removal have become more numerous; and
WHEREAS, the LUDC directed the Administration to proceed with an amendment to the City
Code requiring the removal of a parking space or loading zone to be approved by the City Commission,
with the exception of those spaces removed specifically to create access to a parking facility; and
WHEREAS, on October 27, 2010, the full City Commission ratified this directive from the LUDC
through approval of the LUDC Committee report on the Consent Agenda; and
WHEREAS, at the January 19, 201 1 Commission meeting, the City Commission further directed
the Administration to further modify the proposed ordinance to prohibit such private requests for the
removal of a parking space or loading zone with the exception of those spaces removed specifically to
create access to a parking facility.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MlAMl BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. Chapter 106, "Traffic and Vehicles," Article II, "Metered Parking," Division 1, "Generally,"
Section 106-55, "Parking Rate Fees, and Penalties," Subsection (h)(2), "Permanent Parking Space
Removal" of the Code of the City of Miami Beach, Florida, is hereby amended, as follows:
Chapter 106. Traffic and Vehicles
Set. 106-55. Parking rates, fees, and penalties.
(h) Permanent Parking Space or Loadina Zone Removal:
(2) Private reauests for Peermanent parking space nrloadina zone removal wquests shall
onlv be allowed for the DurDose of creatina access to an off-street ~arkina facilitv aw-&m&
. . ermanent removal of a ~arkina space or loadina zone for any
other reason shall be ~ro-t for the mn.oval of sr2zs.w as part of a n-
fee for the permanent removal of a parking space shall be the same rate as the parking
impact fee, or $35,000.00 per space.
SECTION 2. CODIFICATION.
It is the intention of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami Beach, and it is hereby
ordained that the provisions of this ordinance shall become and be made part of the Code of the City of
Miami Beach, Florida. The sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or relettered to accomplish
such intention, and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section", "article", or other appropriate word.
SECTION 3. REPEALER.
All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith be and the same are hereby repealed.
SECTION 4. SEVERABILITY.
If any section, subsection, clause or provision of this Ordinance is held invalid, the remainder
shall not be affected by such invalidity.
SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Ordinance shall take effect ten (10) days following adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of ,201 1.
ATTEST:
MAYOR MATTI HERRERA BOWER
ROBERT PARCHER,CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO
FORM & LANGUAGE
Underscore denotes new language
denotes deleted language
Double Underscore denotes additional new language after first reading
T:\AGENDA\2011\4-13-1 l\Parking Space Removal Amendment Apr 13 201 1 ord.doc
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Maintain strong growth management policies; Protect historic building stock
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.):
47.6% suggested the effort put forth by the City to regulate development is "about the right amount,"
nearly one-third, 29.6%, indicated "too little" effort is being put forth by the City in this area.
Issue:
Shall the Mayor and City Commission open and continue the first reading public hearing, pending a
recommendation from the Land Use and Development Committee?
Item Summary/Recommendation:
The Administration recommends that the Mayor and City Commission open and continue the first
reading public hearing to the May 11, 201 1 meeting.
During the November 17, 2010 City Commission meeting, the Mayor and Commission continued
the first reading public hearing to the January 19, 2011 Commission meeting and referred the Alton
Road Historic Buffer Overlay District to the Land Use and Development Committee for further
discussion. On December 13,2010 the Land Use and Development Committee heard public testimony
and discussed the proposed ordinance; then they continued the discussion to their next meeting on
January 31, 201 1. The matter was continued at the January 31, 201 1, February 23, 201 1 and March
16, 201 1 meetings and is currently scheduled to be heard by the Committee at 5:00 p.m. time certain
on April 21, 201 1.
The proposed zoning overlay district will modify the existing CD-2 Commercial Medium Intensity
district that is adjacent to lower intensity RS-4 and RM-1 residential buildings in the Flamingo Park
historic district and the Palm View historic district on the east side of Alton Road between 6 St and
Dade Blvd. The overlay district regulations are intended to achieve a more compatible relationship of
scale and massing between the Alton Road corridor and the adjoining residential neighborhoods, to
promote mixed-use development that makes efficient use of parking, to minimize the concentration of
impacts from intense retail and restaurant development and to encourage smaller neighborhood-
oriented uses.
The proposed overlay district will eliminate the .5 FAR bonus for residential uses, regulate building
form through changes to height and setbacks, introduce certain restrictions on the size and location of
commercial uses, and regulate lots containing contributing buildings in the historic district.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
Plannina Board Action: November 17,2009 recommended approval as amended by a vote of 5 to 0
April 27,201 0 recommended approval as amended by a vote of 5 to 0.
August 24, 2010 motion to recommend approval as amended failed by a vote of 3 to 2.
Financial Information:
I source of Amount Account
OBPl Total
Financial Impact Summary: This ordinance is also expected to generally enhance property
values throughout the neighborhood by permitting appropriately scaled infill development and by
encouraging the development of smaller, locally oriented businesses..
Funds: 1
2
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking:
[ Joyce Meyers, Planning Department
N/A
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33 139, www.rniarnibeachfl.gov
MEMO # COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
DATE: April 13, 201 1
SUBJECT: FIRST READING PUBLIC HEARING - Alton Road Historic District Buffer
Overlay zoning district
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF
MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE CODE OF THE ClTY OF MIAMI
BEACH, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING CHAPTER 142, "ZONING DISTRICTS AND
REGULATIONS," ARTICLE Ill, "OVERLAY DISTRICTS," CREATING DIVISION
8 "ALTON ROAD - HISTORIC DISTRICT BUFFER OVERLAY," BY INCLUDING
SECTION 142-858 "LOCATION AND PURPOSE," AND SECTION 142-859
"DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS," INCLUDING AMONG OTHER PROVISIONS
REGULATIONS ON MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA RATIO; MAXIMUM BUILDING
HEIGHT; MINIMUM SETBACKS; BUILDING SEPARATION;-DEMOLITION OR
ADDITIONS TO CONTRIBUTING BUILDINGS IN AN HISTORIC DISTRICT; AND
LAND USE REGULATIONS FOR LOCATION OF RETAIL USES,
RESTAURANTS, BARS, ENTERTAINMENT ESTABLISHMENTS, ALCOHOLIC
BEVERAGE ESTABLISHMENTS AND SIMILAR USES; REQUIRING
CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL OF SUCH USES IN EXCESS OF 20,000 SQ.
FT.; AND PROHIBITING ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE AND ENTERTAINMENT
ESTABLISHMENTS IN OPEN AREAS WITH EXCEPTIONS AS PRESCRIBED IN
THE ORDINANCE; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; REPEALER;
SEVERABILITY; AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
The Administration recommends that the Mayor and City Commission open and continue
the first reading public hearing to the May 11, 2011 meeting. The Land Use and
Development Committee will discuss the proposed ordinance at their April 21, 2011
meeting.
BACKGROUND
In the Summer of 2006 the Historic Preservation Board initiated the westward expansion of
the Flamingo Park Local Historic District to the east right-of-way line of Alton Road between
6th Street and 14'~ Street in order to protect the character of the adjacent National Register
Historic District as well as the historically significant but yet unprotected properties along this
stretch of Alton Road. It was noted by the board that recent commercial development trends
along Alton Road could significantly adversely impact the quality of life and historic integrity
of the National Register Historic District thereby undermining the cultural tourism appeal and
quality of life of the city.
Alton Road Historic District Buffer Overlay
April I 3, 20 1 I
Page 2 of 8
At the same time the Historic Preservation Board requested the Planning Department to
initiate a major planning study of the Alton Road Corridor, including both sides of the road
between sth Street and Michigan Avenue, which should include an analysis and evaluation
of existing uses and conditions, historically significant properties, permitted building heights,
allowable FAR, parking conditions and requirements, the efficacy of current zoning, and the
character of the public right-of-way with regard to pedestrian amenities, convenient means
of transit, and quality of landscape.
The board further requested that the Planning Department organize and advertise a series
of community planning workshops, inviting members of the Historic Preservation Board and
the Planning Board, in order to gain public input and insight from local business owners and
residents so that the Department might develop a comprehensive set of planning and zoning
recommendations for future development and preservation along the corridor that would
enable healthy future growth and development without overwhelming or adversely impacting
the historic character of the area.
On January 16,2008, the Mayor and City Commission approved Ordinance No. 2008-3592,
expanding the boundaries of the Flamingo Park Historic District westward expansion to
Alton Road between 8 Street and 14 Street; and on January 28, 2009, the Mayor and City
Commission approved Ordinance No. 2008-3592, expanding the boundaries of the
Flamingo Park Historic District westward expansion to Alton Road between 6 Street and 8
Street
The Planning Department conducted an analysis of existing conditions, issues and
opportunities in the Alton Road corridor and held a community planning workshop on August
20, 2008 to receive community input on land use, zoning, business development, parking,
transit and pedestrian/bicycle amenities. On January 27, 2009, the Planning Department
presented preliminary findings and recommendations for the Alton Road Neighborhood
Planning Study to the Planning Board. On February 26, 2009, the Planning Department and
the Planning Board held a second community planning workshop on the Alton Road
Neighborhood Planning Study to receive community input. Both community planning
workshops were advertised by mailed notice to propertyowners, newspaper notice, and City
email newsletters.
On March 2, 2009, the Land Use and Development Committee adopted a motion directing
the Planning Department to prepare an ordinance that would rezone the east side of Alton
Road between 6 Street and 16 Street from the CD-2 district to the CD-1 district, and to
review the uses and to the extent that there is a floor area incentive for mixed-use buildings,
require that the additional FAR be set aside for affordable or workforce housing, and to refer
the item to the Planning Board. On March 18, 2009, the Mayor and City Commission
discussed the motion from the Land Use and Development Committee and clarified their
intent to consider other options, including an overlay district that would remove the floor area
ratio incentive for mixed-use projects.
During the Planning Board meetings on April 21, 2009, May 26, 2009 and August 25, 2009,
the Planning Department staff held additional detailed discussions with the Board on the
proposed zoning modifications for the east side of Alton Road in the Flamingo Park Historic
District. The proposed Alton Road- Historic District Buffer Overlay is the result of those
discussions.
Alfon Road Hisforic Districf Buffer Overlay
April 13, 201 I
Page 3 of 8
On October 27, 2009, the Planning Board held a public hearing on the proposed overlay
district and heard testimony from residents who were unhappy with some aspects of the
draft ordinance. The Planning Board continued the hearing to the November 17 meeting and
asked staff to meet with the concerned residents to try to resolve their issues. The Planning
Department held two meetings with the residents on October 30 and November 9, 2009.
The public hearing at the Planning Board meeting on November 17, 2009 resulted in several
additional amendments to the proposed ordinance. The Planning Board recommended
approval of the amended overlay district by a vote of 5 to 0.
Subsequently, the Administration made a determination that the amendments added to the
ordinance during the November 17'~ public hearing, specifically amendments dealing with
land use restrictions, may require a different type of notice to property owners than was
provided for the previous public hearings. To avoid any legal challenges, the overlay district
was brought back to the Planning Board in the same form as it was approved in November,
2009, with 30-day notice mailed to all property owners in and within 375 feet of the proposed
overlay district.
On February 25, 2010, the Land Use and Development Committee discussed the proposed
Alton Road Historic District Buffer Overlay. The Committee recommended that the ordinance
be approved, and indicated that it does not need to come back to them unless there is a
major material change made by the Planning Board.
On April 27, 2010, the Planning Board held a second public hearing on the proposed Alton
Road Historic District Buffer Overlay district after the required 30-day mailed notice. The
Planning Board voted 5 - 0 to recommend approval of the ordinance with an amendment
that deleted the "no variances" provision. Subsequently, at their meeting on May 25, 2010,
the Board voted 3 - 2 to reconsider their recommendation and to schedule the item for
rehearing.
On August 24, 2010, the Planning Board held a third public hearing on the proposed Alton
Road Historic District Buffer Overlay district after the required 30-day mailed notice. Based
on objections from commercial property owners who were not present during the first two
hearings, the Board voted separately on each of several amendments to the ordinance.
Individual amendments that were approved by the Planning Board have been incorporated
into the ordinance. However, a final vote to recommend approval of the entire ordinance, as
amended, failed by a vote of 3-2 (four affirmative votes are required to approve a request
before the board that requires City Commission approval).
On November 1, 201 0, the Administration hosted a meeting between attorneys representing
certain property owners who objected to the ordinance and representatives from the
neighborhoods in an attempt to forge a compromise on several limited points of
disagreement. As a result of that meeting, the Administration is proposing an alternate
version of the ordinance that we believe satisfies the most critical objections from both
sides; while at the same time it represents sound planning principles and the interests of the
city-at-large. A summary chart of the disputed issues and proposed changes to the
ordinance is enclosed as Attachment A, and each issue is discussed in the analysis below.
During the November 17, 2010 City Commission meeting, the Mayor and Commission
continued the first reading public hearing to the January 19, 201 1 Commission meeting and
referred the Alton Road Historic Buffer Overlay District to the Land Use and Development
Committee for further discussion. On December 13, 2010 the Land Use and Development
Alfon Road Historic District Buffer Overlay
April 13, 201 1
Page 4 of 8
Committee heard public testimony and discussed the proposed ordinance; then they
continued the discussion to their next meeting on January 31, 201 1. The matter was
continued at the January 31, 201 1 and February 23, 201 1 meetings and is currently
scheduled to be heard by the Committee at 5:00 p.m. time certain on March 16, 201 1.
ANALYSIS
The purpose of the Alton Road - Historic District Buffer Overlay District is to minimize the
impacts of development along Alton Road on residential properties located in the Flamingo
Park Historic District and the Palm View Historic District. Specifically the overlay district is
intended to apply to properties zoned CD-2 Commercial Medium Intensity that are adjacent
to lower intensity RS-4 and RM-1 residential buildings in designated local historic districts.
The overlay district regulations are intended to achieve a more compatible relationship of
scale and massing between the Alton Road corridor and the adjoining residential
neighborhoods.
The locations of the proposed overlay district are as follows (see also attached map):
Area 1 includes those properties fronting on the east side of Alton Road from 6 Street to 11
Street. Existing zoning is CD-2 adjacent to RM-1 in the Flamingo Park Historic
District.
Area 2 includes those properties fronting on the east side of Alton Road from 14 Street to 15
Street. Existing zoning is CD-2 adjacent to RS-4 in the Flamingo Park Historic
District.
Area 3 includes those properties fronting on the east side of Alton Road from 17 Street to
the Collins Canal, except for the corner property adjacent to 17 Street. Existing
zoning is CD-2 adjacent to RS-4 in the Palm View Historic District.
The proposed ordinance limits the floor area ratio (FAR) to a maximum of 1.5 by removing
the existing bonus of .5 FAR for mixed-use buildings. This will make new construction along
Alton Road more compatible in scale and intensity with the adjoining historic neighborhood
zoned RM-1, which has existing buildings that range from 0.5 to 1.25 FAR with a few
scattered sites over 1.25 FAR. During the planning process, various alternatives were
considered, including down-zoning from CD-2 to CD-1, which has a maximum FAR of 1.0
with a mixed-use bonus of .25 FAR. After much discussion and analysis, it was ultimately
decided that 1.5 FAR is suitable for Alton Road development. This is based on many
factors, including the importance of Alton Road as a commercial corridor and the existing
bus and potential future transit linkages (e.g. Bus Rapid Transit). From an urban design
viewpoint, the proposed overlay district forms a gradual stepping up of the intensity from
RM-I on the residential neighborhood to the east, to a maximum of 1.5 FAR on the east
side of Alton Road, to a maximum of 2.0 FAR on the west side of Alton Road, to a maximum
of 2.25 FAR (2.75 for large lots) on the Bayfront in RM-3. However, it must be noted that
FAR alone does not define the building envelop that is necessary to assure compatibility
with the historic district. The height and setback regulations described below are also
necessary to achieve this goal.
Another alternative that was discussed during the planning process was to keep a FAR
bonus for residential uses in a mixed-use building, but to make the bonus an incentive to
provide affordable or workforce housing. The Planning Board did not support this
recommendation due to their consensus to limit FAR to a maximum of 1.5.
Alton Road Historic District Buffer Overlay
April 13, 201 I
Page 5 of 8
The maximum building height in the Planning Board recommended ordinance is 43 feet
along Alton Road and a maximum of 23 feet in the rear portion of the lots within 50 feet from
the rear property line for lots abutting an alley (Lenox Court) and within 60 feet from the RM-
1 district for blocks with no alley between 8 Street and 11 Street. The 23 feet height limit in
the rear of the lots is based upon maintaining consistency with the predominant 2-story
height of existing buildings in the RM-1 district. For lots adjoining single family districts, the
23 feet height limit will also ensure a compatible transition in the rear portion of the
commercial property. The administration has an alternative recommendation for maximum
building height of 50 feet along the front portion of the lots fronting Alton Road and 28 feet in
the rear portion of the lots. This change is based upon information supplied by property
owners concerning industry standards for minimum ceiling heights in new retail, restaurant
and office buildings. However, this recommendation is subject to building separation
requirements for larger site development (see below) to prevent monolithic buildings at 50
feet height.
The building height limitations in the proposed overlay district are coupled with rear yard
setbacks to achieve the appropriate buffer between the RM-IIRS-4 districts and the CD-2
district. Proposed minimum building setbacks in the rear yard are 25 feet for lots with no
alley and 5 feet for lots with an alley. The existing CD-2 and CD-1 zoning districts have a 5
feet minimum rear setback irrespective of whether there is an alley (20 feet width) to provide
adequate separation between the buildings.
The overlay district proposes a minimum 5 feet setback on the front and side facing a street.
This is necessary to provide adequate pedestrian circulation space to support alternative
modes of transportation and sustain a vibrant commercial district.
The overlay district as amended by the Planning Board has no minimum interior side yard
setback, nor does it have provisions for building separation, lot aggregation or view corridors
on larger lot assemblages. Instead, the Planning Board version of the ordinance contains
language requiring architectural treatments on the faqades of buildings to be reflective of the
50 feet wide lot development pattern that is predominant in the historic district. This could
be accomplished by such things as small variations in setbacks, window placement, or
vertical and horizontal design elements on the faqade, subject to design review. This was
the recommendation of the Planning Board in November 2009 following extensive workshop
discussions wherein the Planning Department staff had recommended various formulas for
requiring a complete physical separation between adjacent buildings on the upper stories
above ground level retail. The intent was to prevent a continuous wall of 40-50 feet tall
buildings that would be inconsistent with the small lot development pattern of the historic
residential neighborhoods. The current recommendation from the Administration is retain the
language developed by the Planning Board with the clarification of "east and west" facades,
and to add a paragraph requiring building separation under limited circumstances as follows:
"Any development greater than 43 feet in height on a lot with more than 150 linear feet of
frontage along Alton Road shall have a separation between all portions of the structure
above a height of 28 feet, so that there is a minimum 15 feet wide view corridor running from
east to west at least every 150 linear feet along the Alton Road corridor".
The overlay district contains 9 contributing buildings in the Flamingo Park Historic District.
Those contributing buildings are proposed to be subject to two of the same conditions
applied to historic buildings in the adjoining RM-1 zoning district. Those include a prohibition
on demolition of architecturally significant portions of the building and prohibition of building
within a historic courtyard.
Alton Road Historic District Buffer Overlay
April 13, 201 I
Page 6 of 8
Residents of the Flamingo Park neighborhood were concerned about impacts of noise and
traffic from intensive commercial uses. Therefore, the proposed overlay district modifies the
underlying CD-2 land uses in several ways. One of them is by prohibiting retail uses,
restaurants, bars, entertainment establishments and similar uses at any level above the
ground floor. An exception is provided for loft or mezzanine within the interior of a ground
floor commercial space, provided that the loft or mezzanine does not exceed one third of the
floor area of the store. Based upon objections from property owners, the current
Administration recommended ordinance deletes the language limiting the loft or mezzanine
to one third of the floor area, and replaces it with language permitting "a second floor within
a ground floor commercial space, if it functions as one single contiguous establishment and
is only accessible to the public through the contiguous ground floor commercial space." This
would allow two full floors inside any given retail store, similar to CB2 or Borders book
stores, but it would not allow multilevel shopping centers.
No alcoholic beverage establishment, entertainment establishment or restaurant may be
licensed as a main permitted or accessory use in any open area above the ground floor (any
area that is not included in the FAR calculations) or at ground level in any open area within
125 feet of a residential district, except that residents of a multifamily (apartment or
condominium) building or hotel guests may use these areas, which may include a pool or
other recreational amenities, for their individual, personal use with appropriate buffering as
determined by the Planning Department or applicable land use board with jurisdiction. No
variance to this provision would be permitted.
In accord with the objective of encouraging locally oriented retail and service uses that are
compatible in scale and character with the historic districts, the overlay district requires
conditional use approval for any individual retail, restaurant, bar, entertainment
establishment or similar establishment in excess of a certain size threshold. The Planning
Dept. conducted a detailed survey of businesses in the Alton Road corridor and determined
that a threshold of 5,000 sq. ft. generally separates businesses that primarily serve the
neighborhood population from businesses that primarily serve the entire city and beyond. To
provide a generous margin of error, staff doubled the recommended threshold to 10,000 sq.
ft. for conditional use approval. The Planning Board changed the conditional use threshold
from 10,000 sq. ft. to 20,000 sq. ft. by a 4-2 vote at their meeting on August 24, 2010, based
upon objections from property owners. The Administration's recommendation is to keep the
original threshold of 10,000 sq. ft. per establishment for conditional use approval based
upon the analysis conducted by the Planning Department.
A majority of the discussions during the community workshops and Planning Board
meetings centered upon the blocks between 6th and I lth Streets. However, it was noted
that there is an incompatible scale relationship between the CD-2 zoning district and
adjoining RS-4 single family zoning districts located in the 1400 block and the 1700 block.
Down-zoning to CD-1 was considered for these two blocks, but the Planning Department
recommends that the proposed overlay district will provide a more effective buffer than CD-1
due to the height and setback regulations in the overlay district. At their August 24, 2010
meeting, the Planning Board voted 5-1 to remove lots 15 and 16 from the overlay district
(northeast corner of 17 Street and Alton Road).
FISCAL IMPACT
In accordance with Charter section 5.02, which requires that the "City of Miami Beach shall
consider the long-term economic impact (at least 5 years) of proposed legislative actions,"
Alton Road Historic District Buffer Overlay
April 13, 201 1
Page 7 of 8
this shall confirm that the City Administration evaluated the long-term economic impact (at
least 5 years) of this proposed legislative action, and determined that there will be no
measurable impact on the City's budget. By nature, a zoning district amendment does not
have direct costs to the City, but it may affect long term revenue from property tax, sales tax
and other revenue streams. Although some property owners have argued that the proposed
overlay zoning will diminish their property values, the Administration believes that this is
claim is highly speculative, especially if the Administration's alternate ordinance is adopted.
The Administration's proposal would preserve all of the most valuable development rights on
each parcel, with the exception of removing the .5 bonus FAR for residential use mixed with
commercial uses. Since this is a bonus and not as-of-right floor area, it is difficult to say
whether any real development would be sacrificed. There are no existing buildings in the
district that have used this bonus. Counterbalancing any potential loss of development
rights on private property is the companion ordinance creating Parking District #5, which will
reduce minimum parking requirements thereby creating significant savings to private
property owners in the cost of providing parking spaces. This ordinance is also expected to
generally enhance property values throughout the neighborhood by permitting appropriately
scaled infill development and by encouraging the development of smaller, locally oriented
businesses.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION
November 17,2009 recommended approval as amended by a vote of 5 to 0
April 27, 2010 recommended approval as amended by a vote of 5 to 0.
August 24, 201 0 motion to recommend approval as amended failed by a vote of 3 to 2.
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends that the Mayor and City Commission open and continue
the item to a date certain of April 13, 201 1.
t:\agendaEOl1\4-13-1 I\alton rd historic buffer overlay merno.docx
Alton Road Hisforic District Buffer Overlay
April 1 3, 20 I 1
Page 8 of 8
Proposed Alton Road Historic District Buffer Overlay
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
An Ordinance Of The Mayor And City Commission Of The City Of Miami Beach, Amending The City's
Comprehensive Plan To Include New Or Revised And/or Updated Goals, Objectives And Policies In
Relation To Certain Items Identified In The City's 2005-2007 Evaluation And Appraisal Report (EAR).
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Regulatory. Required by State Statutes
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): Regulatory
Issue:
Should the City Commission adopt and direct the City Administration to submit the adopted amendments to
DCA and any other required state and local agencies.
Item SummarylRecommendation:
SECOND READING AND ADOPTION PUBLIC HEARING
The proposed EAR-based amendments encompass all the Elements of the Comprehensive Plan except
the Public School Facilities Element for which amendments were not necessary. These amendments are
based on the evaluation of existing policies as recommended in the EAR, including a new Transportation
Element which replaced the Traffic Circulation, Mass Transit and Ports and Aviation Facilities Elements.
The Department of Community Affairs completed its review of the proposed amendments for consistency
with Rule 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code, and Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes and issued its
Objections, Recommendations and Comments Report (ORC) outlining its findings, which is dated
November 19,2010. The Administration has responded to issues raised in the ORC Report and modified
the language in the amendments as necessary. Throughout the process of addressing the Objections in
the ORC Report, Planning Department staff has been in contact with DCA staff to ensure that as amended,
the Plan will be in compliance with Statutes and Rules, and a Notice of Intent (NOI) will be issued, finding
the Plan in compliance.
The Administration recommends that the City Commission approve the proposed ordinance on second
reading public hearing and direct the Administration to transmit all applicable documents to the Department
of Community Affairs (DCA) and other required reviewing agencies.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
I The Planning Board held a special meeting on August 10, 2010, duly advertised pursuant to the )
requirements of State Statutes for Comprehensive Plan Amendments; and by a 4-1 vote (2 members
absent) recommended that the City Commission direct the Administration to transmit all applicable
documents to the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) and other required reviewing agencies.
The City Commission approved the amendments on first reading public hearing on September 15,2010.
Financial Impact Summary:
The proposed Ordinance may have a fiscal impact depending on the cost of capital improvements that
may be necessary to comply with the Goals, Objectives and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking:
I Richard Lorber or Mercy Lamazares
I OBPl
BEACH ,,,
Total
@ MIAMIBEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 331 39, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager w
DATE: April 13, 201 1
Second Readinn Public Hearing
SUBJECT: Adoption of Proposed amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE ClTY
OF MIAMI BEACH, ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY'S
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO INCLUDE NEW OR REVISED AND/OR
UPDATED GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES IN THE FOLLOWING
ELEMENTS; FUTURE LAND USE, TRANSPORTATION, HOUSING,
INFRASTRUCTURE, CONSERVATION1 COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT,
RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS,
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION; ALL IN
RELATION TO CERTAIN ITEMS IDENTIFIED IN THE CITY'S 2005-2007
EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT (EAR) INCLUDING RESPONSES
TO THE OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATION AND COMMENTS REPORT
(ORC); AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE ClTY ADMINISTRATION
TO SUBMIT THE ADOPTED AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND ANY OTHER REQUIRED
STATE AND LOCAL AGENCIES; PROVIDING FOR REPEALER,
SEVERABILITY, CODIFICATION AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
The Administration recommends that the City Commission approve the proposed
ordinance on second reading public hearing and direct the Administration to submit all
applicable documents to the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) and other required
reviewing agencies.
BACKGROUND
Chapter 163.3191, F.S., requires that local governments adopt an Evaluation and
Appraisal Report (EAR) once every 7 years assessing the progress in implementing the
local government's comprehensive plan (Plan). The latest EAR was done during the
period of 2005-2007 and adopted by the City Commission on September 26, 2007. The
EAR included a number of recommendations, which gave the City the opportunity to
revise the Plan to address changing issues and conditions. Although there are other
opportunities to periodically revise the Plan, these revisions often occur as the result of
outside development applications.
Cify Commission Memorandum
Comp Plan EAR-based amendments - Pd reading public hearing
April 13, 201 I Page 2
A number of public discussions occurred during Planning Board meetings, which
discussions were generally advertised as part of the Board's agenda items, opening an
avenue for public input and discussion. Following the recommendations of the EAR,
amendments to the different elements of the Plan are being proposed, including some
that are non-substantive, such as updating obsolete language (i.e., changing names of
agencies or updating applicable/correct references to the City Code).
ANALYSIS
The proposed EAR-based amendments encompass all the Elements of the
Comprehensive Plan except the Public School Facilities Element for which amendments
were not necessary. These amendments are based on the evaluation of existing
policies as recommended in the EAR, including a new Transportation Element which
replaced the Traffic Circulation, Mass Transit and Ports and Aviation Facilities Elements.
At the September 15, 2010 meeting, the City Commission directed the administration to
transmit the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments to the Department of
Community Affairs (DCA) and other required reviewing agencies. DCA completed its
review of the proposed amendment for consistency with Rule 9J-5, Florida
Administrative Code, and Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes and issued its
Objections, Recommendations and Comments Report (ORC) outlining its findings, which
is dated November 19, 2010 and is attached. The response to the ORC and how the
proposed EAR-based amendments have been modified in response to the report are
included in the amendment package. A summary of the response is attached to
facilitate the review.
Some highlights of the Objections in the ORC Report are as follows:
The proposed policies in the EAR-based amendments did not fulfill the City's
responsibility as an Energy Economic Zone (EEZ) Pilot Program community. To this
end Policy 3.4 of the Transportation Plan was amended to include the different
initiatives that would integrate multimodal transportation facilities.
Some of the policies being amended included permissive words such as "encourage"
and "promote" and did not include measurable, intermediate end results to be
achieved. The policies affected were corrected to include mandatory language such
as "shall" and in the case of Policy 8.2 of the Housing Element, initiatives found in
the City's "Green Building Ordinance such as priority review and inspections of
"green" projects, and refunds of application and review fees within the limits of funds
appropriated annually by the City Commission.
Inclusion of concurrency related facilities, including the timing requirements
established by Statute and Rule in Land Use Element Policy 6.2.
Correction of the definition of Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA) based on the
definition pursuant to Section 163.3178(2)(h) and inclusion of the new CHHA
Category 1 Evacuation Zone. This new map was prepared by the South Florida
Regional Planning Council based on the Statewide Regional Evacuation Plan,
released in December 201 0.
Cify Commission Memorandum
Comp Plan EAR-based amendments - Pd reading public hearing
April 13, 20 1 1 Page 3
a Clarification of undefined or ambiguous terms, inclusion of dates defining deadlines,
such as "by 2012" or similar.
Identify the City as an Energy Economic Zone the Future Land Use Map of the City's
Comprehensive Plan; revise the Future Land Use Element to include policy
consistent with the City's application; and include the Sustainability Plan in the Data
and Analysis portion of the plan.
Throughout the process of addressing the Objections in the ORC Report, Planning
Department staff has been in contact with DCA staff to ensure that as amended, the
Plan will be in compliance with Statutes and Rules, and a Notice of Intent (NOI) will be
issued, finding the Plan in compliance. Due to the voluminous nature of these
documents, a CD containing the complete documents was submitted with the recent
Letter to Commission. Notwithstanding, hard copies are available to you upon request.
In addition, the documents are included in the agenda materials on the City's website for
the April 13, 201 1 City Commission meeting.
It should also be noted that the City's Water Supply Plan, adopted by the City
Commission on October 27, 2010, Ordinance No. 2010-3704 has been found in
compliance as of December 15, 2010. All the proposed amendments proposed as part
of the Water Supply Plan are now part of the City's Comprehensive Plan and therefore
are no longer shown underlined.
PLANNING BOARD
The Planning Board held a special meeting on August 10, 2010, duly advertised
pursuant to the requirements of State Statutes for Comprehensive Plan Amendments;
and by a 4-1 vote (2 members absent) recommended that the City Commission direct
the Administration to transmit all applicable documents to the Department of Community
Affairs (DCA) and other required reviewing agencies.
The City Commission approved the proposed amendments upon first reading public
hearing at its September 15, 2010 meeting.
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends that the City Commission adopt the proposed
ordinance, amending the City's Comprehensive Plan on second reading public hearing
and direct the Administration to submit all applicable documents to the Department of
Community Affairs (DCA) and other required reviewing agencies for final review and
finding that the amendment package is in compliance.
Pursuant to Chapter 163.3184 (15) (a), Florida Statutes, the procedure for transmittal of
a proposed plan amendment shall be by affirmative vote of not less than a majority of
the members of the governing body present at the hearing and shall be by ordinance.
The local governing body shall hold at least two advertised public hearings on the
proposed plan amendment as follows:
1. The first public hearing shall be held at the transmittal stage. It shall be held on a
weekday at least 7 days after the day that the first advertisement is published. This
public hearing took place during the City Commission meeting on September 15, 2010.
Cify Commission Memorandum
Comp Plan EAR-based amendmenfs - Pd reading public hearing
April 13, 201 1 Page 4
2. The second public hearing shall be held at the adoption stage and shall be held on a
weekday at least 5 days after the day that the second advertisement is published.
Although this section of the Statute is silent on the size requirement for the ad, in an
abundance of caution it is suggested that the ad be no less than 2 columns wide by 10
inches long in a standard size newspaper, and the headline in the advertisement shall
be in a type no smaller than 18 point. It should be noted that the advertisement for this
public hearing appeared in the "Local" section of the Miami Herald on Wednesday,
March 23, 201 1.
PL
JMGIJGGIRGUML
T:\AGENDA\2011\4-13-1 l\Comprehensive Plan-EAR based memo 2nd rdg.doc
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE ClTY
OF MIAMI BEACH, ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY'S
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO INCLUDE NEW OR REVISED AND/OR
UPDATED GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES IN THE FOLLOWING
ELEMENTS; FUTURE LAND USE, TRANSPORTATION, HOUSING,
INFRASTRUCTURE, CONSERVATION1 COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT,
RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS,
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION; ALL IN
RELATION TO CERTAIN ITEMS IDENTIFIED IN THE CITY'S 2005-2007
EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT (EAR) INCLUDING RESPONSES
TO THE OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATION AND COMMENTS REPORT
(ORC); AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY ADMINISTRATION
TO SUBMIT THE ADOPTED AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND ANY OTHER REQUIRED
STATE AND LOCAL AGENCIES; PROVIDING FOR REPEALER,
SEVERABILITY, CODIFICATION AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 163.31 91 (I), Florida Statutes, local governments are
required to prepare and adopt an Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) as one component of
the local planning process; and,
WHEREAS, at its September 26, 2007 meeting the City Commission adopted the EAR
which was determined to be sufficient to meet the requirements of Section 163.3191, Florida
Statutes; and
WHEREAS, the adopted EAR made certain recommendations for updates and
amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City of Miami Beach has proposed amendments to the policies of the
comprehensive plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission hereby finds that the adoption of this Ordinance is in
the best interest and welfare of the residents of the City; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission, upon first reading of this Ordinance, authorized
transmittal of the EAR-based amendments to the Comprehensive Plan to the Department of
Community Affairs and review agencies for the purpose of a review in accordance with Sections
163.31 84, 163.31 87, 163.31 89 and 163.31 91, Florida Statutes; and
WHEREAS, the Florida Department of Community Affairs completed its review of the
proposed EAR-based Comprehensive Plan amendments for consistency with Rule 9J-5, Florida
Administrative Code, and Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes and prepared the Objections,
Recommendations and Comments Report (ORC) identifying certain objections to the proposed
amendments; and
WHEREAS, the Administration reviewed the Objections and made adjustments to the
language of the proposed amendments in order to respond and comply with the Objections
listed in the ORC Report; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Miami Beach, upon second reading
public hearing is in agreement with the changes made to the proposed amendments and adopts
such amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, THAT:
SECTION 1.
The City Commission hereby adopts the proposed amendments to the City's Comprehensive
Plan according to the recommendations of the 2005-2007 EAR, and in response to the
Department of Community Affairs ORC Report at the public hearing held on April 13, 201 1.
SECTION 2. CODIFICATION.
It is the intention of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami Beach, and it is hereby
ordained that the provisions of this ordinance shall become and be made part of the
Comprehensive Plan of the City of Miami Beach, Florida. The sections of this ordinance may be
renumbered or relettered to accomplish such intention, and the word "ordinance" may be
changed to "section", "article", or other appropriate word.
SECTION 3. REPEALER.
All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith be and the same are hereby repealed.
SECTION 4. SEVERABILITY.
This Ordinance is not severable, and if any provision hereof is declared invalid, the Ordinance
shall be returned to the City Commission for reconsideration.
SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This ordinance shall be effective immediately after the adoption hereof.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of ,2011.
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK MAYOR
APPROVED AS TO FORM
AND LANGUAGE
First Reading: September 15, 2010
Second Reading:
Verified by:
Richard G. Lorber, AlCP
Acting Planning Director
denotes deleted language
Underscore denotes new language
Double underscore denotes amended languaae
F:\PLAN\$PLB\Comp Plan AmendmentsE008-2009 comp plan updateE010 EAR based adoption package\EAR adoption
Ordinance(3-I 8-201 I).doc
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
"Dedicated to making Florida a fietter place to call home"
CHARLIE CRlST
Governor
- THOMAS G. PELHAM
Secretary
November 19,2010
. .
The Honorable Matti Herrera Bower - .r.i
r. :. 1 -. -
Mayor, City of Miamj Beach L. .-+.- > .... 1700 Convention center Drive . .
. : Miami ~eac'h, Florida 33 2 39 . ' , , . . . . . . . .. . i s .pi>. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . I'J
i
Dear Mayor Bower: . - .'. .. -.* . -- . . -'
The Department of Community Affairs qompleted its review of the City of ~&ni fteacg
proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment @CA No. 10-lER), which was received bn Cn
September 17,20 10. Copies of the proposed amendment have been distributed to appropriate
state, regional, and local agencies for their review, and their comments are enclosed.' The
~e~arhnent reviewed the comprehensive plan amendment for consistency with Rule 9J-5,
Florida Administrative Code, and Chapt~ 163, Part 11, Florida Statutes, and prepared the
attached Objections, Recommendations, and Comments Report which outlines our findings
concerning the comprehensive plan amendment. The Department identified eight objections and
eleven comments related to the amendment.
My staff and I &e available to assist the City in addressing the issues identified in our
, report. If you have any questions, please contact Bill Pable, AICP, at (850) 922-1781. ,
. Mike McDaniel, Chief \
Office of Comprehensive Planning
MMIbp .
Enclosures: Objections, ~ecornmendations and Comments Report .
Review Agency Comments
cc: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager, City of Miami Beach
Richard Lorber, Acting Planning and Zoning Director, City of Miami Beach
Carolyn A. Dekle, Executive Director, South Florida Regional Planning Council
2555 SHUMARD OAK BOULEVARD + TALLAHASSEE, FL 32399-2100
850-488-8466 (p) + ,850-921-0781 (f) + Website: www.dca.state.fl.us
t COUMUNSrY PLANNING 850-488-2358 @) 850-4- (f) t FLORIDA COIYINIWNrllES TRUST 850-922-2207 (p) 850-92l-1747 (f) t
t HWSINQ AND COMMUWrPT DEVELOPMENT 8-7958 (p) 8!%9226623(f) t
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND COMMENTS
FOR
City of Miami Beach
, . Amendment $0-ZER
. . . . .. . . .
November 19,2010
Division of Community Planning
This report is prepared pursuant to Rule 9J-11.010
INTRODUCTION. . .
The following objections, recommendations and comments are based upon the Department's
review of the City of Miami Beach proposed Comprehensive Plan pursuant to Section 163.3 184, F.S.
Objections relate to specific requirements of relevant portions of Chapter 9J-5, F.A.C., and
Chapter 163, Part 1I;F.S. Each objection includes a recommendation of one approach that might be taken
to address the cited objection. Other approaches may be more suitable in specific situations. Some of
these objections may have been raised initially by one of the other external review agencies. If there is a
difference between the Departinent's objectioh and the external agency advisory objection or comment,
the Department's objection would take precqdence.
The City should address each of these objections when the amendment is resubmitted for our
compliance review. Objections which are not addressed may result in a determination that the
amendment is not in compliance. The Department may have raised an objection regarding missing data
and analysis, items which the City considers not to be applicable to its amendment. If that is the case, a
statement justifying its non-applicability pursuant to Rule 95-5.002(2), F.A.C., must be submitted. The
Department will make a determination as to the non-applicability of the requirement, and if the
justification is sufficient, the objection will be considered addressed.
The comments which follow the objections and recommendations are advisory in nature.
Comments will not.form a basis for determination of non-compliance. They are included to call attention
to items raised by our reviewers. The comments can be substantive, concerning planning principles,
methodology or logic, as well as editorial in nature dealing with grammar, organization, mapping, qnd
reader comprehension.
Appended to the back of the Department's report are the comment letters from the other sfate
review agencies, other agencies, organizations and individuals. These comments are advisory to the
Department and may not form a basis for Departmental objections unless they appear under the
"Objections" heading in this report.
Upon receipt of this letter, the City has 120 days in which to adopt, adopt with changes, or
determine that the City will not adopt the proposed amendment. The process for adoption of local
government comprehensive plan amendments is outlined in s. 163.3184, F.S., and Rule 95-1 1.01 1, F.A.C.
The City must ensure that all ordinances adopting comprehensive plan amendments are consistent with
the provisions of Chapter 163.3 189(2)(a), F.S.
Within ten working days of the date of adoption, the City must submit the following to the
. Department: 1
Three copies of the adopted comprehensive pian amendments;
A listing of additional changes not previously reviewed;
A listing of findings by the local governing body, if any, which' were not included the
ordinance; and
A statement indicating the relationship of the additional changes to the Department's
Objections, Recommendations and Comments Report.
The above amendment and documentation are required for the Department to conduct a
compliance review, make a compliance determination and issue the appropriate notice of intent.
In order to expedite the regional planning council's review of the amendments, and pursuant to
Rule 95-1 1 .011(5), F.A.C., please provide a copy of the adopted amendment directly to the Executive
Director of the South Florida Regional Pleing Council.
Please be advised that section 163.3 184(8)(c), F.S., requires the Department to provide a courtesy
Momadon statement regarding the Department Notice of Intent to citizens who furnish their names and
addresses at the local government's plan amendment transmittal (proposed) or adoption hearings. In
order to provide this courtesy information statement, local governments are required by law to Msh' the
names and addresses of the citizens requesting this information to the Department. Please provide these
required names and addresses to the Department when you transmit your adopted amendment
package for compliance review. In the event there are no citizens requesting this information, please
inform us of this as well. For efficiency, we encourage that the information sheet be provided in
electronic format.
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND COMMENTS
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 10-1ER
City of Miami Beach
,I. Consistency with Rule 95-5, F.A.C., and Chapter 163, F.S.
This Objections, ~ecommendations, and Comments (ORC) Report pertains to the City of Miami
Beach Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) based amendments (10-1ER).
A. The Department identifies the following objections and recommendations to the proposed
. amendment.
. . 1. Obiection 1 (~utire Land Use Element and Map),- The FLUM in Appendix A of the EAR
based amendments does not identifl the long term planning period that it represents.
Authority: Sections 16j .3 177(5)(a) and (6)(a), F.S.; and Rule 9J-5.005(4), F.A.C.
Recommendation: The City should add the date of the long term planning horizon to its
FLUM.
2. Obiection 2 (Greenhouse Gases) - The City proposes Transportation Policy 3.4, Housing
Objective 8, and Housing Policies 8.1 to 8.6 as objectives and policies pertaining to green
house gas emissions. Of the 8 referenced objectives and policies, 7 utilize permissive words
such as cbencourage", 'bpromote", 'bcollaborateyy, or "to the extent hds allow". The following
objections pertain to greenhouse gases:
a. Lack of S~ecific, Measurable End Result - The objectives listed above do not include the
specific, measurable, intermediate end result to be achieved for energy efficiency and the
policies listed above do not include meaningful and predictable standards for achieving the
objectives. Regarding Transportation Policy 3.4, it is not clear what the policy means,
what a 'tcommercial roadway projectyy is, and how this policy will be implemented.
b. Enernv Economic Zone (EEZ) Pilot Promam - The proposed policies do not fulfill the
City's responsibility as an EEZ Pilot Program community to do the following: a.) Develop
a model to help communities cultivate green economic development; b.) Encourage
renewable electric energy generation; c.) Manufacture products that contribute to energy
conservation and green jobs; and d.) Further implement Chapter 2008-1 91, Laws of
Florida, relative to discouraging sprawl and developing energy-eff~cient land use patterns
and greenhouse gas reduction strategies.
Authority: Sections 163.3177(6)(a), (c), (d), (f), and (9), and 377.809, F.S.; and Rules 9J-
' 5.003(82), (go), 95-5.005(6), F.A.C.
Recommendation: The recommendation is summari~d by each component of the objection,
as follows:
a. Lack of Specific, Measurable End Result - The City should revise the objectives to include
the specific, measurable outcome the City intends to achieve. Revise the policies to
include meaningfbl and predictable guidelines and standards that will be applied to
development to achieve the objectives. The policies should identie the guidelines and
standards the City can apply right away and include specific actions for implementing
additional energy conservation measures that will take longer to implement.
b. EEZ Pilot Prom - The City should incorporate all acfivities as outlined in the City's
application and Sustainability Plan which are intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions
and vehicle miles traveled.
3. Obiection 3 (Capital Facilities) - Land Use Policy 6.2 does not list all concurrency related
facilities, such as water supplies and schools. Also, the policy is not consistent with the varied
concurrency timing requirements by type of infrastructure established by Section
163.3 180(2)(a-c), F.S.
Authoritv: Section 163.3 180(2)(a-c), F.S.; and Rule 95-5.0055(3), F.A.C.
Recommendation: The City should amend Land Use Policy 6.2 so that it lists all concurrency
related facilities and reflects the apprppriate concurrency timing requirements established by
the cited'statute and Rule.
4. Objection 4 (Coastal Mana~ement) - The following objections pertain to coastal
management:
a. Definition of Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA) - Conservation Policy 4.10 is basedon
an &correct definition of the CHHA. It states that "As the entire City is classified as a
Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA) which is reflective of its status as a Category 1
Evacuation Zone.. ." The Category 1 evacuation zone is no longer the correct definition of
the CHHA, and the entire City may not be within the CHHA under the new definition.
. b. De~iction of CHHA on FLUM - The CHHA is not depicted on the FLUM.
Authority: Sections 163.3 177(6)(a) and 163.3 178(2)0, (9)(c), F.S.; and Rule 9J-
5.012(2)(e)3, F.A.C. '
Reconimendation: The City should depict the CHHA on its FLUM and amend Conservation
Policy 4.10 based on the definition of the CHHA pursuant to Section 163.3 178(9)(c), F.S. The
CHHA definition is located in Section 163.3 178(2)0, F.S.
5. Obiection 5 (Meanineful and Predictable Standards) - ~he~roposed revisions to the goals,
objectives, and policies (GOPs) result in a lack of meaningful and predictable standards for the
following reasons: a.) Use of mandatory versus permissive text; b.) Use of undefined or
ambiguous terms; c.) Defers to the Land Development Regulations (LDRs); and d.) Lack of
dates which establish deadlines. The specific GOP citations that are not m&@ and
predictable are listed below. The reason for the lack of rneaningfid and predictable standards
("a'' through "d" above) is referenced parenthetically after each citation.
a. Land Use Policy 3.1 - The policy indicates that mixed uses shall be "encouragedyy.
Furthermore, the policy indicates that ''LDR incentives" will be provided to support mixed
uses, but it fails to define what those incentives will be. (a and c)
b. rans sport at ion Policy 1.5 - The policy states that the City will undertake an examination
of total mobility in an attempt to shift from roadway capacity and level of service to an
overall mobility system capacity and level of service. (d)
c. Transportation Policy 2.3 - The policy states that the City shall provide incentives and
design guidelines for Transit Oriented Developments within the City. The policy defers all
detail regarding the nature of the incentives to the LDRs. (c and d)
d. Transportation Policies 4.1 and 4.2 - The .policies cite inconsistent level of service
standards, are ambiguous, are not subject to a deadline to measure their completion, and
are not associated with guidelines and standards. (b and d)
e. Transportation Policy 4.6 - The term "where appropriatey' should be clarified with specific
spacing standards or other measures to clarifjr when transit infrastructure is required. (b)
f. Transportation Policy 5.4 - The policy notes that the further development of thoroughfares
shall consider "whenever possible" the provision of bicycle lanes. (b)
g. Transportation Objective 6, and Policies 6.1'6.2, and 6.1 1 - The objective and policies
'3upport", "promote", and "encourage" a bulleted lists of Transportation System
Management and Transportation Demand Management initiatives but fail to identifj how
and when they will be implemented locally. (a)
h. Transportation Policy 6.5 - The policy indicates that the City will prepare an analysis that
determines the baseline mode split, which will be the basis of a target mode split. The
policy fails to establish a deadline by which the analysis will be completed. (d)
i. Transportation Policy 6.7 - The policy indicates that the City will "examine''p1acing a
higher priority on alternative mode projects. The policy lacks a specific deadline by which ,
the contemplated review will be complete. (d)
j. Transportation Policy 6.8 -The word "appropriate" is undefined, and the word "may" is
permissive. (a and b)
k. Transportation Policy 6.12 - The policy "promotes" alternate transportation modes and
also references various master plans that include specific projects. (a)
1. Transportation Policy 9.8 - The tern "major" is undefined. (b)
m. Housing Policies 1.3'2.2, and 5.6 - The policy indicates that the City will "supportyy
affordable housing developers' efforts to leverage specified fbnding sources. (a and b)
n. Housing Policy 1.6 - The policy indicates that the City will "continue to streamline" the
housing approval and permitting process. (b and d)
o. Housing Policy 3.1 - The policy states that the City will "mitigate" zoning regulations that
"impede" housing affordable to very low to moderate-income families. (b)
Authority: Section 163.3 177(6)(a) and (9)(e), (0 and (g), F.S.; and Rules 9J-5.003(82) and
(90); and 9J-5.005(6), F.A.C.
Recommendation:
a. Use of Mandatory versus Permissive Text - The objective and policies should be revised
to include the guidelines and standards the City will use to achieve the policy's stated
purpose. Regarding Tr&portation Policy 6.12, it should be amended to identify the
projects for which the City is financially responsible. The policy should be supported by
an updated five-year schedule in the Capital Improvements Element that lists those
projects.
b. Use of Undefined or Ambiguous Terms - The policies should be amended to include
guidelines and standards which indicate how the City will achieve the policy's stated
purpose. Transportation Policies 4.1 and 4.2 cite inconsistent level of service standards.
The inconsistency must be resolved.
c. Defers to the LDRs - The policies should be amended to add measurable and predictable
standards to guide development instead of deferring such details to the LDRs.
d. Lack of Dates Which Establish Deadlines - The policies should be revised to include the
measurable and predictable standards to guide development and provide the basis for the
LDRs. For those policies with extended timelines, the City should include interim
measures that can be applied to development until the cited information becomes available
and the policies are updated.
6. Obiection 6 (Po~ulation Proiectionsl - The population projections provided at page 1 of the
Land Use Element's data and analysis and page 2 of the Transportation Element's data and
analysis are inconsistent. The former projects the City's 2025 population at 97,705 persons,
while the later projects 2025 population at 102,3 16 persons. Also, the historical population
figures in Tables 1 and 2 of the Land Use Element's data and analysis provide different
population figures for 2004.
Authoritv: Sections 163.3 177(2)., (6)(a), F.S.; and Rules 9J-5.003(107), (1 16)' 9J-5.005(2),
(5)(a),.F.A.C.
Recommendation: The City should provide a consistent historical and projected population
trend and apply it consistently throughout the elements. The projections are to be based on
professionally accepted and applied methodologies.
7. Obiection 7 (Future Transportation Map Series1 - While several maps related to the future
transportation map series are included in the data and analysis, the City has not adopted any
maps from the future transportation map series, consistent with Rule 9J-5.019(5), F.A.C.
Authority: Section 163.3177(1), (6)(a), (j), F.S.; and Rule 9J-5.005(l)(e), (2)(a), (4)' 9J-
5 ;0 19(5), F.A.C.
Recommendation: The Future Transportation Map series (including the date per the long- .
range planning period the maps represent) should be-adopted as part of the Comprehensive
- Plan along with the other future conditions maps.
8. Objection 8 (Enerw Economic Zone1 - The following objections pertain to the Energy
Economic Zone (EEZ):
a. EEZ Desimation - In 2009, the City submitted an application for designation as an EEZ
Pilot Community' along with an implementing Strategic Plan, that identified the EEZ as
the City of Miami Beach municipal boundaries. The City's submittal and Strategic Plan
indicated that required changes to the Comprehensive Plan to implement the EEZ
designation would be processed as a part of the EAR-based amendments. However, the
amendment does not recognize or reference the City as a designated EEZ. Therefore, in .
the absence of any EEZ map in the FLUM series, and data and analysis regarding the EEZ
designation, the proposed amendment is inconsistent with the City's application and
Strategic Plan.
b. Consistencv with the EEZ Strategic Plan - The City's proposed amendment is inconsistent
&th the EEZ Strategic Plan for the following reasons:
= Transportation Element - Amendments to the Transportation Element were proposed
which support a number of the program goals of the EEZ. However, the proposed
amendment does not include policy guidance regarding the progressive alternative
multi-modal program underway by the City. Included within the City's Pilot Program
application and Strategic Plan is a discussion of the City's bike-share, car-share and
electrical vehicle program ihtiatives. Transit and multi-modal related policies do not
integrate these programs, which result in the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions
consistent with the goals of the EEZ Pilot Program. Therefore, the Amendment is
inconsistent with the City's application submittal and Strategic Plan and the City's
related goals within the EEZ. Furthermore, as identified in Objection 5, several of the
proposed amendments to the Transportation Element do not provide for meaningful
and consistent standards.
HB 697 - As detailed in Objection 2, the proposed amendment does not include
meaningful and predictable policies implementing the requirements of HI3 697 relative
to developing energy-efficient land use patterns and greenhouse gas reduction
strategies.
Authoritv:
a. 'sections 163.3177'(6)(a), @), (j), (8) and (10)(e), and 377.809, F.S.; and Rules 9J-
5.005(2)(a) and (5)@) and 9J-5.006(l)(e), 9J-5.019(4)(b)ly 2,4, (c)3,5,6,9, 10, 12,
F.A.C.
b. Sections 163.3177(6)(a), (b), (d), and (j), (8), (9)(i) and (f) and (10)(e), and 377.809, F.S.;
and Rules 9J-5.005(2)(a), and 9J-5.019(4)(b)lY 2, and 4, F.A.C.
Recommendation:
a. Revise the Amendment to identi@ the City as an Energy Economic Zone in the FLUM
Series and in the FLUE consistent with the City's application, the Strategic Plan (Draft
. Version of the City's Sustainability Plan) 'and the subsequent designation. The current
Sustainability Plan should be included in the data and analysis in support of the adopted
amendment.
b. Revise the amendment to require that development demonstrate a commitment to the
related goals of the program, consistent with the City's application submittal and Strategic
Plan. Include amendments to the Transportation Element to identify the mdti-modal
linkages that exist to serve the EEZ, or which are targeted for creation within the EEZ.
"., Revise the amendment to require that housing and development, transportation networks,
'I and multi-modal facilities demonstrate a commitment to the related goals of the EEZ
pragram, efficient land use patterns, and greenhouse gas reduction strategies.
B. The Department identifies the following comments related to the proposed amendment.
1. Comment #1 (Capital hprovements Element) - The comments listed below pertain to the
required annual update of the Capital Improvements Element (CIE), which is not part of the
EAR-based amendments but will be due in December.
a. 5-Year Schedule - The City is reminded that the 5-year schedule of capital improvements
should be updated based on a base year of FY 201 0-1 1 through FY 2014-1 5.
b. School Board's District Facilities Work Plan - The CIE does not include a policy adopting
the School Board's current District Facilities Work Plan by reference. Also, the City did
not indicate in its transmittal letter that it is relying on the School Bods most recent data
and analysis.
c. Transportation Policy 3.2 - While the data and analysis for the Transportation Element
references a variety of capital projects, an updated five-year schedule of capital
improvements has not been adopted in the Capital Improvements Element.
d. Transportation Policies 4.8,6.13, and 6.14 - The FY 2010-1 1 through FY 2014-1 5 update
of the City's five-year schedule of capital improvements should include the specific
projects fiom the Coastal Communities Transit Plan, the Coastal Communities
Transportation Master Plan, and the Municipal,Mobility Plan for which the City is
responsible. The noted plans are cited in Transportation Policies 4.8,6.13, and 6.14, and
must therefore be referenced by title, author, and date.
2. Comment #2 (Housing; Policy 3.5) - The policy refers to ''very to moderate-income families".
It appears that the text should read "very low to moderate-income families".
3. Comment #3 (Housing Obiective 6) - The last word should be changed to "uninhabitable".
4. Comment #4 (Infrastructure Policies 8.1 and 8.2) -The two policies &e shown together in a
single paragraph and should be separated by a blank space.
5. Comment #5 (Conservation Obiective 8) - The objective refers to policies in "the Capital
Improvement Schedule". The reference should be to the "Capital Improvements Element". . .
6. Comment #6 (Intergoveinmental Coordination Policv 1.71 - The reference to "Department of
Natural Resources" should be changed to "Department of Environmental Protection". ,
7. Comment #7. (Interaovernmental Coordination Obiective 5) - The objective is an incomplete
sentence and appears to have missing text.
8. Comment #8 (Water Supplv Facilities Work Plan) - The City's comprehensive plan must be
updated to reflect both the adopted EAR amendments and the adopted Water Supply Facilities
Work Plan (WSFWP) amendments when they are deterinined to be in complihce.
9. Comment #9 (Trans~ortdtion Policy 4.1 11 - The City should clarifj, if the intent of the policy
includes fixed guideway transit alternatives previously studied by Miami-Dade Transit and the
Metropolitan Planning Organization.
10. Comment # 10 (Conservation / Coastal Zone Management Policy 3.61 - The City is
encouraged to add a phrase stating that proposed marinas must be.found consistent with the
Miami-Dade County Manatee Protection Plan.
1 1. Comment #11 Won-Point Stomwater Oualitr Goals) - The City should consider public
education strategies for residents, tourists, and business owners.
12. Comment #12 (percentage Distribution among Mixed Uses) - The Low Intensity Commercial,
Medium Intensity Commercial, and Mixed Use Entertainment FLW designations allow a.
mix of uses. If these districts are intended to require a mix of uses, than a percentage'
distribution standard should be adopted. -
3
11. Consistency with Chapter 187, F.S., state Comprehensive Plan
The proposed amendment is inconsistent with the following provisions of Chapter 187, F.S.:
A. Section 187.201(4), Housing, Policy 3: Increase the supply of safe, affordable, and sanitary
housing for low-income persons, moderate-income persons, and elderly persons. This policy
applies to objection 5.
B. Section 187.201(6), Public Safety, Policies 22 and 23: Prepare advance plans for the safe
evacuation of coastal residents. Adopt plans and policies to protect public and private property
' and human lives from the effects of natural disasters. These policies apply to objection 4.
C. Section 187.201(10), Air Quality, Policies 1,2,3, and 4: Improve air quality and maintain the
improved level to safeguard human health and prevent damage to the natural environment.
Ensure that developments and transportation systems are consistent with the maintenance of
optimum air quality. Reduce sulk dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions and mitigate their
effects on the natural and human environment. Encourage the use of alternative energy resources
that do not degrade air quality. These policies apply to objections 2 and 8.
D. Section 187.201(1 l), Energy, Policies 1,2,3,4,6;and 7: Continue to reduce per capita energy
consumption. Encourage and provide incentives for consumer and producer energy conservation. :
Improve the efficiency of traffic flow on existing roads. Ensure energy efficiency in
transportation design and planning and increase the availability of more efficient modes of
transportation. Increase the efficient use of energy in design and operation of buildings, public
utility systems, and other infrastructure and related equipment. Promote the development and
application of solar energy technologies and passive solar design techniques. These policies
apply to objections 2 and 8.
E. Section 187.201(15), Land Use, Policies 1 and 3 : Promote activities which encourage efficient
development and occur in areas which will have the capacity to service new population and
commerce. Enhance the livability and character of urban areas through the encouragement of an
attractive and functional mix of living,. working, shopping, and recreational activities. These
policies apply to objections 1,3,5,6, and 7.
F. Section 187.201(17), Public Facilities, Policy 4: Create a partnership which would identify and
build needed public facilities and allocate the costs of such facilities among the partners in
proportion to the benefits accruing to each of them. This policy applies to objection 3.
G. Section 187.201(19), Transportation, Policies 8,9, 10, and 15: Encourage the construction and a
utilization of a public transit system. Ensure that the transportation system provides Florida's
citizens and visitors with timely and efficient access to services, jobs, markets, and attractions.
Promote ride sharing by public and private sector employees. Promote effective coordination
among various modes of transportation in urban areas to assist urban development and
redevelopment efforts. These policies apply to objection 5.
H. Section 187.201(25), Plan Implementation, Policy 7: Ensure the development of strategic regional
policy plans and local pltmsthat implement and accurately reflect state goals and policies and that
address problems, issues, and conditions that axe of particular concern in a region. This policy
applies to all of the objections.
. . By addressing the concerns noted in Section I, this inconsistency with Chapter 187, Florida Statutes,
can be addressed.
Carlos Alvarez, Mayor
. . -.
October 29, 201 0 .
Mr. Ray ~ubanks,'~dministrator
Plan Review and Processing
Florida Department of Community Affairs
2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard
. (* Planning and Zoning
11 1 NW 1st Street Suite 1210 .
Miami, Florida 331 28-1 902
I T 305-375-2800
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-21 00
Re: City of Miami Beach EAR-Based .Amendments, DCA No. 10-1 ER
. . ....
Dear Mr. Eubanks: -
The Department of Planning and Zoning has reviewed the proposed Evaluation and Appraisal %-
Report (EAR-Based) amendments to the City of Miami Beach Comprehensive Plan. Our review
is conducted to identify points of consistency or inconsistency with provisions of the Miami-Dade
County Comprehensive Development Master Plan (CDMP). The Department finds that the
proposed amendments are generally consistent with the CDMP and offers the following
comments:
....... ......... Transportation ~lement ... . .- ,. ; . : .- .. .: .-; ::.;
....
1. Page TE-3 - .Policy' 1.5:, Multi-modal. Level :of Service. ' The City is proposing to
"...undertake an examination .of total mobility in an attempt 40 shift from roadway
capacity and level of service to an overall mobility system capacity and level of service."
The City should indicate the timeframe in which this examination will occur.
2. Page TE-4 - Policy 2.3: Transit Oriented Design (TOD). This proposed new policy will
require the City to '...provide incentives and design guidelines for TODs within the City."
It is not clear whether the City intended to refer to "Transit Oriented Development"
instead of "Transit Oriented Design." Transit Oriented Development is the standard
planning terminology.
3. Page TE-6 - Policy. 3.4: Sustainable Development. This proposed policy calls for the
City to "...plan, design and construct roadway projects and provide approval' for
commeraal roadway projects that minimize consumption of non-renewable resources,
limit consumption of renewable resources to sustainable yield levels, reuse and recycle
its components, and minimize the use of land and production of noise." It is not clear
what this policy means, what a commercial roadway project is and how this policy will be
implemented. p~Fyw~ ,~~~f.j,tzT2.~~T~~~iz~~31~.y~rcb.. <,$ sc:3b,
.... *:;.$:&;,;!;A; >.$2b :??. *.9?~f;?~.,~~~~~~~;~$:~~~~~>::;::;$~~~~~~&~ ..-> .v !...,An -kt*.:, fi .......*.r..<.+ja!&kk.. ' %%. ;-,.
;~:~.,:.r,,.~ .! .;*a .. , ,6=!,. :.- ;.. ... :.. .... ..: $4:4#' :-J
Page TE-I 1 - Policy 4.1 I':.~Cross-Bay Transit. Alternative. .Thls:..::polrcy ... z. !,.?;,, ~~g~~tiepc~~r~ges$~@3$j6 ... :,. .. .,:.y..:: ,,*. (. ..... .::..,*,, wi:,j!%k7xz*$ ... MOT and the MPO to study the feasibility of.'connedifig .Miami i~@@,~:~@9,~fransrtjt~ ...... : ...... -. ........ jtb~$~i9$::xb%+~ : .,, g+i;fV~&eh~$,
Airport and Downtown Miami." Currently, Bus ~outel20/~~ac~~~~~~~6on~eds:~~i~a,mi~~~~~~~~~~ y~?72?.5+~$".ps.
Beach .with Dohtown Miami, and Route .......... 150/Airpo&Flyer con(+ts Mia.hi-~eac~~.wit~;~~$~~~@#;+~
Miami International Airport. Also, ............I. t~~~~~~~~~j~~~$~~~~$~3~f&~i~~,.th~ ...... .... # ...... f&agibi!ity.:,(BwLJNK:Bg@2$i:t<.$;i% -
Study) of conne&ing Downtown Ma $ @th;$~&~ij.;&q ~~,~f~~~~~~ighi~&~d~~h~~~:~~-~~i@~$$@~& ,,-< .:. ld*'k. ~,Qpwp?i2~.F. @&bmgg&$zi+~f~~y~~~~~%#f e" *:,, <,.. I+%C ,2qT;~j$$5.%
&@a~:~g~$~b@;;z+;s~ .. , ?&** . :.:i -- ... $j~a~~~~~9,~~+: ,..;... ,.. ?sGqv.- s~~.~.. ~r,~!~g$~+;:~~;,.;~~@~sA * >% q,* .*- s,
;>:: , , , r ,,, +:;!. q 6 x~3~~<s~~~~~..~~~~1;~~2.iu~Ft2~~~~@&~'
;; :: >y*FF ;:>A,:.! g&?;{ ,, 3: *, !$ $3 ;&$* &; ~3$3;-~gi~;g:39Y5<:.:<:.7~.c:;~;;:~z?&g$@r*&; .
.,:. , &>,'Ik -,, *; .&<:: *;, .: ,- ;.:* :$ $ i?,f;r ij:,$.A $$>g &$ 3~;~~@f&;$?;:;.g:~2~g~~@;~~~<$~3~$~~g~ s2- ., , , , ,,<:.,-a <*!$35$R7&;<~:;%?Ld$*>$j::<?$*-<< *4*&.*
;& $j& ,.:v;,.: 3 ,&, ,:$.& <,:, @g<<;;S%?*.,g:$ ,$;~$;z7?3~$2$:&~~;{i:57t(*2$;:;;;$!$*G:5:42 .... .. -... .. 1'48:~
.7,;?s $:<?:,f,!$>!+,$<?%j.,,, '$?<y6*2v,*s >..,",, .:z7< , 2,:+ ::; ,..,.., $%% .,*Pq>" ,%- +3! <.<$z;*;i 426 ";," .&" ..-.s,,2.&x!;t$" >&:,,ip: C$ <L& s>zj22; jK;;2 $,T:2,;<,s;:.;~:::;;@<:;~%?3.-
Ray Eubanks, ~dministratdi'
Florida Department of Community Affairs
October 29, 201 0
Page 2 of 3
technology, but the City previously opposed this project. The City should clarify if the
intent of the pblicy includes fixed guideway transit alternatives that were previously
studied by MDT and the MPO.
5. Page TE-27 - Policy 9.1: Calculating Remaining Capacity. This policy makes reference
to the three transportation concurrency management areas (South Beach, Middle Beach
and North Beach TCMAs) established in the City, and the measurement of roadway
capacities on an area-wide basis. As such the hrea-wide capacity is calculated by
averaging the service volumes of the major roadways at the adopted level of service
standards. However, if the service volumes are based on FDOT's Generalized Tables or
generated using ARTPLAN, the service volumes will change .over time as the
Generalized Tables are revised by FDQT on a regular basis and ARTPLAN uses input
variables based on three types of characteristics: roadway, trqffic and control
(signalization), which can also change over time. This policy should indicate that the
service volumes may be updated from time to time.
ConservationlCoastal Zone Management Element
1. Page CICZM-7 and CICZM-8. Policy 3.6 addresses standards that will be part of the
Conditional Use review for proposed marinas executed by the City of Miami Beach's
Planning Board. The City should consider adding a phrase stating that proposed
marinas must be found in compliance with the Miami-Dade County Manatee Protection
Plari. More information on manatee requirements may be found through the Florida Fish
and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Division of Habitat and Species Conservation.
2. Page CICZM-11. Notwithstanding Objective 9 and its policies, it is unclear how Policy
5.2 would effectively "reduce the potential for future loss of life and propertyn as
described in Objective .5. Infrastructure capacity expansion that will serve "projected
population" and specific development projects, both which will increase population, does
not appear consistent with the objective of further reducing loss of life and property.
3. Page CICZM-I2 - Policy 5.7, footnote 2. The City should not reference the Miami-Dade
County CDMP as the CDMP is currently being revised. Current information regarding
County evacuation planning may be available directly from the South Florida Regional
Planning Council or the Miami-Dade County Department of Emergency Management. '
4. Page CICZM-14. State and federal agencies have concluded that public education is an
important factor in successfully minimizing non-point stormwater quality goals. The City
. may want to consider public education strategies for residents, tourists and business
owners.
Housing Element
I. Page HE-13 - Objective 6: Relocation. The' objective reads: "Ensure that relocation
services are provided to 100 percent of the persons who are displaced as a result of
activities funded by federal programs or due to a property being declared inhabitable."
The City may want to revise the word inhabitable to 'uninhabitable.'
t Ray Eubanks, Administratcxf . ;
Florida Department of Community Affairs
October 29,201 0 .
Page 3 of 3
.If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me or Mark R. ~oerner, AICP,
Chief, Metropolitan Planning at 305-375-2835. .
Sincerely,
. .
Cc:. Carolyn A. Dekle, South Florida Regional Planning Council
Mercy Lamazares, AICP, City of Miami Beach
"Card, CarRon" To "'DCPexternalagencycomments@dca.state.fl,us'"
<Carlton .Card@dot.state.fl.us ~DCPexternalagencymments@dca.state.fl.us~,
> "Bill.Pable@dca.state.fl.us" <BiII.Pable@dca.state.fl.us>
11/01/2010 11:17 AM CC
bcc
. . . . . . . . '
' 'Subject Miami Beach 10-1.ER
.,. . .
In accordance with your request, and the provisions of Chapter 163, Florida ~tatutes'and Chapter 95-5,
Florida Administrative Code, this office has completed a review of the City of Miami Beach 10-1ER.
There are no impacts anticipated to the State Highway System facilities resulting from this amendment.
Therefore, the District has no specific objections or recommendations at this time. Please contact
Carlton Card at 305-470-5875, if you have any questions concerning our response.
Carlton S. Card
Transpoaation Planner
Florida Department of Transpoaation District VI
1000 NW 111th Ave
Miami, FL 33172
(305) 470-5875
. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF. STATE ...
Dawn K. Roberts . .
Interim Secretary of State . .
DMSION OF HISTORlCAL RESOURCES
October26,2010 ' . .
Mr. Ray Eubanks . .
Department of Community Affairs , '
Bureau of State Plazlning .
2555 ~hurnkd Oak Boulevard . Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100
Re: Historic Preservation Review of the Miami Beach 10-IER comprehensive Plan
Amendment (Miami-Dade County)
Dear Mr. Eubanks:
According to this agency's responsibilities under Section 163, Florida Statutes, and Chapter 9J-5,
Florida Administrative Code, we reviewed the above document to determine if dataregarding
historic resources.were given sufficient consideration in the request to amend the Miami Beach
Comprehensive Plan.
We reviewed Evaluation and Appraisal Report based text amendments to the Miami Beach
Comprehensive Plan to consider the potential effects of these actions on historic resources. In
the Future Land Use Element, there are no major modifications to Objective 4, which addresses
historic and natural resource protection.
Objective 5 of the Housing Element, which addresses historically significant housing has been
completely rewritten. Objective 8 has been deleted, and the pertinent information
incorporated into Objective 5. The rewritten Housing Element contains policies which continue
the identification of historic housing and its preservation, rehabilitation, and reuse, discourages
demolition, encourages rehabilitation of residential structures, maintains the historic districts
and designated sites to enable tax incentives, encourages retention of architecturally sipficant
homes, provides historic preservation incentives in the land development regulations, etc.
In the Conservation/Coastal Zone Management Element, Objective 11 addresses historic uses.
A change to Policy ll.l.d was made to reference Certificate of Appropriateness Criteria for
applications for development approval.
500 S. Bronough Street Tallahassee, P]L 32399-0250 . hrp:llwww.flheritage.com
0 Dirktois Office 0 Archaeological Researeh ' 4 Historic Preservation
850.245.6300 . FAX: 245.6436 850.245.6444 FAX: 245.W2 850.245.6333 FAX: 245.6437
,October 26,2010. . '.
Page 2
Lastly, the mtoric Preservation Element has been rewritten. This optional element continues
historic preservation policies such as the identification and 'designation of historic resources,
funding historic preservation staff, pursuing heritage tourism, encouraging the public to
identify historic sites and and nominating those suitable for historic recognition and
local designation, developing a GIs database of historic resources, providing education
opportunities to the community, promoting appropriate urban infill azid streetscape
inprovements, expanding and developing preservation guidelines, etc.
The City of Miami Beach is to be commended on the thorough and well thought out
preservation objectives and policies. If you have any questions regarding our comment$ please
feel free to contact Susan M. Harp of the Division's Compliance Review staff at 850.245.6333.
Sincerely,
Laura A. Kammerer, Historic Preservationist Supervisor
Compliance Review Section
Bureau of Historic Preservation
pc: Mr.Bob Dennis
October 20,201 0
Mr. Ray Eubanks, Administrator
Plan Review and Processing
Department of Community Affairs
2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard
Tallahassee, FL 32399-21 00
w -
OCT 2 2 2010
DIVISION OF
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Dear Mr. Eubanks:.
J
Subject: ' City of Miami.Beach, DCA'#I 0-1 ER -
. . Comments on Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment Package
The South Florida Water Management District (District) has completed its review of the
proposed amendment package submitted by the City of Miami Beach (City). The
proposed Evaluation and Appraisal Report-based (EAR) amendments update the text of
the Comprehensive Plan as recommended in the City's adopted EAR. The Cityis to be
commended for its thoroughness in updating the entire Comprehensive Plan and .
recommending changes to strengthen and update the stormwater and water supply
policies in the City's Comprehensive Plan. There appear to be no significant water
resource related impacts; therefore, we forward no comments on the proposed
amendment package.
The District offers its technical assistance to the City, its water supplier, and the
Department of Community Affairs in developing sound, sustainable solutions to meet
the City's future water supply needs and to protect the region's water resources. For
assistance or additional information, please contact Terry Manning at (561) 682-6779 or
tmanning@sfwmd.aov.
Sincerely, .
Rod Braun
Director
Intergovernmental Policy and Planning Division
c: Bob Dennis, DCA
Rachel Kalin, SFRPC
" Marc LaFerrier, Miami-Dade County
Richard Lorber,.City of Miami Beach
Terry Manning, SFWMD
Maria Valdes, Miami-Dade County
3301 Gun Club Road, West Palm Beach, FIorida 33406 (561) 686-8800 FL WATS 1-800-432-2045
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 24680, West Pdm Beach, FL 334164680 www.shvmd.gov
432
RESPONSES TO THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS OBJECTIONS,
RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT (ORC)
DATED NOVEMEBER 19,2010
The objections by DCA are listed in black
The red is the existing language in the submitted proposed EAR amendments detailing each
policy that is affected by the ORC. This is done in order to facilitate the review of the objections
and responses to each.
The green type is the proposed new language that responds to each policy affected by the
ORC.
The changes mentioned in this summary are shown double-underlined in the EAR-based
amendment package
Obiection 1 (Future Land use Element and Map) The FLUM in appendix A of the EAR based
amendments does not identify the long-term planning period that it represents.
Recommendation: The City should add the date of the long term planning horizon to its FLUM.
The long term planning horizon to the FLUM is 2025. This notation has been added to the map.
Obiection 2 (Greenhouse Gases) - The City proposes Transportation Policy 3.4, Housing
Objective 8, and Housing Policies 8.1 to 8.6 as objectives and policies pertaining to green
house gas emissions. Of the 8 referenced objectives and policies, 7 utilize permissive words
such as "encourage", "promote", "collaborate", or to the extent funds allow". The following
objections pertain to greenhouse gases:
a. Lack of specific, Measurable End Result -The objectives listed above do not include the
specific, measurable, intermediate end result to be achieved for energy efficiency
and the policies listed above do not include meaningful and predictable standards for
achieving the objectives. Regarding Transportation Policy 3.4, it is not clear what the
policy means, what a "commercial roadway project" is, and how this policy will be
implemented.
b. Energv Economic Zone (EEZ) Pilot Program - The proposed policies do not fulfill the
City's responsibility as an EEZ Pilot Program community to do the following: a) develop
a model to help communities cultivate green economic development; b) encourage
renewal electric energy generation; c) manufacture products that contribute to energy
conservation and green jobs; and d) further implement Chapter 2008-191, Laws of
Florida, relative to discouraging sprawl and developing energy-efficient land use patterns
and greenhouse gas reduction strategies .
Recommendations: The recommendation is summarized by each component of the objection
as follows:
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 10-1 ER
a. Lack of specific, measurable end result - The city should revise the objectives to include
a specific, measurable outcome the City intends to achieve. Revise the policies to
include meaningful and predictable guidelines and standards that will be applied to
development to achieve the objectives. The policies should identify the guidelines and
standards the City can apply right away and include specific actions for implementing
additional energy conservation measures that will take longer to implement.
b. EEZ Pilot Program - The city should incorporate all activities as outlined in the City's
application and Sustainability Plan which are intended to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions and vehicle miles traveled. The EEZ for the City of Miami Beach was
approved as a redevelopment model to promote among other things, green jobs in the
community. As a series of islands surrounded by water (Biscayne Bay and the Atlantic
Ocean) there is no available land to annex and thus, suburban sprawl will not be an
issue. The City of Miami Beach is a built-out community with very efficient land use
patterns that promote mixed uses (commercial and residential) in its land use categories
except in the single family and the low intensity multifamily districts.
(Policy 3.4: Sustainable Devegiooment (please see Glossarv of terms)
The Citv shall plan, design and construct roadwav proiects and provide approval for ewwxwk4
roadwav proiects that minimize consumption of non-renewable resources. limit consumption of
renewable resources to sustainable vield levels, reuse and recvcle its comeonents, and
minimize the use of land and production of noise, To this end, the Citv shall integrate
multimodal transportation facilities to reduce reliance on automobiles through initiatives such as:
e Expansion of the South Beach Local Circulator, including route changes to incorporate
Belle Island and the Cultural Campus, which will further integrate multimodal transportation
facilities with various neighborhoods and provide linkages to commercial centers,
recreational amenities and cultural assets
e A NoPth Beach Circulator bv continuing to work with Miami-Dade Transit to finalize the
implementation of this service
e Expansion of the Atlantic Greenway Network bv continued negotiation with ~ro~ertv
owners along the Atlantic Ocean and along Biscavne Bav.
e Bicycle rack installations to provide safe and secure bicvcle parkina for bicvclists in Miami
Beach. Bv the end of 2015 it is estimated that approximatelv 500 bicvcle racks will be
installed in safe, convenient location along commercial corridors, residential areas and
public facilities. Bicycling as an alternative form of transportation will increase the aualitv of
life for our communitv bv reducing traffic congestion.
Bicvcle rentall oronram - The Citv alreadv started this program with a proposal to install 85
kiosks of approximatelv 16 bikes per kiosks. The benefits of this program include reduced
traffic congestion, improved air aualitv, quieter and more livable streets and the op~ortunitv
for citizens to improve their health through exercise.
(s Shared car program will allow for the short term access to vehicles bv residents and
visitors reducing the need for vehicle ownership and encouraging the use of alternative
modes of trans~ortation.
OBJECTIVE 8: ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE RESOURCES
The Citv will shall promote energv efficiencv and use of renewable energv resources in the
desicsn and construction or the rehabilitation of housing and other measures to promote energy
efficiencv in existing residential properties.
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 10-1 ER
The Citv will shall rely upon, and ensure consistencv with, the provisions of Chapter 553, Florida
Statutes, when implementing policies to promote enernv efficiencv and use of renewable energy
resources under this obiective.
development proiects under the terms set forth under its Green Building Ordinance, such as, but
not limited to:
a. Building permit applications for a green building proiect submitted or resubmitted for
review shall be given prioritv review over proiects that are not green building proiects by
the citv's departments reviewing such applications;
b. All buildinn inspections requested for green building proiects shall be given prioritv over
proiects that are not green building proiects: and
c. Subiect to, and within the limits of, funds appropriated annually bv resolution of the citv
commission for the purposes set forth herein, owners or developers of green buildings
shall receive a refund of the actual application and review fees for green buildinq
program certification and an amount not greater than one percent of the value of the
construction, or alternativelv 20 percent of the annual allocation, whichever is less, within
I80 davs of proof of certification bv USGBC being submitted in writing to the citv. The
actual amount of financial incentives to which the applicant might aualifv for shall be
estimated at the time of issuance of the building permit for the aualitv proiect, and held in
reserve. The final financial incentives shall be calculated at the time of LEED
certification.
The Citv w-N shall collaborate with local builders and communitv development corporations to
determine ways builders mav incorporate "Sustainable Building" technologies in the construction
of housing, throunh the followinn means:
a. Water (e.n.. indoor water conservation. low-flowllow-flush fixtures. pervious
materials, xeriscaping, reclaimed water irrigation, harvested rainwater. water
budget).
b. Energv (e.n. Energy Star ratings, traditional, local vernacular techniques of
climate sensitive design. passive solar design. landscaping for energv
conservation, site development) and unit orientation (e.g. northlsouth rather then
eastlwest windows) that takes advantage of the natural shade and lighting
available, radiant barrier and ridge venting, solar heating and cooling svstems,
gas heatinalcooling svstems and aopliances, photovoltaic svstems, ductwork,
fans, energv recoverv ventilators programmable thermostats. energv efficient
appliances.
c. Building materials (e.g., dimensional lumber, wood treatment, enqineered
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 10-IER
structural materials, engineered siding and trim, non-toxic termite control, floor
coverings, wood flooring, roofing structural wall panels, insulation, windows and
doors, cabinets, finishes and adhesives).
d. Solid Waste Management (e.g.. home recycling, construction waste recvclina).
The Citv shall promote energv conservation techniques that incorporate Federal Energv Star
standards as consistent with the requirements of the state energv code. Periodic reviews of
development regulations and building codes W shall be conducted to determine if there are
modifications needed to incorporate energy conservation measures in addition to the
requirements of the state energv code.
The Citv W shall provide developers1 builders with information on how to incorporate Federal
Energv Star Standards, state energv code and other energv efficiencv measures into
construction.
The Citv W shall encourage the construction of energv efficient and water conserving housing
through public education programs and regulations that promote innovative and environmentally
sensitive building technologies.
Obiection 3 (Capital Facilities) - Land Use Policy 6.2 does not list all concurrency related
facilities, such as water supplies and schools. Also, the policy is not consistent with the varied
concurrency timing requirements by type of infrastructure established in Section 163.3180(2)(a-
c), F.S.
Recommendation: The City should amend Land Use Policy 6.2 so that it lists all concurrency
related facilities and reflects the appropriate concurrency timing requirements established by the
cited Statute and rule.
Policy 52 6.2
, Recreation, Public Schools and
) will be in place concurrent with the
impacts of the development or the permit is conditional to assure that they will be in place, but
no later than the issuance of a certificate of occupancy or its functional eauivalent. The
requirement that no development permit shall be issued unless public facilities necessitated by
the project are in place concurrent with the impacts of development shall be effective
immediately.
Acceptable Level of Service Standards for public facilities in the Citv of Miami Beach are:
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 10-1 ER
a. Recreation and Open Space - The National Recreation and Park Association's
suggested minimum requirement for recreation and open space ten (10) acres of
recreation and open space per one thousand (1.000) permanent and seasonal
residents is established as the minimum Level of Service Standard for the entire
svstem.
b. Potable Water Transmission Capacity
e 140 Average gallons per capita per dav;
168 Peak aallons per capita per dav
e non-residential uses:
Hotel: 75 gallons per dav per room
e Office: 0.084 gallons per dav per square foot
e Retail: 0.18 aallons per day per square foot
e Industrial: 0.084 gallons Der dav per square foot
e Restaurant: 65 gallons per dav per seat
e School: 12 aallons per dav per student
c. Sanitarv Sewer Transmission Capacitv - 140 Average gallons per capita per day
d. Storm Sewer Capacitv - One-in-five-vear storm event.
e. Solid Waste Collection Ca~acitv - 1.275 tons per capita per vear
f. Transportation Level of Service:
e Local roads - LOS Standard D
e Collector roads - LOS Standard D
e Arterial roads - LOS Standard D
e Limited access roads - LOS Standard D
g. Miami-Dade Public Schools - Beginning Januarv I, 2008, the adopted level of
service (LOS) standard for all Miami-Dade Countv public school facilities is 100%
utilization of Florida Inventorv of School Houses (FISH) Ca~acitv (With
Relocatable Classrooms). This LOS standard shall be applicable in each public
school concurrencv service area (CSA), defined as the public school attendance
boundarv established bv the Miami-Dade Countv Public Schools.
1. Measuring Conformance with the Level-of-Service
Public facility capacity availability shall be determined by the Concurrencv Management
User's Procedural Guide (a supplement to the land development code), which contains
the formulas for calculating compliance.
0
The capacity of new facilities may
be counted only if one or more of the following can be demonstrated:
(A) For water, sewer, solid waste and drainage:
(1) Prior to approval of a building ~ermit or its functional equivalent,
the Citv shall consult with the applicable water supplier to
determine whether adequate water supplies to serve the new
development will be available no later than the anticipated date of
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 10-1 ER
issuance bv the local government of a certificate of occupancv or
its functional equivalent.
(2) The necessary facilities are in place and available at the time a
certificate of occupancy is issued, or
(43) The new facilities are guaranteed in an enforceable development
agreement to be in place when the impacts of development occur.
An enforceable development agreement may include, but is not
limited to, development agreements pursuant to Section
163.3220, Florida Statutes, or an agreement or development order
pursuant to Chapter 380, Florida Statutes (the Development of
Regional Impact authorization).
In the case of water, sewers, solid waste and recreation, the formulas
must reflect the latest population vis a vis flows or park acreacre.
Design capacity shall be determined as follows:
Sewage: the capacitv of the Countv sewage treatment svstem.
Water: the capacity of the Countv water treatment and storage svstem.
Solid waste: the capacitv of the Countv disposal svstem.
Drainage: The on-site detention capability and/or storm sewer capacitv.
(B) For recreation:
(1) Parks and recreation facilities to serve new development shall be
in place or under actual construction no later than 1 year after
issuance of a certificate of occupancv or its functional equivalent.
(2) The new facilities are the subject of a binding executed contract
for the construction of facilities to be completed within one year of
the time the certificate of occupancy is issued, or
(3) A development agreement as outlined in (A)-(4 3) above but
requiring construction to begin within one year of certificate of
occupancy issuance:
Recreation: Measurement shall be based on recreation data in the
Comprehensive Plan plus the latest Citv population estimate with
anv necessary interpretation provided bv the Citv manager or
designee thereof.
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 10-1 ER
(C) For traffic:
(1)
Transportation facilities needed to serve new development are
scheduled to be in place or under actual construction not more
than three years after issuance of a certificate of occuDancv or its
functional equivalent as provided in the adopted local government
five-vear schedule of capital improvements.
(2) No modification of public facility level-of-service standards
established by this plan shall be made except by a duly enacted
amendment to this plan. The Citv shall ensure that no
development approvals are issued that would result in traffic
volumes surpassing the cumulative allowable areawide service
volume based on the sum of the individual roadwavs' Level of
Service Standard within the Transportation Concurrencv
Management Areas.
(3) Roadways: The standard for measuring highway capacities shall
be the Florida DOT Table of Generalized Two-Way Peak Hour
Volumes for Urbanized Areas or other techniques that are
compatible to the maximum extent feasible with FDOT standards
and guidelines. The measurement of capacity may also be
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 10-1 ER
determined by engineering studies provided that analysis
techniques are technically sound and acceptable to the City. The
City shall ensure that no development approvals are issued that
would result in traffic volumes surpassing the cumulative allowable
areawide service volume based on the sum of the individual
roadwavs' Level of Service Standard within the Transportation
Concurrency Management Areas.
Transit: the county Transit Agency bus schedules for routes within
the City.
2. Concurrency Monitoring System
The manager or designee thereof shall be responsible for monitoring facility capacities
and development activity to ensure that the concurrency management system data base
is kept current, i.e., includes all existing and committed development. This data base
shall be used to systematically update the formulas used to assess projects. An annual
report shall be prepared.
3. Capacity Reservation
Any development permit application which includes a specific plan for development,
including densities and intensities, shall require a concurrency review. Compliance will
be finally calculated and capacity reserved at time of final action of an approved final
Design Review approval or building permit if no Design Review is required or
enforceable developers agreement. Phasing of development is authorized in accordance
with Rule 9J-5.0055. Applications for development permits shall be chronologically
logged upon approval to determine rights to available capacity. A capacity reservation
shall be valid for a time to be specified in the land development code; if construction is
not initiated during this period, the reservation shall be terminated.
4. Administration
The City manager (or designee thereof) shall be responsible for concurrency
management. The land development code shall specify administrative procedures,
including an appeals mechanism, exemptions, plan modifications, burden of proof, etc.
5. Project Impact or Demand Measurement
The concurrency management user's procedural guide (a supplement to the land
development code) will contain the formulas for calculating compliance plus tables which
provide generation rates for water use, sewer use, solid waste and traffic, by land use
category. Alternative methods acceptable to the Director may also be used by the
applicant. For example, traffic generation may be based upon the Institute of
Transportation Engineer's "Trip GenerationJ' manual. Transportation facilities needed to
serve new development shall be in place or under actual construction within 3 vears
after the local novernment approves a building permit or its functional equivalent.
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 10-1 ER
Obiection 4 (Coastal Management) -The following objections pertain to coastal management:
a. Definition of coastal High Hazard Area (CHHAl - Conservation Policy 4.10 is based on
an incorrect definition of the CHHA. It states that "As the entire City is classified as a Coastal
High Hazard Area (CHHA) which is reflective of its status as a Category 1 Evacuation Zone ..."
the Category 1 evacuation zone is no longer the correct definition of the CHHA, and the entire
City may not be within the CHHA under the new definition,
b. De~iction of CHHA on FLUM - The CHHA is not depicted on the FLUM
Recommendation: The City should depict the CHHA on its FLUM (Note: A map depicting the
CHHA Cat. 1 Evacuation Zone has been included in the Map Series) and amend Conservation
Policy 4.10 based on the definition of the CHHA pursuant to Section 163.3178(9)(~), F.S. The
CHHA definition is located in Section 163.3178(2)(h) F.S
Accordinn to Section 163.3178(2) (h), F.S., the coastal high-hazard area is
the area below the elevation of the categow 1 storm surge line as established by a Sea, Lake,
Obiection 5 (Meaningful and Predictable Standards) - The proposed revisions to the goals,
objectives and policies result in a lack of meaningful and predictable standards for the following
reasons: a) use of mandatory versus permissive text; b) use of undefined or ambiguous terms;
c) defers to the Land Development Regulations; and d) lack of dates which establish deadlines.
The specific GOP citations that are not meaningful and predictable are listed below. The reason
for the lack of meaningful and predictable standards (a through d above) is referenced
parenthetically after each citation.
Recommendation:
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 10-1 ER
a. use of Mandatory versus Permissive Text - The objective and policies should be revised
to include the guidelines and standards the City will use to achieve the policy's stated purpose.
Regarding Transportation Policy 6.12, it should be amended to identify the projects for which
the City is financially responsible. The policy should be supported by an updated five-year
schedule in the Capital Improvements Element that lists those projects.
b. Use of Undefined or Ambiguous Terms - The policies should be amended to include
guidelines and standards which indicate how the City will achieve the policy's stated purpose.
Transportation Policies 4.1 and 4.2 cite inconsistent level of service standards. The
inconsistency must be resolved.
c. Defers to the LDRs - The policies should be amended to add measurable and
predictable standards to guide development instead of deferring such details to the LDRs.
d. Lack of Dates Which Establish Deadlines - the policies should be revised to include the
measurable and predictable standards to guide development and provide the basis for the
LDRs. For those policies which extended timelines, the City should include interim measures
that cn be applied to development until the cited information becomes available and the policies
are updated.
a. Land Use policy 3.1 - The policy indicates that mixed uses shall be encouraged.
Furthermore, the policy indicates that LDR incentives will be provided to support mixed uses,
but it fails to define what those incentives will be. (a and c)
Policy 2.A $'J
Innovative land use development patterns, including mixed uses shall continue to be permitted
and encouraged through the provision of LDR incentives 4'nn, such as
additional floor area when at least 25% of the total are of a buildinrr is residential, and/ or shared
in areas
in the Future Land Use
Map.
b. Transportation Policy 1.5 - The policy states that the City will undertake an examination
of total mobility in an attempt to shift from roadway capacity and level of service to an overall
mobility system capacity and level of service (d)
Poilicv 1.5: Multi-Mods! Level of Sewice (please see Glossarv of terms1
Roadway level of service is insufficient as a measure of multi-modal mobiiitv in a mature city
with land use intensities, mixed uses and the economic vitalitv such as Miami Beach. The City
shall undertake an examination of total mobility by 2015 in an attempt to shift from roadway
ca~acitv and level of service to an overall mobilitv svstem capacity and level of service. This will
require auantifvinq capacities and levels of service for the ~hvsical roadwav system, the transit
network, the pedestrian network and the bicvcle network. The results will be used as a auide for
the planning and implementation of mobility im~rovements.
c. Transportation Policy 2.3 - The policy states that the City shall provide incentives and
design guidelines for Transit Oriented Developments within the City. The policy defers to all
detail regarding the nature of the incentives to the LDRs (c and d).
ORC-I 0
442
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 10-1 ER
Bv 2012 the Citv shall wcx4de create a list of the tvpe of incentives & as well as create design
guidelines for TODs within the Citv.
d. Transportation Policies 4.1 and 4.2 - The policies cite inconsistent level of service
standards, are ambiguous, are not subject to a deadline to measure their completion, and are
not associated with guidelines and standards (b and d).
Policv 4.11: Meetin@ Transit Level of Sewice
The Citv shall maintain consistencv with the transit level of service standard of Miami-Dade
. . planning period the Citv will continue to perform studies which examine GSEWWWM the use of
Bus Rapid Transit. street cars, preemptive traffic signals and anv other technologies appropriate
for Miami Beach. The Citv will continue to follow the guidelines and standards as outlined in
recent plannina studies such as the Coastal Communities Transportation Management Plan and
the Coastal Communities Transit Studv.
BoBicv 4.2: Minimum Peak Hour Sewice Standard
The Citv shall coordinate with Miami-Dade Transit bv 2012 so that the minimum peak hour
mass transit level of service standards provided within the Citv shall be done with public transit
service having no greater than 30 minute headwavs and an average route spacing of % mile
provided that:
1. The average combined population and emplovment densitv along the corridor between
the existing transit network and the area of expansion exceeds 4,000 people per square
mile, and the service corridor is 112 mile on either side of anv necessarv new routes or
route extensions to the area of expansion;
2. It is estimated that there is sufficient demand to warrant the service; and
3. The service is economicallv feasible.
e. Transportation Policv 4.6 -The term "where appropriate" should be clarified with specific
spacing standards or other measures to clarify when transit infrastructure is required (b).
Develo~ment appro\,al for sites located on main thoroughfares within existing transit routes shall
be required where appropriate, to construct a concrete pad and dedicate an easement to Miami
Beach or Miami-Dade Transit (or its successor aaencies) for public transit uses. The dedicated
easement shall be of sufficient size to allow for American with Disabilities Act (ADA) access to
transit and for future shelter placement. Fair share contributions in lieu of easement dedication
mav be granted when an existing bus shelter or pad is located within % mile from the proposed
development on the same side of the roadwav. Appropriate bus stop facilitv locations shall be
determined by analyzing the existinq need on established routes: assessing the existing built
environment (such as the width of the sidewalk, the presence of a sidewalk andlor the location
of anv existing structures). Bus routes with the highest ridership and located on an existina bike
routes will be the highest ~rioritv for facilitv placement.
ORC-I I
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 10-1 ER
f. Transportation Policy 5.4 - The policy notes that the further development of
thoroughfares shall consider "whenever possible" the provision of bicycle lanes (b)
Policy 5.4: Bicycle Facilities
The further development of thoroughfares shall consider, vufwww: DDS-&&, the creation,
extension and improvement of bicvcle lanes, paths, boulevards, and other bicvcle facilities as an
effort to develop "complete streets." The Citv will continue to follow the guidelines and standards
as outlined in recent planning studies such as the Coastal Communities Transportation
Manaclement Plan
g. Transportation Obiective 6 and Policies 6.1. 6.2 and 6.1 1 - The objective and policies
"support", "promote," and "encourage" a bulleted lists of Transportation System Management
and Transportation Demand Management initiatives but fail to identify how and when they will
be implemented locally (a).
OBJECTIVE 6: MULTI-MODAL TRANSPORTATION
The Citv shall continue to support and promote multiple modes of transportation by considering
Transportation Demand Management (TDM), Transportation Systems Management (TSM) , and
other techniques.
Policv 6.1: Transpohtion Svstemo Management (please see Glossarv of terms]
Through the site plan review process, the Citv shall educate the development communitv and
encourage appropriate TSM strategies to improve the mobilitv systems efficiencv, effectiveness
and safetv. These mav include but are not limited to:
e Traffic manaqement and traffic monitorinn programs
Incident management
Congestion management
e Access management
Parkinq policies which discourage single-occupancv vehicles
e The encouragement of carpools, vanpools or ridesharinq
Proarams or proiects that improve traffic flow, includinq proiects to improve signalization
On road bicvcle lanes, bicvcle parking, and bicvcle amenities at commercial and
residential uses
Improve intersections, and implement Intelligent Transportation Svstems (ITS)
strategies, including Pedestrian oriented intersection design strategies
o Pedestrian countdown signals
PoSIcy 6,2: TransporPTatlon Demand Management (please see Glossarv of terms)
Through the site plan review process, the Citv shall plan for, educate the development
communitv and encourage ap~ropriate TDM strategies to improve the mobilitv svstems
efficiencv, effectiveness and safetv. These mav include but are not limited to efforts to reduce
the dependence on sinale-occupant vehicle trips, and the encouragement of the use of bicvcle,
pedestrian and transit modes as a means of commuting and recreational mobilitv. These may
include, but are not limited to:
ORC-I 2
444
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 10-1 ER
camools,
van pools,
demand response service,
paratransit services (for special needs population),
publicl~rivate provision of transit service,
bike sharing, or shared car initiatives,
provision of short term and lonn term bicvcle parking, showers and chanaina facilities
provision of ~arkina for carpools
alternative hours of travel, including flexible work hours, staqaered work shifts, compressed
work weeks and telecommutinzl options,
subsidv of transit fares,
used of lonn term parkina to be developed at Citv's entry points,
shared vehicular and pedestrian access for compatible land uses, where possible,
shared parkinq agreements for compatible land uses, where possible,
provision of transit amenities,
car share vehicle parking.
Throuqh the site plan review process, the Citv shall educate the development communitv and
promote TSM andlor TDM strategies and incentives to use alternate modes of transportation
lsuch as parking policies and provision of intermodal transfers), that will accomplish mobility
within and throuah each transportation concurrencv management area.
h. Transportation Policy 6.5 - The policy indicates that the City will prepare an analysis that
determines the baseline mode split, which will be the basis of a target mode split. The policy
fails to establish a deadline by which the analysis will be completed (d).
By 2015 the Citv shall undertake an analvsis that determines the baseline mode split, then set
a tarset mode split to be achieved in a certain period of time.
I. Transportation Policv 6.7 - The policy indicates that the City will "examine" placing a
higher priority on alternative mode projects. The policy lacks a specific deadline by which the
contemplated review will be complete (d)
As a method of achieving a balance between an efficient and effective level of service and an
adequate mode split, bv 2015, the Citv shall examine placing a higher priority on the
development and implementation of alternative mode proiects, than it would on phvsical
A method of doing so mav be to spend an increased ~ercentacae of City capacitv ~roiects.
transportation funds, taken from all sources, on transit or alternative mode ~roiects in lieu of
phvsical ca~acitv proiects.
j - Trans~ortation Policv 6.8 - The word "appropriate is undefined, and the word "may: is
permissive (a and b)
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 10-IER
Appropriate improvements or enhancements, such as, but not limited to, dedications or
easements for transit bus stops to the Citv's multimodal network rrtptf would be required as a
condition of development approval.
(Alternate language) As part of the plan review and approval process, the City shall negotiate with
applicants for appropriate improvement and enhancements on the private property, such as, but not
limited to, dedicafions or easements for transit bus sfops as part of the City's multimodal network.
k. Transportation Policv 6.12 - The policy "promotes" alternate transportation modes and
also references various master plans that include specific projects (a)
The Citv shall promote alternate transportation modes and implement the transit. pedestrian,
bicycle and other modes of transportation pursuant to F.A.C. 9J-5 in Transportation
Concurrencv Management Areas as follows:
a. Continue implementing the proiects in the "Bike Master Plan" in the Capital
Improvement Program (CIP) prioritizing those proiects where there are gaps on
the bicvcle and pedestrian network. Current ~rioritv CIP funded proiects include
the Beach Walk Phase II, and Middle Beach Recreation Corridor - Phase I
Pedestrian Bike Path.
b. Continue su~plementing the MMP Proiect Bank with proiects from "Coastal
Communities Transit Master Plan" These, upon approval, would be added to the
CIP. -
c. Continue coordination with Miami-Dade Transit to implement the Middle and
North Beach Circulators. Current prioritv CIP funded proiects include the North
Beach lntermodal Center.
d. Continue improving multimodal infrastructure including pedestrian and bicvcle
pathwavs, secure bicvcle parking, transit shelters, and transit amenities includinq
bike racks on buses. Through the land development code and site plan review
process, the Citv will continue providing amenities and incentives to alternate
modes of transportation. Current prioritv CIP funded ~roiects include the
installation of crosswalks, curb ramp installationlmaintenance and pedestrian
countdown signals in various locations throuahout Miami Beach.
e. Implementing proiects that accommodate all users of the transportation svstem,
including pedestrians, bicvclists, users of mass transit, people with disabilities,
the elderiv, motorists, freight providers, emergencv responders, and adiacent
land users.
I. Trans~ortation Policv 9.8 -The term "major" is undefined (b)
Within the Citv's TCMA's, the Citv shall require all new maior developments, (those
proiects over 50,000 gross square feet, andlor ~roiects that increase the number of trips
over 100 peak hour trips), to submit a Transportation Mitigation Plan which will include
strategies to mitisrate the traffic generated bv the site, and will encourage the use of
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 10-1 ER
alternative modes of transportation. The safetv and convenience of all users of the
transportation system including pedestrians, bicvclists, transit users, and motor vehicle drivers
shall be accommodated and balanced in all types of transportation and development ~roiects
and through all phases of all new maior developments so that the most vulnerable - children,
elderlv, and persons with disabilities - can travel safelv within the public right of wav. Applicable
treatments mav include, but not be limited to TDM strateqies included in Policy 6.2 and TSM
policies included in Policv 6.1.
m. Housing Policies 1.3, 2.2 and 5.6 - The policy indicates that the City will "support"
affordable housing developers' efforts to leverage specified funding sources (a and b)
Skwxwi Cooperate with affordable housing developers' efforts to leverage Miami-Dade Countv
Surtax funds and other financial incentives for the provision of housina affordable to verv low to
moderate- income households, including those with special needs, in Miami Beach.
Stmpet4 Cooperate with housing developers' efforts to leverage Miami-Dade Countv Surtax
funds and other financial incentives for the construction andlor rehabilitation of residential
housing affordable to verv low to moderate-income households in Miami Beach.
Policy 5.6
Skwxwi Cooperate with housing developers' efforts to leverage Miami-Dade County Surtax
funds and other financial incentives for the rehabilitation of residential housing affordable to very
low to moderate-income households in Miami Beach.
n. Housing Policv 1.6 - The policy indicates that the City will "continue to streamline" the
housing approval and permitting process (b and d)
The Planning Department, which includes zoning review, will continue to streamline the housinq
WM?-the expedited processing of permits for affordable housing ~roiects."
This incentive gives priority to designated affordable housing proiects when scheduling Pre-
Design Conferences with all relevant agencies. Also. when the plans are readv for permitting,
first ~rioritv is given to them.
o. Housing Policv 3.1 - The policy states that the City will "mitigate" zoning regulations that
"impede" housing affordable to very low to moderate-income families (b).
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 10-1ER
The Citv shall mitigate zoning regulations such as reduced parking requirements or shared
parking in the case of a mixed use building that impede housing affordable to verv low to
moderate-income families in all zoning districts which permit multifamilv housing, includinq
multifamilv residential, commercial and overlav districts and retain the new multifamilv districts,
e.a. TH Townhome residential and RO Residential Office.
Objection 6 (Population Proiectionsl - The population projections provided at page 1 of the
Land Use Element's data and analysis and page 2 of the Transportation Element's data and
analysis are inconsistent . The former projects the City's 2025 population at 97,705 persons
while the latter projects 2025 population at 102,316 persons. Also the historical population
figures in Tables 1 and 2 of the Land Use Element's data and analysis provide different
population figures for 2004.
Authority: Sections 163.31 77(2), (6)(a), F.S.; and Rules 95-5.003(107), 9J-5.005(2), (5)(a), FAC
Recommendation: The City should provide a consistent historical and projected population
trend and apply it consistently throughout the elements. The projections are to be based on
professionally accepted and applied methodologies.
2008 Projections
Between the 1990 and 2000 U.S. Census, the permanent population of the City of Miami Beach
decreased from 92,639 to 87,933 (5.3% decrease). Estimates and projections show growth will
occur slowly in the City; however these projections are based on prevailing trends.
Current population projections from both Miami-Dade County and Miami Beach staff estimate
that our population will grow to approximately 97,700 by 2025, or about a 6.5% increase.
However, Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing projections shows the 2025 Miami Beach
population to be only 88,521.
According to the 2008 Population estimates by the U.S. Census Bureau, the total population for
the City of Miami Beach is 84,633. The table below shows the comparison from the 2000
Census (actual) to the estimates to date, which indicates a slight growth in years 2001, 2002,
and 2003, but a decline in population starting in the year 2004 to present, based on the actual
2000 census:
Table 1: Population projections, 2000 - 2008'
Table 2: Population Changes and Projections, 1990-2025
1 2000, U.S. Census Bureau; 2001-2008, American FactFinder, U.S. Census Bureau, 2008 Population Estimates.
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 10-1 ER
Table 2 above is being replaced with the one below.
Table 2
Population Ertimotes and Pqdons
Minor Statidiml Area 1.3 and City d Miami Baath, 2000 to2030
Source: US. Census for 1990 and 20CO data. Mami-Dade Planning 8 Zoring Depf. for lulinor Staiisfical Area data for 2006-
203O.Univenitq of Florida, Shirnberg Center for Miami Beach data for 2006-2030.
Note: lulinor Statist~cal Area 1.3 ~ncludes the City of M~amt Beach and five smaller municipalities: Ebl Harbour, Bay Harbor Islands,
Indian Creek, North Bay Ullage, ond Surfs~de with a combined 2007 populmtion of 19,776 according to BEBR.
ORC-I 7
449
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 10-1 ER
Obiection 7 (Future Transportation Map Series) -While several maps related to the future
transportation map series are included in the data and analysis, the City has not adopted any
maps from the future transportation map series, consistent with Rule 9J-5.005(l)(e), (2)(a), 9J-
5.01 9(5), FAC
Recommendation: The Future Transportation Map Series (including the date per the long-
range planning period the maps represent) should be adopted as part of the Comprehensive
Plan along with the other future conditions maps.
Maps INCLUDED:
Figure 1 - Existing Roadway system
Figure 3 - Federal Functional Classification
Figure 4 - Existing Roadway Lane Count
Figure 10 - Existing Evacuation routes
Figure 17 - Existing Bicycle Facilities
Figure 6 - 2015 Peak Hour Level of Service (one-way)
Figure 7 - 2015 Peak Hour Level of Service (Two-way)
Figure 8 - 2015.~aily Level of Service (Two-way)
Figure 8 - 2030 Level of Service (one-way)
Figure 9 - 2030 Level of Service (two-way)
Figure 10 - 2030 Daily Level of Service (two-way)
Obiection 8 (Energv Economic Zone) - The following objections pertain to the Energy
Economic zone (EEZ):
a. EEZ Designation - In 2009, the City submitted an application for designation as an EEZ
Pilot Community, along with an implementing Strategic Plan that identified the EEZ as the City
of Miami Beach municipal boundaries. The City's submittal and Strategic Plan indicated that
required changes to the Comprehensive Plan to implement the EEZ designation would be
processed as part of the EAR-based amendments. However, the amendment does not
recognize or reference the City as a designated EEZ. Therefore, in the absence of any EEZ
map in the FLUM series, and data and analysis regarding the EEZ designation, the proposed
amendment is inconsistent with the City's application and Strategic Plan.
b. Consistencv with the EEZ Stratenic Plan - The City's proposed amendment is
inconsistent with the EEZ Strategic Plan for the following reasons:
Trans~ortation Element - amendments to the Transportation Element were proposed which
support a number of the program goals of the EEZ. However, the proposed amendment
does not include policy guidance regarding the progressive alternative multi-modal program
underway in the City. Included within the City's Pilot Program application and Strategic Plan
is a discussion of the City's bike-share, car-share and electrical vehicle program initiatives.
Transit and multi-modal related policies do not integrate these programs, which result in the
reduction of greenhouse gas emissions consistent with the goals of the EEZ Pilot Program.
Therefore, the amendment is inconsistent with the City's application submittal and Strategic
Plan and City's related goals within the EEZ. Furthermore, identified in objection 5, several
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 10-1 ER
of the proposed amendments to the Transportation Element do not provide for meaningful
and consistent standards. Some the initiatives mentioned in the EEZ application are listed
in the Transportation Policy 3.4. Furthermore most of the policies in the TE provide
guidance for multi-modalism and encourage the use of alternate modes of transportation in
an effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions consistent with the goals of the EEZ.
HB 697 -As detailed in Objection 2, the proposed amendment does not include meaningful
and predictable policies implementing the requirement of HB 697 relative to developing
energy-efficient land use patterns and greenhouse gas reduction strategies.
a. Revise the amendment to identify the City as an Energy Economic Zone in the FLUM
Series and in the FLUE consistent with the City's application, the strategic Plan (Draft version of
the City's Sustainability Plan) and the subsequent designation. The current Sustainability Plan
should be included in the Data and Analysis in support of the adopted amendment.
Note: The FLUM has been modified to note that the entire City is an Energy Economic Zone.
In addition, the following policy is being pr~posed for the Land Use Element.
OBJECTIVE 12: ECONOMIC ENERGY ZONE
As a aoal of the Citv to adopt policies and programs that implement in Miami Beach actions that
strive to protect the environment, the Citv desianated the entire municipalitv to participate in the
"Enerav Economic Zone Pilot Program Communities" Codified in Chapter 2009-89, Laws of
Florida, Section 7.
Policv 12.1
The Miami Beach Sustainabilitv Plan shall be the guiding document (Strateaic Plan) that
provides structure and focus to policies and initiatives in order to successfullv enhance
communitv sustainabilitv.
b. Revise the amendment to require that development demonstrate a commitment to the
related goals of the program consistent with the City's application, the strategic Plan. Include
amendments to the Transportation Element to identify the multi-modal linkages that exist to
serve the EEZ, or which are targeted for the creation within the EEZ. Revise the amendment to
require that housing and development, transportation networks and multi-modal facilities
demonstrate a commitment to the related goals of the EEZ program, efficient land use patterns
and greenhouse gas reduction strategies
Mote: Most of the Transportation Element and Housing Element policies demonstrate a
commitment to the related goals of the EEZ program, specifically Transportation Policy 3.4, 5.4,
6.2, 6.12; Housing Policies 8.2, 8.3, 1.6, 3.1 ; and LUE Policy 3.1 as well as others.
F:\PLAN\$PLB\Comp Plan AmendmentsU008-2009 comp plan updateU010 EAR-based - transmittal\EAR-ORC responses\EAR
ORC worksheet with responses-I .doc
ORC-I 9
451
S ..... MIAMIBEACH
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE OF PROPOSED
AMENDMENTS
TO THE CITY'S
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN'that a second reading and second
public hearing will be held by the City Commission of the City
of Miami Beach on WEDNESDAY, April 13,2011 at ll:t5 A.M.
or as soon thereafter as possible in the City Commission
Chambers, Third Floor, City Hall, located at 1700 Convention 1
Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 331 39 to consider adoption
of proposed amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan
based on the recommendations of the 2005-2007 Evaluation
and Appraisal Report. This item may be continued and under
those circumstances, additional legal notice would not be
provided.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, ADOPTING
AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
TO INCLUDE NEW OR REVISED AND/OR UPDATED ,
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES IN THE FOLLOWING
ELEMENTS; F~JTURE LAND USE, TRANSPORTATION,
HOUSING, INFRASTRUCTURE, CONSERVATION1
COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT, RECREATION
AND OPEN SPACE, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS,
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION;
ALL IN RELATION TO CERTAIN ITEMS IDENTIFIED IN
THE CITY'S 2005-2007 EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL
REPORT (EAR) INCLUDING RESPONSES TO THE ' OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATION AND COMMENTS
REPORT (ORC); AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING
THE CITY ADMINISTRATION TO SUBMIT THE ADOPTED
AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND ANY OTHER REQUIRED
STATE AND LOCAL AGENCIE* PROVIDING FOR .
REPEALER, SEVERABILITY, CODIFICATI~N . AND AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
All interested parties are invited to appear at this meeting or be
represented by an agent, or to express their views in writing
addressed to the Planning ,Department, ,1700 Convent@
Center Drive, City Hall, M~aml Beach, Flor~da, 33139. Copes
of the proposed amendments are available in the Plannlng
Department.
Pursuant to Florida Stat. 286.0105, the City hereby advises the
publ~c that if a person decides to appeal any decision made
by the Planning Board with respect to any matter considered
at its meeting or its hearing, such person must ensure that a
verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record must
include the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to
be based. This notice does not constitute consent by the City
for the introduction or admission of otherwise inadmissible or
irrelevant evidence, nor does it authorize challenges or appeals
not otherwise allowed by law.
In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990,
persons needing special accommodation to participate in this
I proceeding should contact the Board's Administrator no later than
four days prior to the proceeding at (305) 673-7550for assistance;
if hearing impaired, telephone the Florida Relay Service numbers,
(305) 673-721 8 or 71 I, for a$sistance. AD #652 .
4B I THURSDAY, MARCH 31,2011
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
I An Ordinance Amending Chapter 74, Entitled "Peddlers And Solicitors," By Amending Article Ill, Entitled "Panhandling On )
Public Property," of the city Code By Amending Section 74-76, Entitled "Definitions," By Providing Definitions For Financial
Institution And For High Volume Intersections; And By Amending Section 74-78, Entitled "Panhandling On Public Property,"
By Adding Additional Locations Where Soliciting Or Panhandling On Public Property Will Be Considered Unlawful.
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Increase Resident Ratings of Public Safety Services
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): In the 2009 Community Survey, 83.9% of resident respondents
rated Police safety services as excellent or good. In 2007, 37.0% of resident respondents said the City of Miami Beach can
address crime prevention to improve public safety throughout the City. In 2009, 44.9% of resident respondents answered the
same way, representing an increase of 7.9%
Issue: I Shall the Mayor and the City Commission Approve The Amendments to the Ordinance? 1
Item SummarylRecommendation:
FIRST READING
Chapter 74, "Peddlers and Solicitors," Article Ill, "Panhandling on Public Property" currently delineates the City's policy as it
relates to panhandling in the City. As defined in the City's Code of Ordinances, "panhandlingn means "begging, asking or
soliciting" for a donation of money or other thing of value. While homeless persons may panhandle, in fact, panhandling
includes firefighters collecting change in their boots for charity, the Salvation Army asking for donations with their kettles, or
a high school service club asking for donations on a sidewalk. The current City ordinance establishes certain areas where it
is unlawful to panhandle. The goal of these restrictions was to address, among other things, concerns with panhandling
occurring while people were eating.
At the November 22, 2010 LUDC meeting, the Committee discussed the City's current ordinance, as well as current
concerns. The Committee considered some amendments to the current code to address concerns relating to panhandling
occurring in areas where individuals are often accessing their money, as often individuals have reported feeling intimidated
when approached in those circumstances. Likewise, in response to concerns regarding the safety of individuals
panhandling in certain high volume intersections in the City, as well as the traffic concerns this activity raises (when traffic is
held up as people are being solicited), it is recommended that panhandling not be permitted in certain high volume
intersections with "Levels of Service" of E or F, as per the City's Municipal Mobility Plan.
At the February 23, 2011 LUDC meeting, the Committee moved to approve amendments to the current panhandling
ordinance as follows, to be forwarded to the City Commission for consideration: 1) Adding new definitions for financial
institutions and for high volume intersections; 2) Adding prohibitions on panhandling within twenty feet of an ATM, Financial
Institution, and parking "pay-on-foot" machines; and 3) Adding prohibitions on panhandling in any high volume intersection
in the City. All other existing prohibitions would remain, and aggressive panhandling would continue to be enforced
pursuant to County code.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
I Land Use and Develo~ment Committee (LUDC) discussed on November 22. 2010. On Februaw 23, 2011 LUDC I I recommended approvallof the amendments 'to the brdinance and sent it to the full city Commission for first reading.
Financial Information:
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking:
( Robert Santos-Alborna, Acting Code Compliance Division Director
-
OBPl
Account Source of
Funds:
I I
Total
Financial Impact Summary: As panhandling on public property is already legislated, it is estimated that these amendments
to the ordinance will have little, if any, additional financial impact, as it is just adding additional locations.
1
Amount
MIAMIBEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33 139, www.rniarnibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
DATE: April 13, 201 1
SUBJECT: AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE CODE OF THE
ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH, BY AMENDING CHAPTER 74, ENTITLED
"PEDDLERS AND SOLICITORS," BY AMENDING ARTICLE Ill,
ENTITLED "PANHANDLING ON PUBLIC PROPERTY," BY AMENDING
SECTION 74-76, ENTITLED "DEFINITIONSy" BY PROVIDING
DEFINITIONS FOR FINANCIAL INSTITUTION AND FOR HIGH VOLUME
INTERSECTIONS; AND BY AMENDING SECTION 74-78, ENTITLED
"PANHANDLING ON PUBLIC PROPERTY," BY ADDING ADDITIONAL
LOCATIONS WHERE SOLICITING OR PANHANDLING ON PUBLIC
PROPERTY WILL BE CONSIDERED UNLAWFUL; PROVIDING FOR
REPEALER; SEVERABILITY; CODIFICATION; AND AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
At the October 27, 201 0 City Commission Meeting, Commissioner Michael Gongora referred
to the Land Use and Development Committee (LUDC) a discussion on a "stricter
panhandling ordinance." The item was discussed at the November 22, 2010 LUDC
meeting, and the LUDC proposed certain amendments be forwarded to the City
Commission for consideration, following review by the LUDC. At its February 23, 2011
meeting, the LUDC moved to approve the ordinance as recommended and send it to the full
City Commission. The Administration recommends adopting the amendments to the
ordinance.
BACKGROUND
Typically, when speaking about panhandling there are two types: passive and aggressive.
Passive panhandling is generally considered soliciting without any threat or menace, often
without exchanging any words (e.g. just using a cup or holding out a hand). Aggressive
panhandling is when the soliciting is coercive, often accompanied with actual or implied
threats, menacing actions or obstructive behavior.
Chapter 74, "Peddlers and Solicitors," Article Ill, "Panhandling on Public Property" currently
delineates the City's policy as it relates to panhandling in the City. As defined in the City's
Code of Ordinances, "panhandling" means "begging, asking or soliciting" for a donation of
money or other thing of value, whether for charity or personal gain. As such, while homeless
persons may panhandle, in fact, panhandling includes firefighters collecting change in their
boots for charity, the Salvation Army asking for donations with their kettles, or a high school
City Commission Memorandum
Panhandling Ordinance Amendment - First Reading
April 13, 201 1
Page 2 of 3
service club asking for donations on a sidewalk. In short, panhandling is not synonymous
with homelessness, and any changes to the panhandling ordinance should and must
consider the implication on all manner of panhandling that exists.
The current City ordinance establishes certain areas where it is unlawful to panhandle.
These locations where panhandling is prohibited were identified following significant
discussion and following legal challenges to the City's code. The goal of these restrictions
was to address, among other things, concerns with panhandling occurring while people
were eating.
In addition to the City's panhandling ordinance, as noted in Article Ill. Section 74-77, the
provisions of the County's aggressive or obstructive panhandling ordinance are applicable
and enforceable in the City. A copy of the County's Aggressive Panhandling Ordinance is
provided for your reference (Attachment A).
As such, while the City's panhandling ordinance specifically delineates where
panhandlinglsolicitation is prohibited on public property, enforcement of the County code
addresses any panhandling that involves pedestrian interference in a public place through
the obstruction of a pedestrian or vehicular traffic, or if aggressively begging. Any of these
activities in any area of the City, in addition to those areas as delineated in Section 74-78,
would be considered aggressive or obstructive panhandling and would be a violation subject
to a fine as described in County Code.
Violations of the City's panhandling ordinance are punishable pursuant to Section 1-14 of
City Code, which provides for a fine not exceeding $500, or by imprisonment for a term not
exceeding 60 days, or by both such fine and imprisonment.
LAND USE & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETINGS
At the November 22, 2010 LUDC meeting, the Committee discussed the City's current
ordinance, as well as current concerns. The concerns, as noted, were relating to certain
areas of the City, and the current level of enforcement. For example, panhandlers are often
seen in the area of Washington Avenue from loth to 12'~. These panhandlers are not
homeless, but live in a nearby Adult Living Facility (ALF).
Staff provided information on a new program approved by the City Commission and
scheduled to be implemented in conjunction with the Miami-Dade County Homeless Trust.
Beginning in December, 2010, eleven (11) panhandling "meters" were placed in locations
throughout the City identified as having a known presence of panhandling, with additional
meters placed on private property. The goal of this program is to redirect individuals who are
inclined to give their spare change to the meter program, whose proceeds are used to
provide a variety of programs aimed at providing long-term assistance to homeless and
formerly homeless families and individuals.
In light of the pending implementation of the meter program, and the enhanced enforcement
efforts to be initiated, the Committee considered some amendments to the current code to
address concerns relating to panhandling occurring in areas where individuals are often
accessing their money, as often individuals have reported feeling intimidated when
approached in those circumstances. As proposed, panhandling would continue to be
permitted in any other area of the City, although aggressive panhandling is illegal and is not
City Commission Memorandum
Panhandling Ordinance Amendment - First Reading
April 13, 201 I
Page 2 of 3
permitted anywhere in the City.
Likewise, in response to concerns regarding the safety of individuals panhandling in certain
high volume intersections in the City, as well as the traffic concerns this activity raises (when
traffic is held up as people are being solicited), it is recommended that panhandling not be
permitted in certain high volume intersections with "Levels of Service" of E or F, as per the
City's Municipal Mobility Plan.
At the February 23, 2011 LUDC meeting, the Committee moved to approve the ordinance
amendments described below and send it to the full City Commission.
The proposed ordinance amendments were as follows:
1) Adding new definitions for financial institutions and for high volume intersections;
2) Adding prohibitions on panhandling within twenty feet of an ATM, Financial
Institution, and parking "pay-on-foot" machines;
3) Adding prohibitions on panhandling in any high volume intersection in the City.
All other existing prohibitions would remain, and aggressive panhandling would continue to
be enforced pursuant to County code.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Commission approve the proposed amendments to City
Code to address panhandling, as per the proposed amendments delineated in the attached
ordinance.
J MGIH M FIKTIRSAlrm
T:\AGENDA\2011\4-13-1 l\Panhandling Memo -April 201 1 .doc
Municode Page 1 of 1
I ATTACHMENT A I
Sec. 21-31.4. -Aggressive or obstructive panhandling prohibited.
(A) Definitions. The following definitions apply in this section:
(1) Aggressively beg means to beg with the intent to intimidate another person into giving money or goods.
(2) Intimidate means to engage in conduct which would make a reasonable person fearful or feel
compelled. Among the circumstances which may be considered in determining whether the actor
intends to intimidate another person into giving money or goods are that the actor: (a) touches the
person solicited; (b) follows the person solicited, and persists in begging after the person solicited has
given a negative response; (c) directs profane or abusive language toward the person solicited; or (d)
uses violent or threatening gestures toward the person solicited.
(3) Beg means to ask or solicit for money or goods as a charity, whether by word, bodily gestures, signs, or
other means.
(4) Obstruct pedestrian or vehicular traffic means to walk, stand, sit, lie, or place an object in such a
manner as to block passage by another person or a vehicle, or to require another person or a driver of a
vehicle to take unreasonable evasive action to avoid physical contact.
(5) Public place means an area generally visible to public view and includes alleys, bridges, buildings,
driveways, parking lots, parks, plazas, sidewalks and streets open to the general public, including those
that serve food or drink or provide entertainment, and the doorways and entrances to buildings or
dwellings and the grounds enclosing them.
(6) Unreasonable evasive action means causing a vehicle to depart from the lane of traffic in which it is
traveling to change lanes, to straddle lanes, or to enter onto a swale to obtain passage; it also means
causing a pedestrian to leave the sidewalk on which she or he is traveling or to make contact with a wall
or fence bordering the sidewalk.
(B) Prohibited acts. A person is guilty of pedestrian interference if, in a public place, he or she intentionally:
(1) Obstructs pedestrian or vehicular traffic; or
(2) Aggressively begs.
(C) Permitted activities. Acts authorized as an exercise of one's constitutional right to picket or to legally protest,
and acts authorized by a permit duly issued by a lawful authority shall not constitute obstruction of pedestrian
or vehicular traffic.
(D) Penalties. Any person convicted of:
(1 A violation of this section shall be punished by:
a. Not more than thirty (30) days imprisonment;
b. A fine of not more than one hundred dollars ($100.00);
c. Both such fine and imprisonment in the discretion of the court having jurisdiction over the cause;
d. Fines in accordance with Chapter 8CC of the Code of Miami-Dade County; or
e. Completion of the Miami-Dade County Diversion Program, pursuant to Implementing Order of the
Board of County Commissioners.
(2) A second or subsequent violation of this section shall be punished by:
a. Not more than sixty (60) days imprisonment;
b. ' A fine not more than two hundred dollars ($200.00);
c. Both such fine and imprisonment in the discretion of the court having jurisdiction over the cause;
d. Fines in accordance withChaater 8CC of the Code of Miami-Dade County; or
e. Completion of the Miami-Dade County Diversion Program, pursuant to Implementing Order of the
Board of County Commissioners.
(E) Alternative programs. Nothing herein shall limit the discretion of the police, court personnel, and judges from
referring individuals suspected, charged, or convicted of a violation of this provision to treatment programs or
facilities as an alternative to prosecution or incarceration, provided that the individual freely consents. For
homeless individuals, such alternative programs shall include, but not be limited to, the Miami-Dade County
Homeless Assistance Project.
(Ord. No. 94-41, § I, 3-17-94; Ord. No. 10-52, 5 7, 9-21-10)
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
ClTY OF MlAMl BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE CODE OF THE
ClTY OF MlAMl BEACH, BY AMENDING CHAPTER 74, ENTITLED
"PEDDLERS AND SOLICITORS," BY AMENDING ARTICLE Ill,
ENTITLED "PANHANDLING ON PUBLIC PROPERTY," BY
AMENDING SECTION 74-76, ENTITLED "DEFINITIONS," BY
PROVIDING DEFINITIONS FOR FINANCIAL INSTITUTION AND FOR
HIGH VOLUME INTERSECTIONS; AND BY AMENDING SECTION 74-
78, ENTITLED "PANHANDLING ON PUBLIC PROPERTY," BY
ADDING ADDITIONAL LOCATIONS WHERE SOLICITING OR
PANHANDLING ON PUBLIC PROPERTY WILL BE CONSIDERED
UNLAWFUL; PROVIDING FOR REPEALER; SEVERABILITY;
CODIFICATION; AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, in light of the pending implementation of a meter program whereby
donations may be made for homeless assistance programs and the enhanced enforcement
efforts to address increased incidents of illegal panhandling in the City, the amendments set
forth herein will address remaining concerns relating to panhandling occurring in areas where
individuals are accessing their money and have reported feeling intimidated when approached
in those circumstances; and
WHEREAS, in response to concerns regarding the safety of individuals panhandling in
certain high volume intersections in the City, as well as the traffic concerns this activity
generates (e.~., traffic impacts as people are being solicited), panhandling should not be
permitted in certain high volume intersections with "Levels of Service" of E or F, as per the City's
Municipal Mobility Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND ClTY
COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF MlAMl BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1.
That Section 74-76, entitled "Definitions," of Article Ill, entitled "Panhandling on Public Property,"
of Chapter 74, entitled "Peddlers and Solicitors," of the Miami Beach City Code, is hereby
amended as follows:
CHAPTER 74
PEDDLERS AND SOLICITORS
ARTICLE Ill. PANHANDLING ON PUBLIC PROPERTY
* * *
Set. 74-76. Definitions.
The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this article, shall have the
meanings ascribed to them in this section:
Financial Institution means an establishment for the custody, loan, exchanqe, or issue of
money; for the extension of credit; and for facilitatinq the transmission of funds, and
includes, but is not limited to, lendinq institutions, banks, credit unions, and check-
cashinq businesses.
Food store selling alcoholic beverages means any food or convenience store which has
a license for package sales of alcoholic beverages from the state division of beverages
and tobacco in the classification of 1-APS, 2-APS or PS.
Hiqh volume intersections means intersections in the city with Levels of Service (LOS) of
"E or "F pursuant to the citv's ratinq of LOS in the Munici~al Mobility Plan, as mav be
amended from time to time.
Outdoor cafe or outdoor restaurant means a use characterized by outdoor table service
of food or beverages prepared for service in an adjacent or attached main structure for
consumption on the premises. The term also includes outdoor bars and outdoor ice
cream parlors.
Package store means a store primarily engaged in the business of selling alcoholic
beverages for off-premises consumption that has a license for package sales of
alcoholic beverages from the state division of beverages and tobacco in the
classification of 1-APS, 2-APS or PS.
Panhandling means begging, asking or soliciting in person for an immediate donation of
money or other thing of value for charity or personal gain, either by words, bodily
gestures, signs or other means indicating one is seeking an immediate donation or other
thing of value.
Person means any individual, school, party, church, religious or other association,
organization, trust, foundation, group, association, partnership, corporation, society or
other entity.
Sidewalk cafe means a use located on a public sidewalk which is associated with a full
service restaurant where food and beverages are prepared, served and sold and are
delivered for consumption on the sidewalk. It is characterized by tables and chairs and
may be shaded by awnings, canopies, or umbrellas if permits are obtained for such
awnings, canopies or umbrellas. It shall also include the public right-of-way connecting
the main restaurant to the sidewalk cafe.
Solicitations means all direct person-to-person requests for immediate contributions in
the form of money or other thing of value, for any religious, political, associational,
educational, benevolent, health-related, humane, philanthropic, patriotic, or
eleemosynary function, event, organization or purpose, or for any charitable cause. The
term also includes panhandling or begging.
SECTION 2.
That Section 74-78, entitled "Panhandling/solicitation prohibited on public property," of Article Ill,
entitled "Panhandling on Public Property," of Chapter 74, entitled "Peddlers and Solicitors," of
the Miami Beach City Code, is hereby amended as follows:
Sec. 74-78. Panhandlinglsolicitation prohibited on public property.
Notwithstanding the city's regulations regarding charitable solicitations, it shall be
unlawful for any person to panhandle or solicit on public property in the following areas:
(1) Within 20 feet in any direction from the outside perimeter, as indicated in the site
plan attached to the city issued permit, of any outdoor cafe, outdoor restaurant,
sidewalk cafe or other establishment serving food or beverages for immediate
consumption;
(2) Within 20 feet in any direction from anv Automatic Teller Machine (ATMI;
(3) Within 20 feet in any direction from any entranceway into or exit from any food
store selling alcoholic beverages or package store;
14) Within 20 feet in any direction from anv entrancewav into or exit from anv
financial institution;
(5) Within 20 feet in any direction from anv ~arkina "~av-on-foot" machine, or other
machine used for paving for parkina;
16) In anv hiah volume intersection in the citv.
SECTION 3. Repealer.
All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith be and the same are hereby
repealed.
SECTION 4. Severability.
If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is held to be invalid or
unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, then said holding shall in no way affect
the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance.
SECTION 5. Codification.
It is the intention of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami Beach, and it is
hereby ordained that the provisions of this ordinance shall become and be made a part of the
Code of the City of Miami Beach, Florida. The sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or
re-lettered to accomplish such intention, and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section,"
"article," or other appropriate word.
SECTION 6. Effective Date.
This Ordinance shall take effect the day of ,2011.
PASSED and ADOPTED this day of ,2011.
ATTEST:
Robert Parcher, City Clerk
F:\ATTO\TURN\ORDINANC\Panhandling 201 I .docx
Mayor Matti Herrera Bower
APPROVED AS M
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
An Ordinance Amending Chapter 2, Article Ill, Division 26, Sections 2-190.1 07 and Section 2-190.1 10 Of The City Code to
Amend the City Affiliation Requirements for Membership on the Community Development Advisory Committee.
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
I 1. Increase access to workforce or affordable housing. 2. Improve the lives of elderly residents. 3. Enhance learning
opportunities for youth. 4. Reduce the number of homeless. 5. Ensure safety and appearance of building structures and I sites.
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): Based on the 2009 Customer Satisfaction Survey: 17.5% of
businesses feel that lack of workforce housina is one of their most im~ortant challenaes: 80% of residents 65-years or older
rated City response to expectations as excellent; 65% of households with children rated the City support of youth
progams as good or excellent; 43.6% of residents responded favorably to the City's handling of homelessness; 64% of
residents felt that code enforcement was acce~table.
Issue:
Shall the City Code be amended to mirror the HUD recommendation for City affiliation requirements for membership on the
Community Development Advisory Committee?
Item SummarylRecommendation:
The U.S. Housing and Urban Development Department (HUD) requires that entitlement communities prepare and file a
Citizen Participation Plan which outlines citizen involvement in an advisory role in the planning, implementation and
assessment of HUD programs; as well as to provide full access to HUD program information to citizens by providing full and
timely disclosure of all information regarding HUD programs.
In 1978, the City submitted a Citizen Participation Plan which outlined the composition of the City's Community Development
Advisory Committee (CDAC), a 14-member advisory body appointed by the City Commission, and included a non-HUD
requirement that CDAC members live in HUD target areas. The specifications outlined in the Citizen Participation Plan were
codified and the City of Miami Beach's CDAC members therefore must consist of appointees from target areas. This has
resulted in prolonged vacancies on occasion as potential appointees are not able to meet these requirements. Due to the
limited pool of prospective members, amending the Citizen Participation Plan so that CDAC members may be individuals
who have been a resident of the City for a minimum of six months (versus the existing requirement of two years) and that
CDAC members may be appointed City-wide (versus the existing requirements that they reside in target areas) would appear
to widen the pool of potential members.
The proposed Ordinance Amendment to the City Code requires two readings. Therefore, before the second reading, the
Administration will undertake steps to amend the Citizen Participation Plan to mirror the new qualifications language in the
Code, and will bring the corresponding legislation to the City Commission concurrently with the second reading of the
ordinance amendment. It is recommended that the Commission adopt the resolution.
Advisory Board Recommendation: I Commissioner Weithorn is referring this item to the May 5, 201 1 NeighborhoodslCommunity Affairs Committee meeting. I
Financial Information:
I
Source of Funds:
I Financial Impact su&mary:
I I I
Amount Account Approved I
u
OBPl
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking:
Anna Parekh X7260
AGENDA ITEM ~r H
I
2
Total
NIA
Q MIAMIBEACH
Ciiy of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33 139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager \d
DATE: April 13, 201 1
SUBJECT AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF MIAMI
BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE Ill, DIVISION 26, SECTIONS 2-
190.107 AND SECTION 2-190.1 10 OF THE CITY CODE TO AMEND THE ClTY
AFFILIATION REQUIREMENTS FOR MEMBERSHIP ON THE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE; PROVIDING FOR REPEALER, SEVERABILITY,
AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
BACKGROUND
The U.S. Housing and Urban Development Department (HUD) requires that entitlement
communities prepare and file a Citizen Participation Plan which outlines citizen involvement in an
advisory role in the planning, implementation and assessment of HUD programs; as well as to
provide full access to HUD program information to citizens by providing full and timely disclosure of
all information regarding HUD programs.
In 1978, the City submitted a Citizen Participation Plan which outlined the composition of the City's
Community Development Advisory Committee (CDAC). CDAC facilitates community involvement
regarding community development activities and serves as a forum to hear citizen priorities, views
and proposals.
Under the City's Citizen Participation Plan, CDAC has advisory capacitywith respect to the planning
and implementation of the activities listed in the Consolidated Plan. CDAC has no legislative powers
or authority, nor has the power to make administrative decisions or direct staff actions. The Citizen
Participation Plan serves as the By-laws of the CDAC. This 14-member advisory body is appointed
by the City Commission, and includes a non-HUD requirement that CDAC members live in HUD
target areas. The specifications outlined in the Citizen Participation Plan were codified and the City
of Miami Beach's CDAC members therefore must consist of appointees from target areas.
However, due to the limited pool of prospective members, vacancies are often difficult to fill. An
option to address this issue would involve amending the Citizen Participation Plan so that CDAC
members may be individuals who have been a resident of the City for a minimum of six months,
versus the existing requirement of two years, and that CDAC members may be appointed City-wide,
versus the existing requirements that they reside in target areas. This change requires both an
amendment to the City Code and an amendment to the City's Citizen Participation Plan that is filed
with US HUD.
The proposed Ordinance Amendment to the City Code requires two readings. Therefore, before the
second reading, this matter will be discussed by the Neighborhoods/CommunityAffairs Committee
on May 5,201 1, and if approved, the Administration and will undertake steps to amend the Citizen
Participation Plan and will bring the corresponding legislation to the City Commission concurrently
with the second reading of the ordinance amendment.
Commission Memorandum
CDAC CODE Ordinance
Page 2 of 2
The original Citizen Participation was adopted by the Mayor and City Commission on July 19,1978
and amended in 1983,1988,1994,1995,1998 and 2001. This Ordinance Amendment would no
longer require appointees to be a resident of a locally designated target area.
Due to the limited number or qualified and eligible participants staff is recommending that the Plan
be amended in a separate item in May, 201 1 and also amend the City Ordinance which requires two
readings.
CONCLUSION
The Ordinance is necessary to effectuate and encourage Citizen Participation by increasing the number
of City residents that are eligible to be appointed to the CDAC. It is recommended that the Mayor and
City Commission approve the proposed Ordinance on first reading, and schedule a second public
hearing.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE Ill, DIVISION 26,
SECTIONS 2-190.107 AND SECTION 2-190.110 OF THE ClTY CODE,
ESTABLISHING THE CITY'S COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY
COMMITTEE, TO AMEND THE ClTY AFFILIATION REQUIREMENTS FOR
MEMBERSHIP ON THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE;
PROVIDING FOR REPEALER, CODIFICATION, SEVERABILITY, AND AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the U.S. Housing and Urban Development Department (HUD) requires that
entitlement communities prepare and file a Citizen Participation Plan which outlines citizen involvement
in an advisory role in the planning, implementation and assessment of HUD programs; as well as to
provide full access to HUD program information to citizens by providing full and timely disclosure of all
information regarding HUD programs; and
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 97-3086 established the City's Community Development Advisory
Committee (CDAC); and
WHEREAS, per the City's Citizen Participation Plan, adopted pursuant to Resolution No. 95-
21538, the fourteen (14) direct appointees to the Committee must fulfill the City affiliation requirement
by either (i) being a resident of a locally designated community development target area for a minimum
of six (6) months; or (ii) demonstrating ownershiplinterest for a minimum of six (6) months in a business
established in a locally designated community development target area for a minimum of six (6)
months; and
WHEREAS, the Administration finds that it is in the best interest of the City to delete the
aforestated affiliation requirement, and instead let the general affiliation requirements pursuant to
Section 2-1 1 (4) of the City Code control.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE
ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
That Miami Beach City Code, Chapter 2, entitled "Administration", Article Ill, entitled "Agencies,
Boards and Committees", Division 26, entitled "Community Development Advisory Committee",
Sections 2-1 90.1 07 and 2-1 90.1 10, are hereby amended as follows:
SECTION I.
Section 2-1 90.107, entitled "Purpose," is hereby amended as follows:
Sec. 2-1 90-1 07 Purpose.
Per the city's citizen participation plan, -- 21 538 j- and as
said plan may also be amended by the city from time to time, the communitydevelopment
advisory committee (CDAC) shall serve as an advisory body, representing all residents of
the city, especially those directly affected by the consolidated plan, which will encompass
CDBG, HOME and ESGP funds, and the section 108 loan guarantee program, to provide
input regarding all phases of the community development program, and to effectuate and
encourage citizen participation from all individuals, especially low and moderate income
persons and residents of community development target areas. In order to ensure
representation from individuals residing in affected CDBG target areas, the administration in
conjunction with the CDAC may hold neighborhood meetingslhearings to obtain input
directly from those affected; however, CDAC attendance is not mandatoly at these special
meetings.
SECTION 2.
Section 2-190.110, entitled "City affiliation," is hereby deleted in its entirety:
SECTION 3. REPEALER
All ordinances or parts of ordinances and all section and parts of sections in conflict herewith be and
the same are hereby repealed.
SECTION 4. SEVERABILITY
If any section, subsection, clause or provision of this Ordinance is held invalid, the remainder shall not
be affected by such invalidity.
SECTION 5. CODIFICATION
It is the intention of the City Commission, and it is hereby ordained that the provisions of this ordinance
shall become and be made part of the Code of the City of Miami Beach as amended; that the sections
of this ordinance may be renumbered or relettered to accomplish such intention; and that the word
"ordinance" may be changed to "section" or other appropriate word.
SECTION 6. EFFECTIVE DATE
This Ordinance shall take effect ten (1 0) days following adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of ,2011.
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM & LANGUAGE
& FOH EXECUTION
CITY CLERK
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
An Ordinance amending the fees for the Preferred Parking Lot from $15.00 to $10.00 for food and
beverage social events at the Convention Center
Key Intended Outcome Supported: I Improve Parking Availability; Maintain Financial Health and Overall Bond Rating. I
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.):
77.2% of respondents rate the availability of parking across the City as too little. Availability of parking
was one of the changes residents identified to Make Miami Beach better to live, work or play.
Issue:
1 Whether to adiust the hourly parking meter rate south of 23m street, increase the hours of enforcement 1 1 and increase the Hotel an-^ tag rate. I
Item SummarylRecommendation: I Centerplate and Global Spectrum both have been charged with increasing social event business at the 1
Convention Center. Parking rates have routinely been cited by potential clients as a reason for not
selecting the Convention Center for the event. The Administration, Global Spectrum and the Convention
Center Advisory Board recommend the following criteria which are narrowly tailored for the social event
market: Be booked solely as a Food and Beverage function to include but not limited to at least one (1) of
the following: Breakfast; LunchIBrunch; Dinner; Reception:
1. Excludes exhibits, separate meetings held outside of the primary location, and cannot be
associated with a convention, tradeshow, public show andlor corporate meeting.
2. Confirm a minimum attendance of seventy-five (75) attendees.
3. Produce, at the client's sole expense, an approved coupon that is sent either by the Food &
Beverage Concessionaire or the Convention Center's management Company, via mail to all
confirmed attendees prior to the day of the event. A copy must be presented to the CMB Parking
Department within five (5) business days of a fully executed agreement for approval.
4. MBCC in-house Food & Beverage Concessionaire must provide, in writing, to the CMB Parking
Department within five (5) business days of an executed agreement the following information:
Name of Event; Date of Event; Approximate Attendance; MBCC Food and Beverage Cont
information; and Client's name and cell phone number.
5. The approved coupon can only be used the day of the event; the coupon can only be used in the
designated Preferred Parking Lot ("Pn lot); only the original coupon (not a copy) will be presented
and accepted by the parking lot attendant. If these rules are not followed, guest will pay full
parking rate.
6. Coupons must include the date the coupon is valid for, the name of the event and be sequentially
numbered.
The proposed amendment is estimated to have the following annual fiscal impact: (1) an additional 44
events may be booked at the Convention Center; (2) generate $588,000 in new revenue at the Convention
Center; and (3) increase parking revenues by $43,000.
Recommendation: Approve at First Reading and schedule a second and final public hearing.
Advisory Board Recommendation: 1 Trans~ortation and Parkina Committee - On February 7,201 1, the Committee approved the
recommended amendment.
Finance and Citwvide Committee - On February 24,201 1, the Committee approved the recommended I amendment. 1
Financial Information:
1
I I
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking: I Saul Frances, Parking Director I
Source of
Funds: n
OBPl
AGENDA ITEM Rsl
Financial Impact Summary:
Approved Account
I
2
Total
Amount
MIAMIBEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 331 39, www.miarnibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
DATE: April 13, 201 1 FIRST READING
SUBJECT: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE FEES FORTHE PREFERRED PARKING LOT
FROM $15.00 TO $10.00 FOR FOOD AND BEVERAGE SOCIAL EVENTS AT
THE CONVENTION CENTER
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
The Administration recommends that the Mayor and Commission approve the amendment
at first reading and schedule a second and final public hearing.
ANALYSIS
Centerplate and Global Spectrum both have been charged with increasing social event
business at the Convention Center. To that end, both entities have increased their efforts
and have been moderately successful in booking smaller pieces of business. Parking rates
have routinely been cited by potential clients as a reason for not selecting the Convention
Center for the event.
On September 21, 2010, the Convention Center Advisory Board (CCAB) was reviewing
recent social catering sales activity and discussed the City's ordained parking rates for the
Convention Center area. The CCAB discussed the matter extensively and felt the City
should consider developing a different parking rate structure for social events in order to
increase bookings. Subsequently, a resolution of the CCAB was unanimously passed to
request the City Commission consider a parking program to incentivize social business.
The City Commission referred this matter to the Finance and Citywide Projects Committee
and Transportation and Parking Committee at their regularly scheduled Commission
meeting on January 19,201 1.
PARKING AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
The Transportation and Parking Committee met on February 7,201 1 and considered this
matter. The item was presented to the Committee by the Chair of the Convention Center
Advisory Board and City Staff. The committee unanimously recommended in favor of
creating the aforementioned program to help increase social business at the Convention
Center.
April 13, 201 I City Commission Memo
Parking Rate Ordinance Amendment - First Reading
Page 2 of 3
FINANCE AND CITYWIDE PROJECTS COMMITTEE
The Finance and Citywide Projects Committee met on February 24,201 1 and considered
this matter. The item was presented to the Committee by Max Sklar, Director of Tourism
and Cultural Development. The committee voted in favor of creating the aforementioned
program to help increase social business at the Convention Center.
CRITERIA FOR SOCIAL EVENTS
The Administration, Global Spectrum and the Convention Center Advisory Board
recommend the following criteria trigger the proposed $1 0.00 parking rate. This criteria are
narrowly tailored for the social event market.
1. Be booked solely as a Food and Beverage function to include but not limited to at
least one (1) of the following:
a. Breakfast
b. LunchIBrunch
c. Dinner
d. Reception
2. Excludes exhibits, separate meetings held outside of the primary location, and
cannot be associated with a convention, tradeshow, public show andlor corporate
meeting.
3. Confirm a minimum attendance of seventy-five (75) attendees.
4. Produce, at the client's sole expense, an approved coupon that is sent either by the
Food & Beverage Concessionaire or the Convention Center's management
Company, via mail to all confirmed attendees prior to the day of the event. A copy
must be presented to the CMB Parking Department within five (5) business days of a
fully executed agreement for approval.
5. MBCC in-house Food & Beverage Concessionaire must provide, in writing, to the
CMB Parking Department within five (5) business days of an executed agreement
the following information:
a. Name of Event
b. Date of Event
c. Approximate Attendance
d. MBCC Food and Beverage Contact information
e. Client's name and cell phone number
6. The approved coupon can only be used the day of the event; the coupon can only be
used in the designated Preferred Parking Lot ("P lot); only the original coupon (not a
copy) will be presented and accepted by the parking lot attendant. If these rules are
not followed, guest will pay full parking rate.
7. Coupons must include the date the coupon is valid for, the name of the event and be
sequentially numbered.
April 13, 2011 City Commission Memo
Parking Rate Ordinance Amendment - First Reading
Page 3 of 3
FISCAL IMAPCT:
The proposed reduction of the parking rate from $15.00 to $10.00 per vehicle for food and
beverage social events at the Convention Center is estimated to have the following annual
fiscal impact:
An additional 44 events may be booked at the Convention Center.
Generate $588,000 in new revenue at the Convention Center.
Increase parking revenues by $43,000.
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends that the Mayor and City Commission approve the item on
first reading and schedule a second and final public hearing.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE
ClTY OF MlAMl BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE CODE OF THE
ClTY OF MlAMl BEACH, BY AMENDING CHAPTER 106, ENTITLED
"TRAFFIC AND VEHICLES," BY AMENDING ARTICLE II, ENTITLED
"METERED PARKING," BY AMENDING DIVISION 1, ENTITLED
"GENERALLY," BY AMENDING SECTION 106-55, ENTITLED
"PARKING RATES, FEES, AND PENALTIES" TO PROVIDE RATES
AND CRITERIA FOR THE PREFERRED PARKING LOT LOCATED AT
18~" STREET AND MERIDIAN AVENUE, INCLUDING PROVIDING
PENALTIES AND AMENDING THE FEES FOR THE LOT FOR FOOD
AND BEVERAGE SOCIAL EVENTS AT THE MlAMl BEACH
CONVENTION CENTER FROM $15.00 TO $10.00, PROVIDING FOR
CODIFICATION, REPEALER, SEVERABILITY, AND AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
WHEREAS, Centerplate and Global Spectrum both have been charged with increasing
social event business at the Convention Center; and
WHEREAS, both entities have increased their efforts and have been moderately
successful in booking smaller functions; however, parking rates have routinely been cited by
potential clients as a reason for not selecting the Convention Center for the event; and
WHEREAS, on September 21, 201 0, the Convention Center Advisory Board (CCAB)
discussed the matter extensively and unanimously passed a resolution requesting the City
Commission to consider a parking program to incentivize social business; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission referred this matter to the Finance and Citywide
Projects Committee and to the Transportation and Parking Committee at its regularly scheduled
Commission meeting on January 19, 201 1; and
WHEREAS, the Transportation and Parking Committee met on February 7, 201 1 and
the Finance and Citywide Projects Committee met on February 24, 201 1 and both committees
approved the item at their respective committee meetings; and
WHEREAS, the Administration, Global Spectrum, and the Convention Center Advisory
Board developed criteria that are narrowly tailored to the social event market with regard to the
proposed parking amendments.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF
THE ClTY OF MlAMl BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That Chapter 106, "Traffic and Vehicles," Article II, "Metered Parking," Division 1,
"Generally," Section 106-55, "Municipal Parking Garage Rates and Penalties," of the Code of
the City of Miami Beach, Florida, is hereby amended as follows:
CHAPTER 106
TRAFFIC AND VEHICLES
ARTICLE II. METERED PARKING
DIVISION I. GENERALLY
Set. 106-55. Parking rates, fees, and penalties.
(b) Municipal parking garage and Preferred Parking Lot rates and penalties.
@ Preferred Parking Lot (18TH Street & Meridian Ave)
a. $1 5.00 flat rate per vehicle. -
b. For food and beverage social events at the Miami Beach Convention Center -
/MBCC), $10 flat rate per vehicle. Food and beverage social events at MBCC
shall meet the following criteria:
Be booked solelv as a food and beverage function to include, but not be
limited to, at least one (1) of the following:
i. - breakfast;
ii. - lunchlbrunch;
iii. - dinner; and/or
iv. - reception.
Excludes exhibits; separate meetings held outside of the primary location;
and cannot be associated with a convention, trade show, public show, and/or
corporate meeting.
A minimum attendance of seventy-five (75) attendees must be confirmed.
@J Produce (at the client's sole expense) an approved parking coupon that is
sent either bv the food & beverage concessionaire or the MBCC management
companv, via mail, to all confirmed attendees prior to the day of the event. A
copv must be presented to the citv's ~arking department for approval within five
(5) business days of a fullv executed agreement for the event.
MBCC in-house food & beverage concessionaire must provide, in writin%
to the city's parking department, within five (5) business davs of an executed
agreement for the event, the following information:
i. - name of event;
ii. - ... date of event;
Ill. - approximate attendance;
iv. MBCC food and beveraqe contact information; and -
v. - client's name and mobile telephone number.
(6) The a~proved coupon can only be used the day of the event. The coupon can
only be used in the Preferred Parking Lot. Only the original coupon (not a copy) will
be presented and accepted by the parking lot attendant. If these rules are not
followed, the guest will pay the full parking rate.
Coupons must include the date of the event, the name of the event, and be
sequentially numbered.
SECTION 2. CODIFICATION.
It is the intention of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami Beach, and it is
hereby ordained that the provisions of this ordinance shall become and be made part of the
Code of the City of Miami Beach, Florida. The sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or
relettered to accomplish such intention, and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section",
"article", or other appropriate word.
SECTION 3. REPEALER.
All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith be and the same are hereby
repealed.
SECTION 4. SEVERABILIW.
If any section, subsection, clause or provision of this Ordinance is held invalid, the
remainder shall not be affected by such invalidity.
SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Ordinance shall take effect ten (1 0) days following adoption.
PASSED and ADOPTED this day of ,2011.
ATTEST:
Mayor Matti Herrera Bower
Robert Parcher, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO
FORM & LANGUAGE
Underline denotes new language
denotes deletions 04/06/2011
T:\AGENDA\2011 \Apnll3\Regular\PreferredParkingLotRateAmendlstRead.ord.doc
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
A Resolution approving, following a duly noticed public hearing, the placement of a memorial plaque on the Bus
Shelter located at 3801 Collins Avenue honoring Harold Tillman.
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Increase community satisfaction with City government
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): Miami Beach Customer Satisfaction Survey indicates 75%
of residents and 68% of businesses rated Miami Beach City government as excellent or good in meeting their needs
and expectations.
Issue: I Shall the Mayor and City Commission adopt the resolution?
Item SummarylRecommendation:
I On Se~tember 3. 2010. Commissioner Wolfson reauested a referral to the Neighborhoods/Community Affairs I
committee (NCAC) meeting to discuss the placement of a small plaque on the busshelter located at 3801 Collins
Avenue in memory of Mr. Harold Tillman, who was instrumental in the installation of this bus shelter. As required by
City Code, the placement of the plaque honoring Mr. Tillman was discussed and approved at the December 14,201 0
NCAC meeting. The plaque design was also reviewed and approved at the February 15,201 1 Arts in Public Places
(AiPP) Committee meeting, subject to the following design specifications:
1. Font Futura Standard with text in black;
2. Material brushed stainless steel;
3. Dimensions 7" W x 2.5" H x 1/16" thick; and
4. Name centered vertically and horizontally underneath the advertising wall within the bus shelter
The estimated cost of the plaque is approximately $225. Clear Channel Adshel, the City's bus shelter contractor, has
agreed to install the plaque free of charge. Pursuant to Section 82-504 of the City's Code, the City Commission called
for a public hearing regarding the placement of the Harold Tillman commemorative plaque at their March 9, 201 1,
meeting. The City Clerk subsequently published the appropriate Public Notice on March 24, 2011, meeting the
requirement that the notice be sent at least 10 days prior to said Public Hearing in a newspaper of general circulation
in Miami Beach.
I THE ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE RESOLUTION. 1
Advisory Board Recommendation: I NCAC Approval: 12/14/10; AiPP Approval: 211 511 1 1
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking: I Fernando Vazquez, P.E., x.6399
Financial Information:
T:\AGENDA\201 IM-13-11Vlarold Tillman Plaque- Public Hearing Sum 4-1 I .doc
AMI BEACH 477
Account
Transportation Division Other Operating Expenses 01 1-0870-
000343
Financial Impact Summary:
Amount
$225.00
$225.00
Source of
Funds:
El OBPI
I
"2
1 &3
Total
MIAMIBEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 331 39, www.rniamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
DATE: April 13, 201 1
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE
ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING, FOLLOWING A
DULY NOTICED PUBLIC HEARING, THE PLACEMENT OF A
MEMORIAL PLAQUE ON THE BUS SHELTER LOCATED AT 3801
COLLINS AVENUE, IN MEMORY OF MR. HAROLD TILLMAN, IN
ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 82-504 OF THE ClTY CODE.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
FUNDING
To be paid with $225.00 from the Public Works Department, Transportation Division
Other Operating Expenses Budget (01 1-0870-000343).
BACKGROUND
On September 3, 2010, Commissioner Wolfson requested a referral to the
Neighborhoods/Community Affairs Committee (NCAC) meeting to discuss the placement
of a small plaque on the bus shelter located at 3801 Collins Avenue in memory of Mr.
Harold Tillman, who was instrumental in the installation of this bus shelter.
Mr. Tillman was born in New York in November 1912. While living in New York, he wrote
for the Wall Street Journal. On May 27, 1976, he moved from New York to the Four
Freedoms House, located at 3800 Collins Avenue, where he was the president of the
Social Club from 1979 to 1989. Mr. Tillman was also the founder of the Four Freedoms
House library.
ANALYSIS
The process of approving the placement of a memorial plaque is governed by Sec. 82-
504 of the City Code (Attachment 1). As required by City Code, the placement of the
plaque honoring Mr. Tillman was discussed and approved at the December 14, 2010
NCAC meeting.
Subsequently, and also as required by City Code, the plaque design was reviewed and
approved at the February 15, 201 1 Arts in Public Places (AiPP) Committee meeting,
Commission Memorandum- Final Approval for the Harold Tillman Plaque
April 13, 201 1
Page 2 of 2
subject to the following design specifications:
1. Font Futura Standard with text in black;
2. Material brushed stainless steel;
3. Dimensions 7" W x 2.5" H x 1/16" thick; and
4. Name centered vertically and horizontally underneath the advertising wall within
the bus shelter.
City staff has obtained a quote and design layout for the plaque from Baron Sign
Manufacturing, which has provided the City with similar plaques in the past (Attachment
2). The estimated cost of the plaque is approximately $225. Clear Channel Adshel, the
City's bus shelter contractor, has agreed to install the plaque free of charge.
Pursuant to Section 82-504 of the City's Code, the City Commission called for a public
hearing regarding the placement of the Harold Tillman commemorative plaque at their
March 9, 201 1, meeting. The City Clerk subsequently published the appropriate Public
Notice on March 24, 201 1, meeting the requirement that the notice be sent at least 10
days prior to said Public Hearing in a newspaper of general circulation in Miami Beach.
Conclusion
The Administration recommends the public hearing be held and the placement of the
Harold Tillman memorial plaque be approved.
Attachments:
1. City Code, Sec. 82-504
2. Plaque Layout
JMGIDRBIFHBIHDCIFV
T:\AGENDAUOI 1\4-13-1 I\Harold Tillman Plaque- Public Hearing Memo 4-1 1 .doc
Attachment 1
I %&. Fa-=. - Monuments or memorials.
(a)
Whenever there is a proposal to establish a monument or memorial on public property in the city, it shall
first be considered and reviewed by the committee according to the following procedures:
(1)
Any person, organization, association, corporation or other entity, including a member of the city
commission or the administration of the city, may propose the establishment of a monument or
memorial at any time by submitting a proposal in writing to the committee.
(2)
Within a reasonable time after receipt of the proposal, the committee shall meet to consider and
review same. Notice of the meeting shall be given to all persons who have proposed the
establishment of the monument or memorial.
(3)
After reviewing the proposal in accordance with its established selection criteria, the committee
shall transmit a written recommendation to the city commission regarding same.
(4)
The city commission may only consider a proposal to establish a monument or memorial that
has been approved by a majority of the members of the committee.
(5)
Within a reasonable time after receiving the recommendation for the establishment of a
monument or memorial from the committee, the city commission shall call a public hearing.
(6)
Notice of a public hearing regarding the establishment of the monument or memorial shall be
published at least 10 days prior to the hearing in a newspaper of general circulation in the city.
(7)
At the close of the public hearing, the city commission may approve the establishment of the
monument or memorial. In approving the establishment, the commission shall be governed by its
established selection criteria. Additionally, any proposal to establish a monument or memorial
must be approved by a five-sevenths vote of the city commission.
(8)
Upon approval of the establishment of the monument or memorial, the city commission shall
forward the proposal to the art in public places committee. The art in public places committee will
then make its recommendation to the city commission regarding the location, aesthetic quality,
lated issues in
1116th brushed stainless steel w/ black text. Font: Futura medium Mounting: pin and DST
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING, FOLLOWING A DULY
NOTICED PUBLIC HEARING, THE PLACEMENT OF A MEMORIAL
PLAQUE ON THE BUS SHELTER LOCATED AT 3801 COLLINS
AVENUE, IN MEMORY OF MR. HAROLD TILLMAN, IN ACCORDANCE
WITH SECTION 82-504 OF THE ClTY CODE. .
WHEREAS, on September 3, 2010, Commissioner Wolfson requested a referral to the
Neighborhoods/Community Affairs Committee (NCAC) meeting to discuss the placement of a
small plaque on the bus shelter located at 3801 Collins Avenue, in memory of Mr. Harold
Tillman; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Tillman was instrumental in the installation of the bus shelter at 3801
Collins Avenue; and
WHEREAS, as required by Section 82-504 of the City Code, the placement of the
plaque honoring Mr. Tillman was discussed and approved at the December 14, 2010 NCAC
meeting; and
WHEREAS, as also required by the City Code, the memorial plaque was discussed and
approved at the Art in Public Places (AiPP) Committee, contingent upon the following design
specifications: font Futura Standard with text in black; material brushed stainless steel;
dimensions 7" W x 2.5" H x 1/16" thick; and name centered vertically and horizontally
underneath the advertising wall within the bus shelter; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 82-504 of the City Code, at its regular meeting on
March 9, 201 1, the City Commission held a duly noticed public hearing regarding the placement
of the Harold Tillman memorial plaque.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED THAT THE MAYOR AND ClTY
COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that the Mayor and City
Commission hereby approve, following a duly noticed public hearing, the placement of a
meinorial plaque on the bus shelter located at 3801 Collins Avenue, in memory of Mr. Harold
Tillman, in accordance with Section 82-504 of the City Code.
PASSED and ADOPTED this day of April, 201 1.
ATTEST:
Robert H. Parcher, City Clerk ROVED AS TO Matti Herrera Bower, Mayor izM
T:\AGENDA\2011\4-13-1 I\Harold Tillman Plaque- Public Hearing Reso 4-1 I .doc
482
I
2BtSlE I THURSDAY, MARCH 24,2011 NE
XI- _ I^____.I____ ._ -_------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
A Resolution approving, following a duly noticed public hearing, the following agreements pertaining to a proposed Lease )
Agreement having a term of nine {9) and 364 hays, between the City and Pennsylvania Avenue, LLC D/B/A Gigi, for use of
approximately 7,000 square feet of ground level retail space at the Pennsylvania Avenue Garage, 1661 Pennsylvania Avenue,
Miami Beach, Florida for a high-quality restaurant (primary use), with ancillary uses for a high-quality bakery, barlcafe and book
and gift shop: 1) a Letter of lntent (LOI) setting forth the substantive business terms of the Lease; 2) a Pre-Lease Due Diligence
Review Agreement; and 3) a draft, in substantial form, of the proposed lease; and authorizing the City Manager to execute the
Pre-Lease Due Diligence Review Agreement; authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the final lease based upon the
business terms in the LO1 and subject to the final review by the City manager and the City Attorney's Office; and further waiving
by 517th~ vote the competitive bid requirement.
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
I Increase resident satisfaction with the level of services and facilities. 1
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.):
Approximately 40% of retail businesses surveyed, rank Miami Beach as one of the best places to do business and 61 % of
the same group would recommend Miami Beach as a place to do business.
Issue:
I Shall the City Commission approve the Lease Agreement? 1
Item SummarylRecommendation:
PUBLIC HEARING
On February 14,201 1, Koniver Stern, the City's Real Estate Broker, presented the City with a proposed Letter of lntent (LOI) from
Mr. Amir Ben Zion, to lease approximately 7,000 square feet of ground floor retail space in the recently completed Pennsylvania
Avenue Garage, located at 1661 Pennsylvania Avenue. The prospective tenant is planning to open a second version of its highly
acclaimed Gigi's Restaurant currently operating in Miami's Wynwood district. Based on preliminary estimates, the Tenant's cost to
build out the shell space is anticipated to cost approximately $2.5 Million. Due to the nature of the City's charter involving the ' lease of city-owned property, the maximum allowable term under the charter is nine (9) years and three hundred and sixty four 1 (364) days. In consideration of these circumstances, the prospective tenant has requested a six (6) month due diligence review
period to precede the actual lease commencement date, in order to allow them to reserve leasing rights while advancing design 1 and plan development in order to ascertain the feasibility of obtaining a full building permit prior to commencement of the lease.
On March 14, 201 1, the City's Finance Committee approved in concept the terms and conditions related to a Pre-Lease Due
Diligence Agreement and a Lease Agreement, provided for in the attached Letter of lntent (LOI), as follows:
The Pre-Lease Due Diligence Agreement reserves the retail space for a maximum of six (6) months, to commence immediately
upon approval of the proposed lease by the City Commission and terminate upon the earlier of six months or the date on which
the tenant is ready to obtain a full building permit for the proposed improvements to the space. As a condition for reserving the
space during this period the prospective tenant shall post a $25,000 fee with the City. The proposed lease generally provides for
a term of nine years and 364 days, at an initial base rent of $75.00 per square foot (adjusted by 3% annually commencing during
the third year); percentage rent; and a proportionate share of Common Area Maintenance costs (taxes and insurance), projected
at $10.00 per square foot during the first year of the lease.
The Administration recommends approval, following a duly noticed public hearing, of the proposed Pre-Lease Due Diligence
Review Agreement and the Letter of lntent (LOI), setting forth the substantive business terms of the Lease Agreement between
the City and Pennsylvania Avenue, LLC., and further authorizing the Mayor and City Commission to execute the Final Lease,
based upon the business terms in the LO1 and subject to final review by the City Manager and the City Attorney's Office.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
] Finance & Citywide Projects Committee: March 24, 201 1
Financial Information: I Source of Funds: n/a I Amount I Account I
I 1 I nla
Financial Impact Summary:
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking:
) Anna Parekh, extension 7193
MIAMIBEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33 139, www.miarnibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
DATE: April 13, 201 1 PUBLIC HEARING
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF
MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING, FOLLOWING A DULY NOTICED
PUBLIC HEARING, THE FOLLOWING AGREEMENTS PERTAINING TO THE
PROPOSED LEASE AGREEMENT (THE LEASE), HAVING ATERM OF NINE (9)
YEARS AND 364 DAYS, BETWEEN THE ClTY AND PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE
LLC, DlBlA GIGI, FOR THE USE OF APPROXIMATELY 7000 SQUARE FEET OF
GROUND LEVEL RETAIL SPACE AT THE PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE GARAGE,
1661 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, FOR A HIGH-
QUALITY RESTAURANT (PRIMARY USE), WITH ANCILLARY USES FOR A
HIGH-QUALITY BAKERY, BARICAFE, AND BOOK AND GIFT SHOP: 1) A
LETTER OF INTENT (LOI), SETTING FORTH THE SUBSTANTIVE BUSINESS
TERMS OF THE LEASE; 2) A PRE-LEASE DUE DlLLlGENCE REVIEW
AGREEMENT; AND 3) A DRAFT, IN SUBSTANTIAL FORM, OF THE PROPOSED
LEASE; AUTHORIZING THE ClTY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE PRE-LEASE
DUE DlLLlGENCE REVIEW AGREEMENT; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND
ClTY CLERK TO EXECUTE THE FINAL LEASE, BASED UPON THE BUSINESS
TERMS IN THE LO1 AND SUBJECT TO FINAL REVIEW BY THE ClTY
MANAGER AND ClTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE; AND FURTHER WAIVING, BY
517THS VOTE, THE COMPETITIVE BIDDING AND APPRAISAL REQUIRMENTS
(AS PERMITTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 82-39 OF THE ClTY CODE),
FINDING SUCH WAIVER TO BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
KEY INTENDED OUTCOMES SUPPORTED
Increase resident satisfaction with the level of services and facilities.
BACKGROUND
As you are aware, the recently completed Pennsylvania Avenue Garage located at 1661
Pennsylvania Avenue (the Garage) was built with approximately 7,000 square feet of retail space.
The Administration has been working with the Koniver Stern Group (KSG), the City's contracted real
estate broker, to market this space as available for lease. The space is available in its entirety, or
can be sub-divided into smaller spaces. KSG researched and marketed the space according to
industry standard.
Commission Memorandum
GIGl's
April 13, 201 1
Page 2 of 4
The space has been available since the CO was issued for the building on October 29,201 0. The
City, via KSG, has shown the space to several restaurateurs and retail operations. While showing
the space, prospective tenants were informed that it is not the City's intention to provide or fund any
of the necessary improvements for prospective tenants, which will include, among other things,
installation of HVAC, bathrooms, lighting, dry wall, flooring, etc. Further, the space was not built with
any venting system or grease trap to support a restaurant tenant.
In addition, pursuant to City Code, lease terms beyond ten years require a referendum. As a result,
the maximum lease term for the space without a referendum in nine years, 364 days. In discussing
potential prospects for this space with KSG, the City was advised that the short term restriction may
present an issue for certain tenants, as the necessary build-out for certain uses (such as a
restaurant) can be extensive, which in turn would drive up the cost of amortizing the capital
investment over the shorter term. By comparison, private landlords can often offer terms far
exceeding ten years to accommodate sizeable tenant investment in the space. As a result, in order
to be more competitive with private market landlords, the City would need to consider other ways of
making a potential lease more favorable.
ANALYSIS
On February 14,201 1, KSG presented the City with a proposed Letter of Intent (LOI) from Mr. Amir
Ben Zion, of Pennsylvania Avenue, LLC D/B/A Gigi (tenant or Gigi), to lease approximately 7,000
square feet of ground floor retail space available in the recently completed Pennsylvania Avenue
Garage, located at 1661 Pennsylvania Avenue. The prospective tenant is planning to open a
second version of its highly acclaimed Gigi's Restaurant currently operating in Miami's Wynwood
district. As indicated in the attached concept proposal from Gigi, Amir Ben Zion has an extensive
background in the restaurant industry and has created many landmark culinary and hospitality
landmarks in Miami and Miami Beach, including, but not limited to, The Townhouse Hotel and Bond
Street Japanese Restaurant on 2oth Street, Miss Yip Chinese Cafe on Lincoln Road and Sra.
Martinez in the Design District. The tenant's plan which generally encompasses the entire retail
space of the Garage, provides for an eclectic mix of uses, which will include Gigi's noodles, buns
and BBQ, Gigi's burgers and beers, Gigi's coffee and bakery and the Gigi mini bar. A copy of the
tenant's preliminary concept plan is included as "Exhibit A to this memorandum.
Based on preliminary estimates, the Tenant's cost to build out the shell space is anticipated to cost
approximately $2.5 Million, which includes the installation of a grease trap, additional sub-grade
plumbing and kitchen exhaust venting, none of which are provided for in the current design of the
building. Typically, a build-out of this nature would command a term in excess of ten years in order
to amortize the capital investment in the project. However, due to the City's charter involving the
lease of city-owned property, the tenant will instead agree to the maximum allowable term under the
charter of nine (9) years and three hundred and sixty four (364) days. The prospective tenant is
nonetheless committing to a minimum capital investment of $1.2 million as a condition of the Lease.
However, the prospective tenant has requested consideration of a six (6) month due diligence
period to precede the actual lease commencement date, in order to allow them to reserve leasing
rights while advancing design and plan development and consulting with the City's Planning and
Building Departments in order to ascertain the feasibility of obtaining a full building permit prior to
commencement of the Lease. The prospective tenant is willing to invest a considerable sum and
time necessary to develop full plans without the full benefit and security of an executed lease, while
posting a $25,000 fee with the City, which will be refundable in the event the prospective tenant is
unable to obtain a full building permit within six months in spite of reasonable and verifiable efforts to
do so. During the six-month due diligence period, the City retains the right to continue to market the
Commission Memorandum
GIGl's
April 13, 201 1
Page 3 of 4
property and accept back-up offers to lease the site. Pursuant to direction from the City Attorney's
Office, the Administration has negotiated two separate instruments which were presented to the
City's Finance and Citywide Projects Committee for its consideration on March 24,201 1, as follows:
Pre-Lease Due Diligence Period
The first item is a "Pre-Lease Due Diligence Period," outlined in the attached Letter of Intent (LOI),
which is attached hereto as "Exhibit B." This document reserves the retail space for a maximum of
six (6) months, to commence immediately upon approval of the proposed lease by the City
Commission. The Pre-Lease Due Diligence Period will terminate upon the earlier of six months after
the approval date of the Lease terms by the City Commission, or the date on which the tenant is
ready to obtain a full building permit for the proposed improvements to the space, in which case the
$25,000 security for the Pre-Lease Agreement shall be credited towards the Tenant's Minimum
Security Deposit. Under the terms of this Agreement, the Tenant may choose to proceed with the
Lease at the end of the six months, even if they haven't obtained a full building permit. However, at
that time, the Tenant would be subject to the full terms of the Lease. It should further be noted that
all costs incurred during the due diligence period are borne by the Tenant.
Proposed Lease Terms
The second item involves the actual terms of the proposed Lease which are also set forth in the
attached LO!. In recognition of the sizeable capital investment by the prospective tenant, the
Administration is recommending the maximum allowable lease term of nine years and 364 days.
The proposed Lease includes a base rent (adjusted annually, commencing the third Lease Year), as
well as a percentage of gross, with rent commencement to occur on the earlier of six months after
Lease Commencement or ninety days from the sooner of the either the TCO or the opening of the
business. A full year rent payment under these terms represents approximately $525,000 in rental
income to the City (pending verification of actual square footage and exclusive of any percentage
of gross collected and CAM to be charged).
While there are few market comparables for retail spaces on 17' Street in the immediate vicinity, the
proposed base rent of $75 per square foot is above the $60 per square foot asking rent for the
comparable retail space at 1677-1681 Lenox Avenue. Furthermore, and as noted above, the
Administration has required that, in addition to the base rent, the prospective tenant will pay to the
City a percentage of gross revenues, equivalent to two (2%) percent of revenues in excess of $8
million and three (3%) of revenues in excess of $9 million. Gross revenues will not include tips or
taxes. In addition to base and percentage rent, the prospective tenant will pay is prorated share of
Common Area Maintenance (CAM) costs, including any real estate taxes assessed in the future.
The first year's CAM costs are projected at $10.00 per square foot or $70,000 annually.
CONCLUSION
Section 82-37 of the Miami Beach City Code, governing the salellease of public property, as
amended by the City Commission on September 15, 2010, provides that the lease of any City-
owned property for a term of ten (1 0) years or less (including renewal option periods) requires the
following:
1) the proposed lease shall be transmitted by the City Manager (without need for referral
by the City Commission) to the Finance and Citywide Projects Committee (F&CPC), for
review; and
Commission Memorandum
GIGl's
April 13, 201 1
Page 4 of 4
2) City Commission approval accompanied by a public hearing, which may be set by the
City Manager and shall be advertised not less than seven (7) days prior to said hearing
in order to obtain citizen input into the proposed lease.
Sections 82-39 further provides for the waiver of the competitive bidding requirement, by 517'~' vote
of the City Commission, upon a finding by the City Commission that the public interest would be
served by waiving such condition.
On March 24,201 1, the F&CPC recommended in favor of the proposed lease and directed staff to
work with the City's broker and the prospective tenant to finalize the terms and conditions pertaining
to the Pre-Lease Due Diligence Period and the Lease Agreement for approval by the full City
Commission.
The prospective tenant's proposed use is desirable for the available retail space in the City-owned
Garage, providing an attractive variety of uses under the auspices, development and management
of an experienced operator. The Administration therefore recommends that the Mayor and City
Commission approve, following a duly notice public hearing, the proposed Pre-Lease Due Diligence
Review Agreement and the Letter of Intent (LOI) setting forth the substantive business terms of the
Lease Agreement between the City and Pennsylvania Avenue, LLC., and further authorizing the
Mayor and City Commission to execute the Final Lease, based upon the business terms in the LO1
and subject to final review by the City Manager and the City Attorney's Office.
JMG/HMF&/Ke
Attachments.
EXHIBIT "A
nood!es Dbq beer Gigi is a culinary hub dedicated to community and urbanism. It offers cutting-edge, high-performance, affordable "comfort" food. Gigi is an industry innovator. The gigi paradigm--stark, interactive, whimsical, gastronomically addictive-- treats dining like Frank Gehry's building treats concert-going. Gigi presents cooking like a live symphony. New World Center is a program-driven, inviting building that calls people to come in and experience the music. Gehry described his idea as "the building putting on a performance", which is exactly the gigi concept: the kitchen puts on a performance, almost a striptease. In gigi, the glass walls are the proscenium, the open kitchens are central focal points and stages for chefs (or musician-chefs), and the people walking or driving by are the audience. People are part of the spectacle and that inspires them to participate. On a small scale, the exhibitionistic, rough and tumble, democratic openness of Gigi echoes the Gehry design. Gigi will enhance the peoplelbuilding interaction. Gigi will offer an exploration of interactive, exposed kitchens connected by a maze of art: gigi noodles, buns & BBQ (similar to the gigi on N Miami Av) will lead to gigi burgers & beer, gigi coffee & bakery, and the gigi minibar. The gigi village will create a bustling, hip agora environment. It will be wi-fi friendly and equipped with a top-of-the-line sound system whose speakers can feed the live performances in NWC. Gigi will offer takeout to people who set up folding chairs in the park. It will make Pennsylvania and 17th Sts an extension of Lincoln Rd, a bridge to the convention center, city hall and performance centers. The gigi demographic of twenties to fifties sophisticated urban professionals will grow to include families and tourists spilling forth from the mall and the beach. The existing gigi at 3470 N Miami Av has been open since August 26 and has become an extraordinary success with no PR and no advertising. In five months it has become a four million dollar business with a seating capacity of only 98. The lines outside the gigi door are legendary. Newsweek, Southern Living, and Food and Wine have named gigi one of the top ten new restaurants to open in the U.S. this year. Gigi is the brainchild of Amir ben Zion who has created many successful culinary and hospitality landmarks in Miami Beach and Miami: the Townhouse Hotel and Bond St Japanese restaurant, which celebrated 10 years of profitable operation this year, were designed with respect to the original art deco structure and have remained strong crowd favorites; Miss Yip Chinese Cafe, which revived and glamorized Chinese food in Miami Beach; Sra Martinez in the Design District, where celebrity chef Michelle Bernstein, currently a judge on Ironchef, is reinventing Barcelona-style tapas; Bardot, a livingroom-nightclub-artgallery which has reinvented the live music venue in Miami; and, finally, gigi, where chef Jeff McGinnis, of Top- Chef and Ritz Carlton fame, is performing culinary art.
noa?ies bbq beer champaam pipar heidsieck brul champagne (75GndI piper heiddeck brut chmnpagne split (1B7mll white pind grin, acrobat oregwr chardonnay, j lohr riwrstone, ca riesling, nex1. wa sau-n blanc. tampura. chile Mend, naked ed~. hanu, red cabamst, castle rock. ~apa mrbt, ~~. ca rnatbec, el=, argentsls syrah. libaziy school, a mot noir. pseph dnwil k Ibrel, frame zinfandel. lwrvim. ca briar pabat bke (MI boy) singha asahi air magic hat #&I dm nevada pate ale kirin ligM keesarden kirin icbiban (2202) sake dcuden "kantsuXuriicom(crting1y familiar, surpashirgly smooth 5 dawazakw "&'Mil. hry, hint of pear 8 melon 6 n&ri 'w kan3chmj lively, vduptwus 7/32 IW~I bunraku T,unmar reserve (modiwnsize W) 20 -1 yamahli "Ugbtjd &pint of honey (L herbs (rnd~umsiw m) 21 IMOmlI bNCl%@S Rat and spsrlding water mke/dii&elapide gigi apih:er (boUe) &i tad taa (home made uwlened) shpressoldM basics braised short rib meat loaf - smokey plantain, soy molasses 10 1 Ib of southern boy bbq ribs - pickled chilies, cilantro 16 bit -pork belly, pickles 9 buns roasted pork -peanuts tandoori chicken -cucumber, mint shitake mushroom - sticky icky sauce. sesame beef brisket - chef jorge's famws sol7 tam raw florida strawberries and citrus - fresh herb 4 local seasonal fruits - jackfruit, pomegranate, carambola 3 fl. snapper - celery. sweet potato, big mn 8 tuna - avocado, cucumber, dlrus 8 local greens - miso honey 7 homestead avocado and tomato - cit~s, hearts of palm, crunchy rice 9 I snack - . . - - . . grilled butternut -yogurt, spicy vinegar crispy chicken skin - asian mmesm grilled bok choy - pineapple, teriyaki shitake mushroom -sticky soy brussel sprouts and cauliower - bacon. soy ternpura fried eggplant - spicy aioii noodle bowl caribbean shrimp pad thai - bean sprouts, omelet, peanuts ~ork ramen -organic wached egg, scallion -. .. I steak chow fun - mushroom, eggplant 16 rice bowl atlantic seafood bavl - red mut curry, basil. tomato, jasmine rice 16 florida fish -fermented black bean, jasmine rice 15 slow braised curry duck leg - mmnut riso!b 12 Chef Jeff Mclnnis
GIG1 LEASE
"EXHIBIT B"
LETTER OF INTENT
PLACEHOLDER
INSERT - PENDING FROM
KONIVER STERN
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION OF THE ClTY OF
MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING, FOLLOWING A DULY NOTICED
PUBLIC HEARING, THE FOLLOWING AGREEMENTS PERTAINING TO THE
PROPOSED LEASE AGREEMENT (THE LEASE), HAVING ATERM OF NINE (9)
YEARS AND 364 DAYS, BETWEEN THE ClTY AND PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE
LLC, D/B/A GIGI, FOR THE USE OF APPROXIMATELY 7000 SQUARE FEET OF
GROUND LEVEL RETAIL SPACE AT THE PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE GARAGE,
1661 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, FOR A HIGH-
QUALITY RESTAURANT (PRIMARY USE), WITH ANCILLARY USES FOR A
HIGH-QUALITY BAKERY, BARICAFE, AND BOOK AND GIFT SHOP: 1) A
LETTER OF INTENT (LOI), SETTING FORTH THE SUBSTANTIVE BUSINESS
TERMS OF THE LEASE; 2) A PRE-LEASE DUE DlLLlGENCE REVIEW
AGREEMENT; AND 3) A DRAFT, IN SUBSTANTIAL FORM, OF THE PROPOSED
LEASE; AUTHORIZING THE ClTY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE PRE-LEASE
DUE DlLLlGENCE REVIEW AGREEMENT; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND
ClTY CLERK TO EXECUTE THE FINAL LEASE, BASED UPON THE BUSINESS
TERMS IN THE LO1 AND SUBJECT TO FINAL REVIEW BY THE ClTY
MANAGER AND ClTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE; AND FURTHER WAIVING, BY
517THS VOTE, THE COMPETITIVE BIDDING AND APPRAISAL REQUIRMENTS
(AS PERMITTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 82-39 OF THE ClTY CODE),
FINDING SUCH WAIVER TO BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY.
WHEREAS, on February 14,201 1, the City's broker, Koniver Stern, presented the City with a
proposed Letter of Intent (LOI) from Mr. Amir Ben Zion, of Pennsylvania Avenue, LLC D/B/A Gigi
(Tenant), to lease approximately 7,000 square feet of ground floor retail space in the recently
completed Pennsylvania Avenue Garage, located at 1661 Pennsylvania Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the Tenant is planning to open a second version of its highly acclaimed Gigi's
Restaurant, currently operating in Miami's Wynwood district; and
WHEREAS, based on preliminary estimates, the Tenant's cost to build out the vanilla shell
space is anticipated to cost approximately $2.5 million, which will have to include the installation of a
grease trap, additional sub-grade plumbing, and kitchen exhaust venting; and
WHEREAS, in consideration of these circumstances, the Tenant has requested a six (6)
month "pre-lease" due diligence review period (to precede the actual Lease commencement date) in
order to ascertain the feasibility of obtaining a Full Building Permit prior to entering into the Lease;
and
WHEREAS, Section 82-37 of the Miami Beach City Code, governing the lease of public
property for a term of ten (10) years or less requires review by the Finance and Citywide Projects
Committee, and City Commission approval, accompanied by a public hearing; and
WHEREAS, Section 82-39 of the City Code further provides for the waiver of the competitive
bidding and appraisal requirements, by 517th~ vote of the City Commission, upon a finding by the
Mayor and City Commission that the public interest would be served by waiving such conditions; the
Administration would hereby recommend that the Mayor and City Commission approve said waiver;
and
WHEREAS, on March 14, 2011, the City's Finance and Citywide Projects Committee
considered the proposed business terms of the aforestated Lease, including Tenant's request for
the Pre-Lease due diligence review, and recommended that the City Commission approve same,
subject to negotiation of final Lease; and
WHEREAS, at its regular meeting on April 13,201 1, and as required pursuant to Section 82-
39 of the City Code, the Mayor and City Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to hear
public comment as to the proposed Lease.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND ClTY COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that the Mayor and City Commission hereby approve,
following a duly noticed public hearing, the following agreements pertaining to a proposed Lease
Agreement (the Lease), having a term of nine (9) years and 364 days, between the City and
Pennsylvania Avenue, LLC, D/B/A Gigi, for use of approximately 7,000 square feet of ground level
retail space at the Pennsylvania Avenue Garage, 1661 Pennsylvania Avenue, Miami Beach, Florida,
for a restaurant (primary use), with ancillary uses for a bakery, a barlcafe, and a book and gift shop:
1) a Letter of Intent (LOI), setting forth the substantive business terms of the Lease; 2) a Pre-Lease
Due Diligence Review Agreement; and 3) a draft, in substantial form, of the proposed Lease;
authorizing the City Manager to execute the Pre-Lease Due Diligence Review Agreement;
authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the final Lease, based upon the business terms in
the LOI, and subject to final review by the City Manager and the City Attorney's Office; and further
waiving, by 517'" vote, the competitive bidding and appraisal requirements (as permitted pursuant to
Section 82-39 of the City Code), finding such waiver to be in the best interest of the City.
PASSED and ADOPTED this day of April, 201 1
ATTEST:
Robert Parcher, ClTY CLERK
JMG\HMF\AP\KOB
~\AGENDA\2011\Aprill3\Regular\GiGi Lease Reso.doc
Matti Herrera-Bower, MAYOR
GROUP
RFTAlt REAL ESTATE & BROKERAGE
April 4, 201 1
Amir Ben-Zion
Pennsylvania 17 LLC
5700 Collins Ave. PH A
Miami Beach, FL 33140
Re: Pennsylvania Avenue Garage
1661 Pennsylvania Avenue
Miami Beach, FL 33139 (the Property)
Dear Amir:
On behalf of the City of Miami Beach (City), as owner of the above referenced Property,
I am pleased to present the following Letter of Intent (LOI), setting forth the substantive
business terms under which the City would enter into a lease agreement (the Lease)
with Pennsylvania 17 LLC (Tenant), for the Premises (as described below).
Notvvithstanding the preceding, this LO1 is subject to and conditioned upon the following:
I. approval of the LO! by the Mayor and City Commission;
2. approval of the Pre-Lease Due Diligence Review Period Agreement (as
described below) by the Mayor and City Commission, and execution of same by
Tenant and the City; and
3. approval, in substantial form, of the Lease by the Mayor and City Commission,
and execution of the final negotiated Lease by Tenant and the City.
Property: Pennsyivania Avenue Garage, 1661 Pennsylvania Avenue, Miami
Beach, Florida.
Premises: Approximately 7,000 sq ft of ground floor retail space on the
Property, to be leased in "AS IS" "WHERE IS" condition.
Tenant: Pennsylvania Avenue LLC, DBA Gigi.
Use: The mainlprimary use of the Premises shall be for the operation of
a high quality restaurant, similar in menulservice to Gigi Restaurant
(located at 3470 North Miami Avenue, Miami, Florida), as well as
secondary ancillary uses for a high quality bakery, small barlcafe,
and book & gift shop.
1665 Washinaton Avenue, Penthouse, Miami Beach, Florida 33139
k9V
~e&hone (305) 532-6 1 00 Fax (305) 532-6 1 0 1
Additional Area
(Dry Storage): Tenant has identified an additional unused space underneath the
garage ramp of the Property as possible space for dry storage (the
Additional Area). Tenant, at Tenant's sole cost and expense, shall
build-out the entire Additional Area in order to make said Area
usable for its intended purpose, which wili include, without
limitation, installing door access and pouring flooring. The square
footage for Tenant's portion of the Additional Area shall be included
(as additional square footage) in the Premises above, and shall
also be included for purposes of calculating Tenant's payment of
any additional real estate taxes and insurance charges (on that
additional square footage), but not for purposes of calculating
(additional) Base Rent. In consideration of this, the Tenant shall
utilize fifty (50%) percent of the Additional Area (a minimum of 500
SF), and shall allow the balance to be used by the City, at no
charge to City.
Outdoor Seating
(Sidewalk Cafe): Subject to City approval and (if approved) Tenant's compliance with
all applicable government requirements including, without limitation,
the City's Sidewalk Cafk Ordinance (as same may be amended
from time to time), Tenant shall be entitled to use an outside area
adjacent to and fronting the Premises (as further determined by the
City's Public Works Director) for use as an outdoor sidewalk cafe.
Tenant acknowledges that any such outdoor seating area must be
approved, and subject to annual renewal, by the City pursuant to
the City's Sidewalk Caf6 Permit procedures, and shall not be as a
matter of right under the Lease. Further, any such Sidewalk Cafe
Permit will be issued as a revocable license consistent with other
sidewalk cafh permits in the City, and there will be the standard
fees and costs associated with that Permit (in addition to the Rent
and other charges described in this LO!).
Flood Panels: Tenant acknowledges that in the event the City determines, in its
sore and reasonable discretion, that a condition arises that requires
the installation of flood panels on the Premises, then Tenant will
assume sole and immediate responsibility for installation of same.
Once the City determines (also in its sole and reasonable
discretion) that the condition necessitating the installation has
passed, Tenant shall also assume sole and immediate
responsibility for removal and storage of the flood panels.
Tenant Investment: As an added inducement to have City enter into the Lease, Tenant
covenants and agrees that it wili invest, or cause to be invested, no
less than $1,200,000 in hard construction costs onlto the Premises
Construction
Escrow and
Guaranties:
including, without limitation, the following fixed, non-removable
improvements: grease trap; HVAC units and distribution; plumbing
installed and distributed for kitchen and bathrooms; completed
bathrooms for not less than 200 patrons; and electrical system
installed with distribution. As a condition of issuance of the
Temporary Certificate of Occupancy (TCO) for the Premises,
Tenant shall first certify to the City that it has, in fact, expended not
less than the required aforestated amount(s) for hard construction
costs.
F"ol4owing Lease execution, and issuance by the City of Tenant's
Fuil Building Permit, and prior to commencement of construction,
Tenant shall deposit, in cash or through a Letter of Credit (in a form
reasonably acceptable to and approved by the City), construction
funds, in the amount of the cost of the work (as such amount is set
forth in the canstruction contract between Tenant and its General
Contractor) for the build-out of the Premises for the intended
Use(s), which will be deposited into Tenant's attorney's escrow
account to guarantee the diligent and timely prosecution of
construction. At its sole djscretion, the City may also require that
Tenant's General Contractor (G.C.) furnish the City with a
Construction Completion Guaranty, andlor require Tenant's G.C. to
furnish a Payment and Performance Bond (in a form reasonably
acceptable to and approved by the City), guaranteeing the
performance of the G.C. under the construction contract. The City
shall be named as a dual obligee under such Band.
Term: Nine (9) years and 364 days.
initial Base Rent: Year 1: $75.00 psf.
Increases: Three (3%) percent, per year commencing with Year 3 of the
Lease.
Additional Rent: Tenant shall pay its proportionate share of Common Area
Maintenance share of (CAN), reat estate taxes, and insurance for
the Property (which is projected to be $lO.OQ psf for Year 1 of the
tease).
Percentage Rent: In addition to the annual Base Rent and Additional Rent, Tenant
shall also pay an annual Percentage Rent of two percent (2%) of
gross sales in excess of $8,000,000. Should sales exceed
$9,000,000, the Percentage Rent shall increase to three (3%)
percent above $9,000,000. Tenant shall report sales annually on
the anniversary date of the Rent Commencement Date.
Lease
Commencement
Date: The earlier of: (i) end of the six (6) month term of the Pre-Lease
Agreement (as set forth below), (ii) or issuance by the City of a Full
Building Permit.
Rent
Commencement
Date: The earlier of: (i) 180 days from the tease Commencement Date
or; (ii) 90 days from the issuance of a Temporary Certificate of
Occupancy (TCO) or Tenant's opening for business, whichever is
earlier.
Prepaid Rent: One month of Base Rent ($43,750), due upon Lease execution
Minimum Security
Deposit: Three (3) months Base Rent ($131,250), due upon Lease
execution.
Pre-Lease Due
Diligence
Review Period: It is the intent of Landlord and Tenant for Tenant to be granted a
Pre-Lease Due Diligence Period based upon the following terms,
which will be memorialized in a written agreement (the Pre-Lease
Agreement) to be entered into between the parties, following
approval of this LO1 by the Mayor and City Commission:
As a condition of the City's approval and execution of
the Pre-Lease Agreement, and concurrent therewith,
Tenant shall tender to the City a $25,000 deposit,
which will only be refundable if, after good-faith,
diligent efforts, Tenant is unable to obtain a Full
Building Permit for the Premises by the end of the
term of said Agreement (as set forth below). In that
event, Tenant shall not be obligated to enter into the
Lease; provided, however, that Tenant may elect to
waive the aforestated condition and proceed to enter
into the Lease, in which case the $25,000 security for
the Pre-Lease Agreement shall be credited toward
Tenant's Minimum Security Deposit.
w The Pre-Lease Agreement shall be for a maximum
term of six (6) months, which shall commence
(following approval of this LO1 by the Mayor and City
Commission) upon execution of the Agreement by the
parties hereto; provided, however, that in the event
Tenant obtains its Full Building Permit prior to the end
of the maximum six (6) month term, then the Pre-
Lease Agreement shall automatically terminate and
the parties shall proceed to execute the Lease ; the
Lease Commencement Date shall be deemed to have
commenced as of the date of issuance of the Full
Building Permit.
* Tenant shall be deemed to have made its "good faith,
due diligence efforts" under the Pre-Lease Agreement
if it satisfies the following conditions during the term of
the Agreement, or with the timeline expressly
provided therein: (i) contract with a Florida certit'led
and licensed architectlengineer to prepare any and all
required plans and specifications for the proposed
Uses on the Premises including, without limitation,
such construction documents as required by the City's
Building Department in order to process and review
Tenant's Building Permit application; and (ii) submit a
complete application (including the required plans,
drawings, and construction documents) for a Building
Permit, and obtain a Building Permit process number
from the City's Building Department no later than four
(4) months from the commencement of the term of the
Pre-Lease Agreement.
e City shall agree to sign within a reasonable period of
time, all documents that are required of it as
LandlordlOwner in Tenant's pursuit of a Building
Permit.
* Time is of the essence and it shall be a requirement
of the Tenant to not@ the City if for any reason it
deems that it cannot construct its proposed facility.
* fn consideration of Tenant's diligent pursuit of a Full
Building Permit for the Premises and the expense of
funds anticipated by Tenant in said pursuit, City
agrees to accept only back-up contracts during the
term of the Pre-Lease Agreement, and wilt, in good
faith, continue to negotiate the Lease anticipated in
this LQI.
Sole Broker($): Koniver Stern Group and City Realty Group international (Jon
Jacobs, Realtor).
Contingency: The terms of this LO1 shall be subject to approval by the City
Commission.
Good Faith
Negotiations: This LOI represents some of our undertakings regarding a possible
future Lease and is not intended to create a legally binding
obligation on either party. Such an obligation will be created only
when a proposed Lease is approved by the Mayor and City
Commission and both parties execute the final Lease, covering all
of the rights and obligations of the parties, which is then delivered
by and between us. If the Lease is not approved by the Mayor and
City Commission, andlor not executed by the parties, then neither
party will be liable to the other under this document or as a result of
any preliminary negotiation; provided, however, that in the event of
Tenant's non-compliance with the conditions of the Pre-Lease
Agreement, the City shall be entitled to retain Tenant's $25,000
deposit.
The foregoing LO1 is also predicated upon receipt of acceptable personal and corporate
financial and business background information.
Please sign in the space indicated below, if you are in agreement with the terms stated
herein, provide the required financial information, and I will forward the City's draft
Lease for your review upon final approval of the LO1 by the Mayor and City
Commissian.
If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 305-532-
61 00.
Thank you.
Lyle Stern
Koniver Stern Group
AGREED AND ACCEPTED BY TENANTIPENN 17 LLG:
Print Namerritle f
Date: 4\?\\20\\
12NE I THURSDAY, MARCH 31,2011 NE
MIAMIBEACH .
CITY OF MlAMl BEACH
PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a first reading and public
hearing will be held by the City Commission of the City of
Miami Beach on WEDNESDAY, April 13,201 1 at 11 :30 A.M.
or as 'soon thereafter as possible in the City Commission
Chambers, Third Floor, City Hall, located at 1700 Convention
Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139 to consider:
-% RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY
~. CoMMlssloN FLORIDA, NPTICED PUBLIC APPROVING, OF THE HEARING, CITY FOLLOWING OF 'THE MIAMI FQLLOWING A BEACH, DULY
AGREEMENTS PERTAINING TO. THE PROPOSED
LEASE AGREEMENT (THE LEASE), HAVING A TERM
OF NINE(9) YEARS AND 364 DAYS, BET WEE^^ THE
CITY AND PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE LLC, D/B/A
GIGI, FOR THE USE OF APPROXIMATELY 7000
SQUARE FEET OF GROUND LEVEL RETAIL SPACE
AT THE- PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE GARAGE, 1661
PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, MlAMl BEACH, FLORIDA,
FOR A RESTAURANT (PRIMARY USE), WITH
ANCILLARY USES TO INCLUDE A BAKERY, BAR/ -
CAFE, AND BOOK AND ~lfi SHOP: 1 .) A PRE-LEASE
DUE DlLLlGENCE REVIEW AGREEMENT; 2.) A LmER
OF INTENT (LOI), SElTING FORTH THE SUBSTANTIVE
BUSINESS TERMS OF THE LEASE; AND 3.) A DRAFT,
IN SUBSTANTIAL FORM, OF THE PROPOSED LEASE;
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTETHE
PRE-LEASE DUE DILLIGENCE REVIEW AGREEMENT
AND THE LOI, AND FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR AND ClTY CLERK TO EXECUTE THE FINAL
. LEASE, BASED UPON THE BUSINESS TERMS IN
THE LO1 AND SUBJECT TO .FINAL REVIEW BY THE
ClTY MANAGER AND ClTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE;
. AND FURTHER WAIVING, BY 5RTHS VOTE,
THE COMPETITIVE BIDDING -AND APPRAISAL
REQUIRMENTS (AS PERMITTED PURSUANT TO
SECTlON82-39 OF THE CITY CODE), FINDING SUCH
WAIVER TO BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY.
Inquiries may be directed to the Department of Housing/
Community Development at (305) 673-7260.
G
All interested parties are invited to appear at this meeting or be
represented by an agent, or to express their views in writing
addressed to the Planning Department, 1700 Convention
Center Drive, City Hall, Miami Beach, Florida 331.39. Copies
of the proposed amendments are available in the Planning
Department.
Pursuant to Florida Stat. 286.01 05, the City hereby advises the
public that if a person decides to appeal any decision made
by the Planning Board with respect to any matter considered
at its meeting or its he~ing, such person must ensure that
a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which~ecord
must include the testimony and evidence upon which the
appeal is to be based. This notice does not constitute consent
by the City for the introduction or admission of otherwise
inadmissible or irrelevant evidence, nor does it authorize
challenges or appeals not otherwise allowed by law. ,
In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of'l990,
persons needing special-accommodation to participate in this
proceeding should contact the Board's Administrator no later than
four days prior to the proceeding at (305) 673-7550 for assistance:
if h&,ing impaired, telephone the Florida Relay Serv~ce numbers,
(305) 673-7273 of 79 1, for assistdnce. AD #653 ' ' ' ' '
505
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
R7 - Resolutions
R7C A Resolution Approving An Agreement Between The City And Broward Stage
Door Theater For The Operation And Management Of The Byron Carlyle Theater
Pursuant To Request For Proposals No. 24-09/10 And Authorizing The Mayor
And City Clerk To Execute Said Agreement Having An Initial Term Of Five (5)
Years, Commencing On February 1, 201 1, And Ending On January 31, 201 5,
With An Additional Five (5) Year Option Term At The City Sole And Absolute
Discretion.
(Tourism & Cultural Development)
(Memorandum & Resolution to be Submitted in Supplemental)
I
( Agenda Item a7 C
i
i Date 4/13 -11
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33 139, m.miamibeachfl.goy
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK, Robert Parcher, City Clerk
Tel: (305) 673-741 1, Fax: (305) 673-7254
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
To: Mayor Matti Herrera Bowerr and Members of the City Commission
From: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager ,
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:
That appointments be made as indicated.
ANALYSIS:
Attached are the applicants that have filed with the City Clerk's Office for Board and
Committee appointments.
VACANCIES
Affordable Housing Advisory 11 City Commission
Committee
9 Page I
Board of Adjustment 7 City Commission 1 page 5
Community Development Advisory 14 Commissioner Deede Weithorn 1 Page 11
Committee
Community Relations Board 17 Commissioner Michael Gongora 1 Page 12
Debarment Committee 7 Mayor Matti Herrera Bower 1 Page 15
Agenda Item b79 4
We are committed to providing excellent public service and safe?. to all who live, work and play in Date Y-13-J)
51 1
VACANCIES
Design Review Board 7 City Commission 1 Page 16
Fine Arts Board 14 Commissioner Ed Tobin 1 Page 18
Golf Advisory Committee 12 Mayor Matti Herrera Bower 1 Page 20
Hispanic Affairs Committee 7 Mayor Matti Herrera Bower 1 Page 23
--
Housing Authority 5 Mayor Matti Herrera Bower 1 Page 25
Miami Beach Commission For 2 1 Commissioner Jonah M. Wolfson 1 Page 28
Women
Miami Beach Sister Cities Program 24 Mayor Matti Herrera Bower 5 Page 31
Single Family Residential Review 3 Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager 3 page41
Panel
Waterfront Protection Committee 10 Commissioner Ed Tobin 1 Page46
Youth Center Advisory Board 10 Commissioner Ed Tobin 1 Page 47
Commissioner Michael Gongora 1
Attached isnbreakdown by Commissioner or City Commission:
JMG: REPIlg
City Commission Commit tees
~ommittee Fist Name AD
Chairperson Commissioner Deede Weithorn Mayor Bower
Vice-Chair Commissioner Jorge Exposito Mayor Bower
Member Commissioner Jonah Wolfson Mayor Bower
Alternate Commissioner Edward L. Tobin Mayor Bower
Liaison Patricia Walker, Chief Financial Off.
Chairperson Commissioner Jonah Wolfson Mayor Bower
Vice-Chair Commissioner Michael Gongora Mayor Bower
Member Commissioner Jorge Exposito Mayor Bower
Alternate Commissioner Jerry Libbin Mayor Bower
Liaison Richard Lorber, Acting Planning Dir
Commissioner Jerry Libbin Mayor Bower
Commissioner Edward L. Tobin Mayor Bower
Member Commissioner Deede Weithorn Mayor Bower
Alternate Commissioner Michael Gongora Mayor Bower
Liaison Barbara Hawayek, Code Cornplianc
Monday, March 21,201 1 Page 1 of 1
NON-CITY COMMISSION COMMITTEES
Citizen's Oversight Committee
Greater Miami Convention and Visitors Bureau
Tourist Development Council
Miami-Dade County Homeless Trust Board
m Performing Arts Center Trust (PACT)
Metropolitan Planning Organization
Dade Cultural Alliance
Miami Dade League of Cities
MIAMIBEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33 139, www.miamibeachff.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO : Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City
DATE: April 13, 201 1
SUBJECT: BOARD AND CITY COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Make appointments as indicated.
BOARDS AND COMMITTEES
1. Affordable Housing Advisory Committee
2. Board of Adjustment
3. Design Review Board
Agenda Item /? 9 4
F:\CLER\$ALL\MARIA-M\B & C\Cornrnission Memo B & C FOR 4-1 3-1 1 .doc
51 5
Date 4-13-11
Board and Committees Current Members
> r-
&or& ~oqsin~ ~dviso~ ~dnmhttee - a
gee. 2-167' -
&. - - *I:
Composition:
The committee shall consist of eleven (11) voting members with two (2) year terms appointed at
large by a majority vote of the Mayor and City Commission:
One citizen:
1) actively engaged in the residential home building industry in connection with affordable housing;
2) actively engaged in the banking or mortgage banking industry in connection with affordable
housing;
3) representative of those areas of labor actively engaged in home building in connection with
affordable housing;
4) actively engaged as an advocate for low-income persons in connection with affordable housing;
5) actively engaged as a for-profit provider of affordable housing;
6) actively engaged as a not-for-profit provider of affordable housing (Housing Authority member);
7) actively engaged as a real estate professional in connection with affordable housing;
8) actively serving on the local planning agency pursuant to Florida Statute 3 163.3174 (Planning
Board member);
9) who resides within the jurisdiction of the local governing body making the appointments;
10) who represents employers within the jurisdiction;
11) who represents essential services personnel as defined in the local housing assistance plan.
Members of the Loan Review Committee, members of the Community Development Advisory
Committee (CDAC), Planning Board and Miami Beach Housing Authority may be appointed to fill any
of the eleven (11) categories and serve as ex-officio voting members on this committee. If due to
conflict of interest by prospective appointees, or other reasonable factor, the City is unable to appoint
a citizen actively engaged in these activities in connection with affordable housing, a citizen engaged
in the activity without regard to affordable housing may be appointed.
City Liaison: Richard Bowman
To replace (3) Rep. Labor Home BI 12/31/2012 City Commission
Stephanie Berman
To replace (8) Local Planning Boar 12/31/2012 City Commission
Jonathan Fryd
To replace Roberto (6) Not For Profit 12/31/2012 City Commission
DaTorre
To replace Dr. (10) Rep. Empl. withlju 12/31/2011 City Commission
Bany Ragone
To replace Ada (4) Low-Income Advoc. 12/31/2011 City Commission
Llerandi
To replace Brian (1) Res. Home Bldg. 12/31/2012 City Commission
Ehrlich
To replace Lianne (11) Rep. Essential Sew 12/31/2011 City Commission
Pastoriza
To replace Robert (5) For Profit 12/31/2012 City Commission
Saland
To replace David (2) BankinglMortgage 12/31/2012 City Commission
Smith
Name Last Name PositionITitle Term Ends: Appointed by: Term Limit:
- -
cm- P-
Thursday, March 31,2011 Page 1 of 47
Board and Committees Current Members
Clark Reynolds (9) Res. Juris. Local Gvt 12/31/2011 City Commission 12/31/13
Michael Burnstine (7) Real Estate Prof. 12/31/2011 City Commission 12/31/13
-
Amy Perry
Arian Adorno
Dr. Bany Ragone
Marie Towers
Roberto DaTorre
Andrew Fischer
Charles Urstadt
Karen Fryd
Mark Wohl
Steven Gonzalez
P-ernP-PeP
Thursday, March 31,2011 Page 2 of 47
Board and Committees Current Members
6 ' *. ~*a;d6f adjustment a ,A *. . . ,& -, A . - = s "424.L RSA 1-2 ~ec 118.; d
Composition:
Two (2) year term.
Appointed by a 5/7th vote.
Seven (7) voting members composed of two members appointed as citizens at-large and five
members shall be appointed from each of the following categories (no more than one per category),
namely: Law, Architecture, Engineering, Real Estate Development, Certified Public Accountant,
Financial Consultation, and General Business. The members representing the professions of law,
architecture, engineering and public accounting shall be duly licensed by the State of Florida; the
member representing general business shall be of responsible standing in the community, and each
member shall be bound by the requirements of the Conflict of Interest Ordinance of the city and shall
be subject to removal from ofice for the violation of the terms thereof. No member shall have any
financial or other interest in any matter coming before the board.
Members shall be apppointed for a term of two years by a five-seventh vote of the city commission.
Members of the Board of Adjustment must be either residents of or have their principal place of
business in Miami Beach; provided, however, that this amendment shall not affect the term of existing
members of the Board of Adjustment.
City Liaison: Antonieta Stohl
To replace Andrew At -large 12/31/2012 City Commission
Name Last Name Position/Title Term Ends: Appointed by: Term Limit:
Alexander Annunziato At-large 12/31/2011 City Commission 12/31/13
Andrew Resnick Real Estate Developer 12/31/2012 City Commission 12/31 /I 5
Bryan Rosenfeld CPA 12/31/2011 City Commission 12/31/15
Lior Leser Financial Consultation 12/31/2011 City Commission 12/31/13
Richard Preira Law 12/31/2012 City Commission 12/31/16
Sherry Roberts General Business 12/31/2011 City Commission 12/31/13
-
Applicants Position/Title Applicants PositiontTitle
Alan Fishman
Brent Coetzee
Dov Konetz
Josh Gimelstein
Micky Ross Steinberg
Robert Newman
Scott Needelman
Beth Gopman
Brian Ehrlich
Jessica Conn
Joy Malakoff
Rafael Velasquez
Roger Houle
-wmwP~--P,+a--m----
Thursday, March 31,2011 Page 5 of 47
Board and Committees Current Members
Design Review Board -
Composition:
Two (2) year term.
Appointed by a minimum of 4 votes.
Seven (7) regular members and two (2) ex-officio members.
The seven (7) regular members shall consist of:
two (2) registered architects,
one (1) registered architect or a member of the faculty of a school of architecture, urban planning or
urban design in the state, with practical or academic expertise in the field of design, planning, historic
preservation or the history of architecture, or a professional architectural designer or professional
urban planner
one (1) registered landscape architect,
one (1) registered architect, professional designer or professional urban planner,
and two (2) citizens at-large.
One person appointed by the City Manager from an eligibility list provided by the Disability Access
Committee shall serve in an advisory capacity with no voting authority. The Planning Director, or
designee and the City Attorney or designee shall serve in an advisory capacity.
Residency and place of business in the county. The two (2) citizen-at-large members and one of the
registered landscape architects, registered architects, professional designer or professional urban
planners shall be residents of the city.
City Liaison: Thomas Mooney
To replace Michael Urban Planner 12/31/2012 City Commission
Laas
4v~~"r- "*- k&mug?)\
Name
-
Carol
Gabrielle
Jason
Lilia
Seraj
Thomas
Last Name
-
Housen
Redfern
Hagopian
Medina
Saba
DeLuca
PositionITitle Term Ends: Appointed by: --
At-large 12/31/2012 City Commission
At-large TL 12/31/2011 12/31/2011 City Commission
Registered Architect 12/31/2011 City Commission
Urban Planner 12/31/2012 City Commission
Landscape Architect 12/31/2011 City Commission
Reg. Architect TL12/31/2011 12/31/2011 City Commission
Gary Held advisory1City Attorney Designee
Richard Lorber advisory1Acting Planning Director
Vacant ex-officio/Disability Access Committee
Term Limit:
--
Applicants PositionITitle Applicants PositionITitle
Beth Dunlop
Elizabeth Camargo
Gilbert Squires
Jessica Conn
Leonard Wien, Jr.
Pamela Palma
Daniel Garcia
Gabriel Paez
Jane Gross
Larkin Menezes
Leslie Tobin
Scott Needelman
?<,- m*~.,+~-"~~x?m.*"".., ..>.%-d,,sma, .".%,.*% s7a~"*%~~*~+ds~w~z~>-~~~%*~.~a-""- ."~ b.-,e ,.-'"-,*>
Thursday, Page 16 of 47
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
MIAMIBEACH
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR AND COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
FROM: Matti Herrera Bower, Mayor rev/& bflS
DATE: March 28,201 1
SUBJECT: Boards& Committees: appointment of a member to the Housing Authority
Please place on the April 13,20 1 1 Commission meeting agenda my appointment of Eugenio Cabreja
for Tenant Commissioner to the Housing Authority.
I thank you in advance for your cooperation in this matter. If you have any questions, please
do not hesitate to contact Rebecca Wakefield at extension 61 57.
Thank you.
We ore cornmiffed to providing excellenl public service and sofey 10 011 who live, work, ond ploy in f Agenda Item RSA
$
I Date 11-13-11
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
R9 - New Business and Commission Requests
R9B1 Dr. Stanley Sutnick Citizen's Forum. (1 2:30 p.m.)
R9B2 Dr. Stanley Sutnick Citizen's Forum. (5:30 p.m.)
AGENDA ITEM: R9B1-2
DATE: 4-13-0
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
MIAMIBEACH
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR AND COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
FROM: Ed Tobin, Commissioner A
DATE: February 23,201 1
SUBJECT: Agenda item for March 9th Commission Meeting
Please place on the March ga, 201 1 City Commission meeting agenda a discussion item on
changing the Flamingo Park Master Plan to include a bathroom in the Tot Lot. Also include
as part of the discussion the design of the tennis club house and the composition of the
tennis courts at Flamingo Park.
Should you have any questions, please contact Yanette Bravo at ext. 6274.
I Agenda Item f? 7 C
We ore cornmiffed to providing excellent public service and safety to all wfio live, work, and ploy in 01 Date 4-33-1 I
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
MIAMIBEACH
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR AND COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
FROM: Ed Tobin, Commissioner A
DATE: March 28, 201 1
SUBJECT: Agenda item for April 13th Commission Meeting
Please place on the April 13, 201 1 City Commission meeting agenda a discussion item on
including monthly crime statistics as a standard agenda item on the
Neighborhood/Community Affairs Committee.
Should you have any questions, please contact Yanette Bravo at ext. 6274.
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
@ MIAMIBEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33 139, www.rniamibeachfl.gov
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager 1
DATE: April 13, 201 1
SUBJECT: COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE -%TINO AS AUDIT COMMITTEE TO DISCUSS
INTERJUM STATUS REPORT OF INTERNAL AUDITS
BACKGROUND
Previously, at the last Audit Committee Meeting held during the Committee of the Whole on
November 17, 2010, the External Auditors presented their final reports for fiscal year
2008109. The Internal Audit Division presented their 201 1 Audit Plan along with a summary
of audits completed for fiscal year 200911 0. The purpose of this meeting is to present an
interim status report of internal audits completed and in process for the current year and to
provide insight into potential audit areas for FY 201 1/12.
Internal Auditor's Re~orts
The City's Internal Audit Division, a component of the Office of Budget and Performance
Improvement, is responsible for ensuring:
Compliance with Resort Tax Ordinances by auditing Miami Beach businesses;
Compliance with City policies and procedures and financial integrity and sufficiency
of internal controls by Departments and Not-for-Profits;
Supporting and special projects assisting other City areas; and
Integrity of performance measures reported Citywide.
Resort Tax Audits
The majority of resources in the Division are dedicated to auditing the Miami Beach
businesses required to report and remit resort taxes. This effort is supported by
approximately half of the positions in the Division as well as by outside contract auditors.
Resort tax generated for the fiscal year 200911 0 was $41,986,105.
Effective October 22, 201 0, new auditing agreements were contracted with five separate
audit firms. For the current year the department has targeted to complete 250 audits.
Scheduled audits are based upon the type of business, actual resort tax receipts received,
and the frequency of the last audit.
As of March 31,201 1, the Division has completed 89 resort tax audits (36% of our total goal)
of which 60 were hotels, restaurants, nightclubs, and bars. These audits resulted in
additional tax assessments of $57,467. This represented 1.08% of the total resort tax
reported for these entities over the multi-tax year audited. However, more important than the
amount collected is the incentive this creates to ensure that entities are filing appropriately
as these additional assessments are assigned interest and penalties. The number of audits
completed during the first six months are not reflective of the anticipated annual total as it
took time to bringthe outside contractors onboard and first six months included larger audits
performed by the inside field agents.
Agenda Item f? 4 E
Date 4-13-ll
Internal Audits
For Department and Not-for Profit lnternal Audits, the City's Audit Plan is separated by
different types of reviews. Annually required audits include those mandated by City Code
and State Agreements, as well as providing assistance to the City's external auditors.
For the current year, the Division has scheduled 24 audits based upon a risk assessment
approach. Audits are classified as to high, medium or low risk. Higher assigned risk areas
are subject to more frequent audits, and lower risk areas are often less frequent. Overall,
ten internal audit areas have been substantially completed to date. Two audits have been
issued, two are awaiting exit conferences and six are awaiting responses from Management.
The represents 42.2% completed out of 24 audit areas initially targeted for this year. Out of
the audit areas completed, one audit was added during the year. With the additional one
audit, it is projected that we will complete all 25 audits for the year.
Attached is Summary of Internal Audit Activities (Exhibit 1) for the current fiscal year.
Reports are listed on-line on the City's website at http://web.
miamibeachfl.gov/obpi/scroll.aspx?id=366 2. Exhibit 2 provides a listing of Audit Areas for
the City. Audits substantially completed in 201 1 are shown in bold.
Exhibit 1 - Summary of Internal Audit Activities for Fiscal Year 201011 I
Internal Audits - Completed
Cultural Arts Council
First Class Parking, LLC Valet Parking
Internal Audits - Pending Final Reports
State Beachfront Management Agreement
Boucher Brothers Miami Beach, LLC Beachfront Concession Agreement
Concurrency Management Fees
Public Works Department's Warehouse Inventory
Sanitation Fees Residential Billings
Sanitation Fines and Forthwiths
Storm Water Review
Water and Sewer Impact Fees
For fiscal year 201011 1 internal audits to date included the following recommendations:
Additional safeguards over inventory processing for areas of Public Works;
Revisions to update several departmental procedures and improve controls for
Code Compliance and Sanitation:
lmprove controls over Parks and Recreation Revenues;
Changes in procedures to comply to reporting requirements of approved grant
funds distributed by the Cultural Arts Council;
lmprove control processes for Water and Sewer Impact Fees and Concurrency
Fees;
Strengthen oversight of compliance to the agreements for providing cashiers and
attendants to the City and Beach Concession agreement.
Parkina Monitoring Reviews
In the Parking area, the Division completed twelve meter enforcement, two attended lot cash
operations and two coin room reviews during the current fiscal year. While our parking
meter reviews identified an improvement in enforcement over the previous fiscal year, areas
of enforcement still fell short of desired benchmarks. Operational procedures for attended
lots were found to comply with the city's guidelines. In addition, coin room operations were
functioning in accordance the city's procedures.
Sanitation Audits
For the current year, four audits of waste haulers were completed. We anticipated
completing eight audits in this area for fiscal year 201 011 1
Other Su~port
Additional support was directed to performing non-audit activities.
Assistance was provided for Cleanliness Assessment Program
o Input of Daily Assessment results.
o Preparation of Quarterly reports.
o Testing new automated assessment system and reports.
Hurricane related grant monitoring responsibilities for the past fiscal year included:
o Assisting FEMA and the State with their ongoing closeout for Hurricane Wilma
2005.
o Preparation of Quarterly Reports to FEMA (still ongoing for Hurricane Wilma
projects).
o Monitoring each open project for completion and requested reimbursement.
o Assisting Office of Inspector General with audit of FEMA funding received for
Hurricane Katrina and Wilma.
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
INTERNAL AUDIT DEPARTMENT
Audit Areas
Areas highlighted are considered for audit based on projected frequency. Comments provided indicate reasons why area
may not be audited within the projected frequency.
Department -Audit Area
Last Risk
Audit l3.W Comments
Mayor and City Commission
;<:~::$~;;;~:;~:;;: loperations [?I.I.I.,*.: ..L. ..1 L I I
Administrative Support Services
City Manager Office
I , ".i . . I 7.... .I Operations ,-,., .?"%.%..F>... f ;:,:i:;i::Si::,:::: L I .' ',i.?'i.*. . Communications . L I
B
earned their Distinguish Budget Award, and
Audit Areas 201 1 Interim
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
INTERNAL AUDIT DEPARTMENT
Audit Areas
Areas highlighted are considered for audit based on projected frequency. Comments provided indicate reasons why area
may not be audited within the projected frequency.
De~artment - Audit Area
Last Risk
Audit m Comments
P
reviewed and comments under areas of user
Human Resources
City Attorney
I loperations
City Clerk
Economic Dev. & Cultural Events
L
L
L
L
Operations includes Labor Relations
Review of Benefits Formulas
Pension Time Purchased by Leave Hours
Health, Dental and Life Insurance
Economic Development
Economic Development
nchor Shop Retail I Garages 1 2010 1 L I
I ; ,*.s *,,~.;:;<:<;,,. RDA - Administrative & Operations ,.,%*..** .,.,.* ...,' [*::::.':;:,:.:...:::I L I
Risk Management
Workers Compensation I 1 2005 1 M I
General Liability Insurance 1 2005 1 L I
Ei$iijijig;ii';;;,
2005
2008
2010
L
M
L
Operations, Record Retention I Public Requests
Special Masters
Election Invoices
[City Leases, Historic City Hall, 777 Building,
Central Sewices
Inventory 1 2003 1 L I
Operations I Billings for Department Services 1 2009 1 L I
: ,j.:. ::;.*> I:,:: ..<.: ..,... . . . . : .:.:.
2010
2008
Audit Areas 201 1 Interim
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
INTERNAL AUDIT DEPARTMENT
Audit Areas
Areas highlighted are considered for audit based on projected frequency. Comments provided indicate reasons why area
may not be audited within the projected frequency.
De~artment -Audit Area
Last Risk
A* Comments
"
eview and operations analysis of the Building
mpleted in 2009. Procurement of new permitting
Operations
Code Compliance
I
I State Housing Initiatives Part (SHIP) Programs
I I I I I I
Community Sewices
Audit Areas 201 1 Interim
Code Compliance system being procured in 2010.
Community Services
H Code Enforcement Violations and Operations
2001 L
2010
I Homeless Outreach Services
Housing & Community Development
CDBG grants
Home Investment Partnerships (HOME Entitlement)
::r::.;:i::.:::::::: [~:,i;~:~:~~~:~:~:,: . . . . , . . . , . . M Department is reviewed periodically by the State
gi?$$;k.$$:: . M of Florida and HUD.
f:J;$*;:$F:;S *.* . * * >,. % -,.
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
INTERNAL AUDIT DEPARTMENT
Audit Areas
Areas highlighted are considered for audit based on projected frequency. Comments provided indicate reasons why area
may not be audited within the projected frequency.
Department -Audit Area
Last Risk
AH m Comments
P
conjunction with reimbursement requests made
for prior hurricanes.
Audit Areas 201 1 Interim
Properw Management
M
M
Maintenance Agreements
Internal Service Charae Billings (Includin~ CAM)
2008
2010
Inventory (Property Management)
Capital Improvement Projects
:; ,, l~inancial Controls & Operations 1. .. *... . .... . , . , . . i:::. ... ,I I
2009 L
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
INTERNAL AUDIT DEPARTMENT
Audit Areas
Areas highlighted are considered for audit based on projected frequency. Comments provided indicate reasons why area
may not be audited within the projected frequency.
De~artment - Audit Area
Last Risk
IYP_ft. Comments
Parking
Public Safety
Fleet Management
Police
r~ounty Court Fines - Traffic 1 2001 1 L Ifollow-up audit preformed 1012003, no exceptions I
Attended Parking Lots Monitoring
Boat Show Parking
Cashiers & Attendants Agreement (Parking)
Coin Room (Monitoring) Meter Collection
Internal Audit assisted police in reviewing new
procedures for false alarm. Police in process of
H
M
M
H
2010
2008
2009
2010
Audited vehicle purchasing process.
Unit (CIU)
Official Authorized Funds - Strategic Investigation I
Completed 4 reviews during the year.
As of 812009 audit required annually.
Completed 4 reviews of win room during the year.
M
L
L
L
Fuel distribution
Inventory & Processing
Operations I Internal Service Charges Billings
Vehicle Purchases
Audit Areas 201 1 Interim
2009
201 0
:i:::i.+":;:::i::.;: ..... .,.',.,.~.. . . .... . .......... :,:,
2007
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
INTERNAL AUDIT DEPARTMENT
Audit Areas
Areas highlighted are considered for audit based on projected frequency. Comments provided indicate reasons why area
may not be audited within the projected frequency.
De~artmeflt - Audit Area
Last Risk
lyfB Comments
Fi
completed in 2009. Procurement of new permitting
Non-Profit Organizations
Citywide Projects
Other funding sources:
Friends of the Bass lo 1 2003 1 L I
Police Athletic League lo 1 2009 1 L I
H Capital Projects - Non-CIP, (Public Works, Parks,
Both general fund and CDBG funding source:
Audit Areas 201 1 Interim
RDA, Convention Center, Etc.) la,,:5i2:z:>:;tj.2
s,i%?;$s;:.;:g ',, . , ,. t" ,1.!*... ~ ,., . , . ..L.>::
General Fund for 201 1 is $16.606.
General Fund for 201 1 is $21,660.
201 0 L :,:ly>:.:-; ,.... .. ::& L
Boys and Girls Club
Miami Beach Community Health Center
gc
North Beach Development Corp 2008 L gc General Fund for 201 1 is $18,000.
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
R9 - New Business and Commission Requests
R9F The Committee Of The Whole Will Meet During Lunch Recess Of The April 13,
201 1 City Commission Meeting At The City Manager's Large Conference Room
To Discuss Casino Gambling Legislation Currently Pending Before The Florida
Legislature. (Page)
(Economic Development)
(Memorandum to be Submitted in Supplemental)
I
Agenda Item aq F
, Date 4-/3-I/
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
R9 - New Business and Commission Requests
R9G Discussion Of Proposed Amendments Lessening The Intensity Of The 1-1 Light
Industrial District; And The Stay Of Proceedings Resulting From Appeals Of
Administrative Decisions To The Board Of Adjustment.
(Requested by LUDC)
(Legislative Tracking: Planning Department)
Agenda Item 6) 5 6-
Date Y-/3-//
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
MIAMIBEACH
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR AND COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
FROM: Ed Tobin, Commissioner A
DATE: March 30,2010
SUBJECT: Discussion on Dunlop Orange Bowl Tennis Tournament
Please place on the April 1 3'h Commission Agenda a discussion on the Dunlop Orange Bowl
Tennis Tournament.
Should you have any questions, please contact Yanette Bravo at ext. 6274.
ETIyb
: Agenda Item Rq Y
We ore committed 10 provrdrng excellenf publrc senJrce and sofey to all who irve, work, orld play In oun
Date Y-)3-//
543
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
MIAMIBEACH
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR AND COMMISSION 3 P;! bh@MORANDUM
6 j. !,,ITi: .t,,.,, L.". 3 -8 id.
TO: Jorge Gonzalez, City Manager,.{ ..--- .-... -
FROM: Jerry Libbin, Commissioner
DATE : March 3 1, 201 1
SUBJECT: Agenda item for the April 1 3th, 201 1 Commission meeting; a discussion regarding
the Funkshion Fashion event held in the City of Miami Beach.
Please place on the April 1 3th, 201 1 Commission meeting agenda a discussion regarding the
safety issues resulting from the sale of excess tickets to the Funkshion Fashion event held in the City
of Miami Beach. It may be appropriate to develop a policy or procedure to monitor all ticket
sales or to consider whether or not this event should be welcome back to Miami Beach.
Please contact my office at ext. 71 06 if you have any questions.
Agenda Item /? 71
We ore cornrnrtfed to providrng excellent publrc sewrce and sofery to all who live, work, and play rn our Date Y-13-ll
545
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
MIAMIBEACH
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR AND COMMISSION 201 1 k:!? 3 1 pi; 4: b7MEMORANDUM
r, 'IT,'a,, a,, ; .,..,,.,,,, &
*,I
TO: Jorge Gonzalez, City Maiidw---- --------- _ -._____. _ .
FROM: Jerry Libbin, Commissioner
DATE : March 3 1, 201 1
SUBJECT: Agenda item for the April 13th, 201 1 Commission meeting; a discussion regarding
the ridership of the South Beach Local (SBL).
Please place on the April 13th, 201 1 Commission meeting agenda a discussion regarding the
ridership of the South Beach Local (SBL) and the potential recommendation to eliminate the stops
on Belle Isle. Please see the attached MDTA APC Ridership Statistics.
Please contact my office at ext. 71 06 if you have any questions.
Attachment
J L/er
UNIQUE STOP E DIRECTION NO - - - - - - - - - - ------ 3 CLOCKWISE 10394 10394 2834 2842 1145 2843 2844 2845 2846 2847 2848 2840 625 2841 674 2864 2700 2703 2705 2706 2707 2708 2709 2710 2711 2712 62 8 SEQUENTIAL STOP NO MDTA APC RIDERSHIP STATISTICS ............................. APC STOP SUMMARY - DAILY TOTALS ROUTE 123 Weekday DECEMBER 2010 ............................. LOCATION BAY RD 20 ST BAY RD 20 ST - EOL ALTON RD 17 ST WEST AV #I620 WEST AV 15 TE WEST AV FLAMINGO WY WEST AV 14 ST WEST AV 13 ST WEST AV 12 ST WEST AV 11 ST WEST AV 9 ST ALTON RD 8 ST ALTON RD 6 ST ALTON RD 4 ST ALTON RD 2 ST SOUTH POINTE DR WASHINGTO WASHINGTON AV 1 ST WASHINGTON AV 5 ST WASHINGTON AV 7 ST WASHINGTON AV 8 ST WASHINGTON AV 9 ST WASHINGTON AV 11 ST WASHINGTON AV 13 ST WASHINGTON AV 14 ST WASHINGTON AV 15 ST WASHINGTON AV 16 ST WASHINGTON AV LINCOLN RD LATITUDE LONGITUDE PAGE 1 OFF TOTAL URBAN TRANSPORTATION ASSOCIATES
UNIQUE STOP E DIRECTION NO - - - - - - - - - - ------ 3 CLOCKWISE 10395 2881 2882 2883 2893 2 8 94 2906 TOTAL COUNTER- C LOCKWI SE 746 2907 2895 2906 2776 2889 2890 2891 10395 2764 624 2765 2766 2767 2768 SEQUENTIAL STOP NO ---------- MDTA APC RIDERSHIP STATISTICS ............................. APC STOP SUMMARY - DAILY TOTALS ROUTE 123 Weekday DECEMBER 2010 ............................. LOCAT ION - - - - - - - - 23 ST LIBERTY AVE 17 ST WASHINGTON AV 17 ST CONVENTION CENTER D 17 ST MERIDIAN AV DADE BD MICHIGAN AV DADE BD ALTON RD VENETIAN WY E ISLAND AV WEST AV 20 ST 20 ST BAY RD DADE BD PURDY AV VENETIAN WY E ISLAND AV MERIDIAN AV 18 ST 17 ST MERIDIAN AV 17 ST PENNSYLVANIA AV 17 ST WASHINGTON AV 23 ST LIBERTY AVE WASHINGTON AV 17 ST WASHINGTON AV LINCOLN RD WASHINGTON AV 15 ST WASHINGTON AV 14 ST WASHINGTON AV 13 ST WASHINGTON AV 12 ST PAGE 2 ON OFF ---- ----- - TOTAL URBAN TRANSPORTATION ASSOCIATES
UNIQUE STOP E DIRECTION NO - - - - - - - - - - ------ 3 COUNTER-C LOCKWISE 2769 2770 2771 2772 2773 2774 2775 725 2778 62 7 2780 2839 10103 10102 10107 10106 10101 10100 10099 746 SEQUENTIAL STOP NO ---------- MDTA APC RIDERSHIP STATISTICS ............................. APC STOP' SUMMARY - DAILY TOTALS ROUTE 123 Weekday DECEMBER 2010 ............................. WASHINGTON AV 9 ST WASHINGTON AV 8 ST WASHINGTON AV 7 ST WASHINGTON AV 5 ST WASHINGTON AV 4 ST WASHINGTON AV 2 ST WASHINGTON AV 1 ST ALTON RD 2 ST ALTON RD 4 ST ALTON RD 5 ST ALTON RD 8 ST ALTON RD 9 ST WEST AV 9 ST WEST AV 10 ST WEST AV 12 ST WEST AV 13 ST WEST AV 14 CT WEST AV 15 TR WEST AV LINCOLN RD WEST AV 20 ST - EOL LATITUDE LONGITUDE ON OFF TOTAL - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----- ----- ----- TOTAL URBAN TRANSPORTATION ASSOCIATES
MIAMIBEACH
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR AND COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Jorge Gonzalez, City Manager
FROM: Ed Tobin, Commissioner
DATE: April 5, 201 1
SUBJECT: Item for Discussion
Please place on the next Commission Agenda an item for discussion regarding the viability
of the City of Miami Beach taking over towing services within the City. Furthermore, to
discuss any other towing related matters.
Agenda Item t?q k
We ore cornrnltted to provldlng excellent public servlce and sofey fo 011 who Irve, work, and ploy m our Date 9-),'?-I/
551
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
MIAMIBEACH
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR AND COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
FROM: Ed Tobin, Commissioner
DATE: April 6,201 1
SUBJECT: Discussion on Local Belle lsle Bus Route
Please place on the April 13'~ Commission Agenda a discussion on the Local Belle lsle Bus
Route.
Should you have any questions, please contact Yanette Bravo at ext. 6274.
ET/yb
Agenda Item
We ore cornmitied fo providrng excellent publrc sewlce ond soieiy to 011 who Irve, work and play In oul
WqL
I Date 4-13-1f
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Lh MIAMIREACH
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR AND COMMISSION CITMW@RAWM
TO: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
FROM: Matti Herrera Bower, Mayor
DATE: April 6,201 1
SUBJECT: R9 Item: Discussion Regarding a Resolution to Support the Passage of
HB 281 and SB 880
Please place on the April 13, 201 I Commission meeting agenda a discussion
regarding a resolution to support the passage of HB 281 and SB 880 by the Florida
Legislature. The proposed bills would require taxpayers who appeal the market
value of their property to pay a portion of the tax liability whik their appeal is being
addressed. These bills have the support of the Citizens' Oversight Committee, under
the auspices of the Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facilities Planning in
Miami-Dade County. The Committee's letter is attached.
I thank you in advance for your cooperation in this matter. If you have any
questions, please do not hesitate to contact Rebecca Wakefield at extension 61 57.
Thank you.
We ore con~miffed /o providi~lg escdlen) public service and sufeeiy 10 all who live, work, and ploy in our Y
, Agenda Item RqM
, Date 4-13-11
Chairman
Glenn H. Gopman
Vice Chair
Leslie Coller
Voting Members
iris Escarra
Alex David
Antonio Fraga
Mayor Matti Herrera Bower
Susan Kairalla
Jeff Kaufman
Oliver Kerr
Jorge Luis Lopez
Mayor Manuel Marono
Marc Mattia
Dr. Frederick A. Morley
Dannie McMiilon
Nazi Ramallo-Slerra
Victoria Tomas
CITIZENS' OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE
Under The Auspices of the lnterlocal Agreement For
Public School Facility Planning In Miami-Dade County
VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
March 29,201 1
TO: Distribution List (attached)
RE: SUPPORT OF HB281 AND SB880 -
Dear CountyILocal Government lnterlocal Designee:
. .
The Citizens' Oversight Committee (Committee) supports adequate funding to
achieve a high-quality education 'system, and finds that such funding is an
investment in our District's ability to compete nationally and globally in the
marketplace. . .
At our recent March meeting, the Committee discussed, among other things,
one of the School Board's key issues for the 201 1 legislative session, which is
proposed HB281 and SB880. Both proposed bills would require taxpayers who
appeal the market value of their property to'pay a portion of the tax liability
while their appeal is being addressed. The Committee voted unanimously to
seek support for both proposed bills, which are currently under discussion in
their respective legislative bodies.
As such, on behalf of the Committee we respectfully request that your local
government, as a signatory to the lnterlocal Agreement for Public School
Facility Planning in Miami-Dade County, seek the support of the Florida
Legislature for HB 281 and SB 880.
Thank you in advance for your support of the feferenced legislation.
Sincerely,
Glenn H. GO~&&~, C.P.A., P.F.S.
Chairman
cc: School Board Members
Superintendent of Schools
School Board Attorney
Superintendent's Cabinet
Ms. Ana Rijo-Conde, AlCP
Mr. Ivan M. Rodriguez
Citizens' Oversight Committee,Members
ILA DISTRIBUTION LIST
Mr. Eric M. Soroka, ICMA-CM
City Manager
City of Aventura
Mr. Ronald J. Wasson
Town Manager
Town of Bay Harbor Islands
Mr. Patrick G. Salermo
City Manager
City of Coral Gables
The Honorable Otis Wallace
Mayor
City of Florida City
Mr. Steven J. Alexander
Town Manager
Town of Cutler Bay
Ms. Yvonne Soler-Mckinley
City Manager
City of Doral
The Honorable Julio Robaina
Mayor
City of Hialeah
Ms. Mirtha S. Gonzalez
Chief Zoning Official
City of Hialeah Gardens
Mr. George Gretsas
City Manager
City of Homestead
Mr. Tony E. Crapp Jr.
City Manager
Ciiy of Miami
Mr. Jorge M. Gonzalez
City Manager
City of Miami Beach
Mr. Genaro lglesias
Village Manager
Village of Key Biscayne
Dr. Danny 0. Crew
City Manager
City of Miami Gardens
Mr. Alex Rey
Town Manager
Town of Miami Lakes
Mr. James Borgman
City Manager
City of Miami Springs
Mr. hama as J. Benton
Village Manager
Village of Miami Shores
Mr. Russel Benford
City Manager
City of North Miaml
Mr. Bob Pushkin
Interim City Manager
City of North Bay Village
Mr. Octavian Spanner
Community Development Director
City of Opa-Locka
Eve A. Boutsis, Esq.
Nagin, Gallop & Figueredo, P.A,
Village Attorney
Village of Palmetto Bay
Ms. Roslyn Weisblum
Acting City Manager
City of North Miami Beach
Mr. Hector Mirabile PhD.
Acting City Manager
City of South Miami
Hans Ottinot, Esq.
City Attorney
City of Surny Isles Beach
Mr. Stephen Olmsted
Planning Director (Designee)
Village of Pinecrest
p he Honorable Manuel M. Marono
Mayor
City of Sweeetwater
Ms. Yolanda Aguilar
Ciiy Manager
City of West Miami
Ms. Lynn M. Dannheisser
Town Attorney
Town of Surfslde
Mr. Marc C. LaFerrier, AlCP
Director
Department of Planning and Zoning
Miami-Dade County
STAFF WORKING GROUP MEMBERS
Ms. Joanne Carr
Community Development Director
(Designee)
City of Aventura
Mr. Michael Miller
Planning Consultant (Alternate)
Town of Bay Harbor Islands
Mr. David Hennis
Community Development Director
(Designee)
City of Cutler Bay
(Appointment Pending)
City of Florida City
Ms. Frances Schwartz
Planning and Zoning (Designee)
City of Homestead
Mr. Rogelio Madan
Planner (Alternate)
City of Miami
Ms. Ana Rijo-Conde, AlCP
Eco-Sustainability Officer (Designee)
M-DCPS
Ms. Bhairvi Pandya
Senior Planner (Alternate)
City of Miami Gardens
Mr. David Dacquisto
Director of Planning (Designee)
Village of Mlami Shores
The Honorable lleene S. Wallace
Vice Mayor (Designee)
Town of Bay Harbor Islands
Mr. Eric Riel, Jr.
Planning Director (Designee)
City of Coral Gables
Mr. Alex A. David
Planning Consultant (Alternate)
Cutler Bay
Mr. Ronald J. Wasson
Town,Manager (Alternate)
Town of Bay Harbor Islands
Mr. Scot Bolyard
Planner (Alternate)
City of Coral Gables
Mr. Nathan Kogon
Planning and Zoning Director (Designee)
City of Doral
Ms. Debora Storch Ms. Mirtha Gonzalez
Planning and Zoning Official (Designee) Chief Zoning Official (Designee)
City of Hialeah City of Hialeah Garden
..
Mr. Gregory Gay
(Appointment Pending) Planner II (Designee)
City of Key Biscayne City of Miami
. .
Ms. Mercy Larnazares . Mr Richard Lorber
Planning (Designee) . . Zoning Administrator (Alternate)
City of Miami Beach City of Miami Beach
Mr. Jay Marder
Ms. Vivian G. Villaarnil Development Services Director
Director I (Alternate) (Designee)
M-DCPS City of Miami Gardens
Mr. David J. Ofstein Mr. Richard Ventura
City Planner (Designee) , Director of Planning, Zoning and Code
Enforcement (Designee) City of Miami Springs Town of Miami Lakes
Ms. Paula H. Church
Section Supervisor (Designee)
Department of Planning and Zoning
Miami-Dade County
(Appointment Pending)
North Bay Village
STAFF WORKING GROUP MEMBERS
Ms. Maxine Calloway
Director of Community Planning I
Development (Alternate)
City of North Miami
Dr. Ezekiel 0. Orji, CPA
Assitant City Manager (Designee)
City of Opa-Locka
Mr. Stephen Olmsted
Piannlng Director (Designee)
Village of Pinecrest
The Honorable Lewis Thaler
Vice Mayor (Aiternate)
City of Sunny lsles Beach
Ms. Sarah Sinatra
Town Planner (Designee)
Town of Surfside
Ms. Tanya Wilson-Sejour
City Planner (Designee)
City of North Miami
Mr. Efren Nuiiez
Zoning Administrator (Designee)
Village of Palmetto Bay
Ms. Patricia Janisse
Planner (Aiternate)
Village of Pinecrest
Mr. Alex A. David
Planning Consultant (Alternate)
City of Sunny lsles Beach
Mr. Juan Pena .
Planning Director (Designee) .
City of West Miami
Mr. Christopher Heid
City Planner (Alternate)
City of North Miami Beach
Ms. Lourdes Cabrera
Interim Contact
City of South Miami
The Honorable Norman S. Edelcup
Mayor (Designee)
City of Sunny lsles Beach
(Appointment Pending)
Sweetwater
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
9 MIAMIBEACH
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR AND COMMISSION
TO: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
FROM: Jonah Wolfson, Commissioner
DATE: April 6th, 201 1
SUBJECT: Agenda Discussion ltem
MEMOR
Please place on the April 1 3th, 201 1 Commission Meeting Agenda a discussion item
regarding prior resolution prohibiting removal of green space for additional bike lanes.
If you have any questions, please contact Leonor Hernandez at extension 6437.
We ore cornrnt\fed to provtdrng excellen/ publrc servrce and soleh/ to all who /we work or~d play In our 1 Agenda Item Rq hl
Date p-j?-//
561
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Reports and Informational Items
(see LTC #075-2011)
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK