99-23426 RESO
RESOLUTION NO. 99-23426
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AlJTHORIZING THE
ADMINISTRA TION TO ISSUE A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) FOR
THE DEVELOPMENT OF A FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR A PERMANENT
ELECTRIC SHUTTLE FACILITY/ INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER,
SUCH STUDY BEING FULLY FUNDED AT $67,800; AND FURTHER
APPROPRIA TING A $47,800 GRANT A WARDED FOR THE PURPOSE BY
THE METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION, PLUS THE CITY'S
$20,000 MATCH UTILIZING PARKING ENTERPRISE FUNDS, AS
AUTHORIZED BY RESOLUTION NO. 99-23233, DATED JULY 7,1999.
WHEREAS, on July 7, 1999, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No. 99-
23233, authorizing the Administration to submit a grant application to the Metropolitan Planning
Organization (MPO), to perform a feasibility study for a Permanent Electrowave Facility/Intermodal
Transit Center, at a cost not to exceed $70,000, including the City's $20,000 match; and
WHEREAS, on September 23, 1999, MPO Governing Board Resolution No. 18-99 awarded
$47,800 toward this feasibility study; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the performance of
this feasibility study; and
WHEREAS, the feasibility study shall propose a project which is creative and innovative
in nature; which fits in, adds to, and complements the South Beach sense of place; which is
neighborhood and environmentally friendly; and enhances the area's quality of life.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOL VED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that the Mayor and City
Commission hereby authorize the Administration to issue a request for proposals (RFP) for the
development of a feasibility study for a permanent Electric Shuttle Facility/Intermodal Transit
Center, such study being fully funded at $67,800; and further appropriate a $47,800 grant awarded
for the purpose by the Metropolitan Planning Organization, plus the City's $20,000 match utilizing
Parking Enterprise Funds, as previously authorized by Resolution No. 99-23233, dated July 7, 1999.
Passed and approved this the 15th day of
December
, 1999.
ATTEST:
1 . 7
i'l\ /..~
... ~ (, cel'. .)..l C l'- .."--..
C TY CLERK
'f/J(
MAYOR
j\PPROVED AS TO
fORM & LANGUAGE
t~ FOR EXECUTtON
aJ
1Jt~ 1z.~~9
MPO RESOLUTION ## 18-99
E.rHIBtt A
RESOLUTION AWARDING TRANSPORTATION PLANNING FUNDS FOR
STUDIES THROUGH THE FY 2000 MUNICIPAL GRANT PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the Interlocal Agreement creating and establishing the Metropolitan Planning
Organization (MFO) for the Miami Urbanized Area requires that the MFO provide a structure to
evaluate the adequacy of the transportation planning and programming process, and
WHEREAS, the Transportation Planning Council (TPC) has been established and charged with
the responsibility and duty of fulfilling the aforementioned functions, and
WHEREAS, the TPC has reviewed the attached recommendations made a of ~ /JOfl :J..
municipal grant funding and finds them consistent with the goa s an 0 ~ectives of the Transportation
Plan for the Miami Urbanized Area.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE GOVERNING BOARD OF THE
METROPOLIT AN PLANNING ORGANIZATION FOR THE MIAMI URBANIZED AREA:
SECTION 1. That the award of transportation planning funds for studies through the FY 2000
Municipal Grant Program is hereby approved.
The foregoing resolution was offered by Board Member Raul Martinez, who moved its adoption.
The motion was seconded by Board Member Bruno A. Barreiro, and upon being put to a vote, the vote
was as follows:
Board Member Miriam Alonso
Board Member Bruno A. Barreiro
Board Member George J. Berlin
Board Member Barbara M. Carey-Shuler -
Board Member Miguel Diaz de la Portilla -
Board Member Betty T. Ferguson
Board Member Perla Tabares Hantman
Board Member Neisen O. Kasdin
Board Member Richard N. Krinzman
Board Member Raul Martinez
Board Member Natacha Seijas Millan
Board Member Jimmy L. Morales
Board Member Dennis C. Moss
Board Member Pedro Reboredo
Board Member Dorrin Rolle
Board Member Katy Sorenson
Board Member Javier D. Souto
Board Member Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Board Member Raul Valdes-Fauli
Board Member Frank Wolland
Chairperson Gwen Margolis
aye
aye
aye
absent
aye
absent
aye
aye
aye
aye
aye
absent
aye
ave
aye
aye
aye
absent
aye
aye
aye
By
.,: \!PORES8i.k9.lwl'
~
~
~
-
~
o
~
-
~
-
Eo-
Z
<:
~
-
c.,j
..J
-<
~
-
-
u
-
z
-.,
...J
~
~
-
~
c..
;J
-
-
-
-
=
N
>-
~
~
- -
~ ~
:;.
~
-
~
-
...
I:::
~
-
....
-
~
...
'"
-
...
.-
..;;c
-
....
~
...
~
~
-
-
.-
-
....
....
-
::
C
M
~
0:::
,. ,
,..,..
~
-,
-'
Z
z
~
L:J
C\
C\
C\
,...,
u;
='
Ql)
='
<:
-
tIl
Q)
;;,.
-'
o
....J
ii
00
u~~
C1Jr-
<V
<:
- '-
ii E1b
~
-
tIl
Q)
~
--
00
::l
.:
...l<:1a::
Co
~Q.
-
~
.;;t;.
I:
E:: "':)
~ QJ-
~ en c
-- ~ s
:: go =:
c... 0:: <:
I
1=
~ loe ~
c::: Ir--'" r-
<::~ ~
~!"'" "'"
<:
~
::l
en
I
0010"-
-1-
~ I~ ~
~I
o [ i
C-i-IM
::E
I
lrllM
I I
I
'00 -
- M
r-
o
o
...
-1M
o 0
o 0
o 0
o O.
lrl lrl
"'" "'"
[I
.c
:.c
.;;;
~
QJ
t.;..
....
CIJ
C .-
CIJ :.E
U .~
"'2 CIJ
"':) t.;..
o :>-.
~.~i I i.!
_ r- c..
I
.c
"il
c..
:~
~
~
;:; ~
~ ::0
co ~
o
.~ E
o
~ W
...l<: ....
a-E - N
0::0
:!:
cio!
~ IV'. \
ar:"' 10''' I
NIN'
. I
""'1""'1
, I I
o -llrlIOOI',~
N NININ '"
I I
Nor.M-r- 00
I I
Ni~I\Clor.lr-
I I
~ N -1'00 r-
lrl~l""'lNr- 00
lrl N ~ 00 r- '00
N~OO'oOr- or.
I
.2
~
~
~
~
E
000
000
N o. 00
r-'"Noti
N l""'l N
"'" "'" "'"
I
I
"':l
a
>.
"'0
.=
CZl
.c
:>-.
"'0
='
c/i
c:
o
~
E
QJ
=
i)
Q. >.
en E ]
.;;; <Il CZl
:>-. QJ QJ
"'2 .~ u
::: C: 'E
<: ~ QJ
- CZl
~ I 0 ~
o ~ co
E = .~
~ ~ .::
GI~
-
u
~
II)
co
o 0
o 0
c o.
o lrl
N r-
"'" "'"
I
c:
~
Of
<Il
QJ
"'0
QJ
c..
"'0
a fIl
u .;;;
-6' E ~
= ~ ~
c/i r=-<
"':) ell U
Cl:l C :>
o II) <:
0::: E "'0
!!:! ~ :::
:; 0 N
II) ....
...,.Q. u.J
~:E z
.;;;
a
r=
:>-.
II)
"0
....
r-
-
u
~ QJ
- ~ ::: ~
a ..... ~::o
a::E~~o
~ t: ~ ~ E
011)0
z z z ~ U
1l""'l1~llrll'oO
r-
Il""'l
!~
100
i
00
II- !
I"'" ~
:>-.
"'0
.=
CZl
.c
, .-
:.c
.;;;
C':l
II)
t.;..
Q()
c:
.~
o
~
Z
ell
QJ
....
o
.c
CZl
;:::
.!
::E
00
gl
~
~
-
(.)
C':I
Co
E
rr.
,.....,
'-'
,
-
....
C
-:::l
....
-
!:
o
Z
<-..
o
:;.
....
....
--
....
(.)
Q)
I:
C':I
Q)
;>
tIJ
o
Q.
u
<il -
"0 5
I: . (.)
C':I 00 C':I
E .=: :.a'
~.;;t;.C':I .c
'"" ; Q) ~ ~
EQ.': -0
tn.. ce-
.:; I: "0 Co
::lQ)1: ::lQ.
_01JC':I 1:C':I
.~ ...
"0 E = (.) ~ "0
=::l..o ,,=-Q)
C':I tIl 0 (.) Q) tIJ
C'" o..oc
~ ~ Q)C':Ic.
"'''O~ CCtIJO
C':I C ..::. ...
cC':I.c EtlJQ.
.cC':l'O C':I~~
't:::' e..o ~ - 'Q)
::;=0 "::'~..o
0"0- .c=tIl
6h~1: 1: C':I
<-..tIlQ) OC':lQ) .c
o ~.= z -g ~ (.)
~s.s ~E] ~
E:: (.) "0 Q)
.cellC cco :>,
oocC':I Q) tI'l "0
..c: Q. EQ)ell ~
tIl .c Q) .c "0 "0
]~~ c.-.~Q)"O
....oo~ E~~"O~
- I: .- 0 C 00 ::l g
co'" (.)-I:c;;"O
o 00 "0 occ
IJ C':I I: I: C':I (.) Q) 0
_ C':I.... tI'l Q) (.)
::ltl'l tI'lQ)C':I..o:>,
~1:x Q);>-0Q)"O
0'- Q) - Q) ;> C':I
Q. IJ Q) ::l tI'l I: C':I Q)
o IJ 2"0 tI'l.c'"
c..E ~ tIJ ~ ell tIJ C':I
<-..C':I~ ::lOOQ)CtI'l
... (.) ..0'-'" 0 C':I
O.::::c O=C':I .c
Q) :>,'- .:: Q) "0 - -
... - 0 Q)'" C '"" C
::l__ ~CC':II:Q)
C;..o= "::'Q)Q)8E
co 00Q) 1:
ceEc c..o=OOC':l
"0 Q) - tI'l .: Q.
o IJ -0 ., tI'l ~ tI'l c;; ~
C C':I Q. U X .- '""
c: Co. ._ Q) c. ~ X tIl
Q) E ~ t:: .9.c ::l Q).-:
c ';.,.c ~ ... ~ 2 ~o ::e
Q) - ce ... Q).g tIJ :;>
;> ~ ~ .9 "'g .:; 1 c::: (.)
C':I'= C. C':I ~ Q) 0 Q)::C
~'cr. 0:5 (.)... c; ::l
IJ 8.. c.. 1: ~'E ~ 2i5 0..
.:; 0 <-..'(3 Q) Q) ..::. tI'l :>,
-C_oC':lt::tI'lo.cc
~ Q) a e ... Q) tI'l - - ::l
Q) 0 tI'l ::l - .^ 0
"0 u:i 'c E t;:; >. -9 ~ ;: U
o "0 ::: = c: as -- Co. 0
C 1: C C':I E C E - Q)
~ ell 8. ce c.. ... 'E .- g ~
E:: ~ 0..0 "00 tI'l .s 00 ce E a
- ~.- C':I 1:'= f- ...!.
..og-g5E:5c;;5o~
.!!l Q) 0 _.~ 1: x '0 a .-
C~OC~UUJc..u..~
Q)
E N~ -.:tV'\\Ol'OO
~
C':
I:
C':I
E
Q)
....
"0
::l
-..
1:
tIJ
-
C':I
-
-
"0
Q)
C
;:::
::::
Q)
ti
"0
~
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
RFP NO. 27-99/00
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR
A FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR A 'ELECTRIC SHUTTLE' PERMANENT
FACILITY/INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER PROJECT
PROPOSALS ARE DUE AT THE ADDRESS SHOWN BELOW
NO LATER THAN JANUARY 17,2000 AT 3:00 PM
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
PROCUREMENT DIVISION
1700 CONVENTION CENTER DRIVE, THIRD FLOOR
MIAMI BEACH, FL 33139
PHONE: (305) 673-7490
FAX: (305) 673-7851
RFP NO.: 27-99/00
DATE: December 16, 1999
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
1
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
1700 CONVENTION CENTER DRIVE, MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA 33139
http:\\cLmiami-beach.fl.us
PROCUREMENT DIVISION
Telephone (305) 673-7490
Facsimile (305) 673-7851
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
RFP NO. 27-99/00
Sealed proposals will be received by the City of Miami Beach Procurement Director, 1700
Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida, 33139, until 3:00 p.m. on the January 17,2000 for:
A FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR A 'ELECTRIC SHUTTLE' PERMANENT FACILITY/
INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER PROJECT
At time, date, and place above, proposals will be publicly opened. Any proposal received after time
and date specified will be returned to the proposer unopened.
Proposal documents may be obtained upon request from the Procurement Division, telephone
number (305) 673-7490, Bid Clerk.
You are hereby advised that this RFP is subject to the "Cone of Silence, " in accordance with
Ordinance 99-3164. From the time of advertising until the City Manager issues his recommendation,
there is a prohibition on communication with the City's professional staff. The ordinance does not
apply to oral communications at pre-bid conferences, oral presentations before evaluation
committees, contract discussions during any duly noticed public meeting, public presentations made
to the City Commission during any duly noticed public meeting, contract negotiaions with the staff
following the award of an RFP, RFQ, RFLI, or bid by the City Commission, or communications in
writing at any time with any city employee, official, or member of the City Commission unless
specifically prohibited. A copy of all written communications must be filed with the City Clerk.
Violation of these provisions by any particular bidder or proposer shall render any RFP award, RFQ
award, RFLI award, or bid award to said bidder or proposer void, and said bidder or proposer shall
not be considered for any RFP, RFQ, RFLI or bid for a contract for the provision of goods or
services for a period of one year.
The City of Miami Beach reserves the right to accept any proposal or bid deemed to be in the best
interest of the City of Miami Beach, or waive any informality in any proposal or bid. The City of
Miami Beach may reject any and all proposals or bids.
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
Michael A. Rath, CPPB
Procurement Director
RFP NO.: 27-99/00
DATE: December 16, 1999
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. OVERVIEW AND PROPOSAL PROCEDURES
II. SCOPE OF SERVICES
III. PROPOSAL FORMAT
IV. EVALUATION/SELECTION PROCESS; CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION
V. GENERAL PROVISIONS
VI. SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS
VII. ATTACHMENTS
VIII. PROPOSAL DOCUMENTS TO BE COMPLETED AND RETURNED
TO CITY
RFP NO.: 27-99/00
DATE: December 16, 1999
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
3
SECTION I - OVERVIEW AND PROPOSAL PROCEDURES:
A. INTRODUCTIONIBACKGROUND
On January 20, 1998, the City inaugurated a successful local transit service for South Beach,
known as the Electrowave Circulator Shuttle. A permanent
storage/maintenance/charging/fueling/dispatching facility is needed to support an expanding
electric shuttle fleet and program. This facility should also include a transit station to support
intermodal transfers, and possibly a medium-size garage to support a South Beach employee
park-and-ride program. The feasibility study for such a facility will also investigate and
evaluate potential sites for the project, within the Redevelopment Area of Miami Beach. The
duration of the feasibility study will be approximately six (6) months.
It is essential that the study reflect a creative and innovative thinking process, since no
typical or common place transit facility is expected or desired from this study and
prospective project.
The City will select the proposal which demonstrates the highest level of understanding of
the study objectives and produces the best detailed plan to meet these objectives.
B. RFP TIMETABLE
The anticipated schedule for this RFP and contract approval is as follows:
RFP issued
December 16, 1999
Deadline for receipt of questions
January 6, 2000
Deadline for receipt of proposals
January 17,2000 at 3:00 p.m.
Evaluation committee meeting
Week of January 24,2000
Commission approval and authorization
of negotiations
February, 2000
C. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION
An original and seven (7) copies of complete proposal must be received by January 17, 1999
at 3 :00 p.m., and will be opened on that day at that time. The original and all copies must
be submitted to the Procurement Division in a sealed envelope or container stating on the
outside the proposer's name, address, telephone number, RFP number and title, and proposal
due date.
The responsibility for submitting a response to this RFP to the Procurement Division on or
before the stated time and date will be solely and strictly that of the proposer. The City will
in no way be responsible for delays caused by the U.S. Post Office or caused by any other
entity or by any occurrence. Proposals received after the proposal due date and time will not
be accepted and will not be considered.
RFP NO.: 27-99/00
DATE: December 16, 1999
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
4
D. PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE
None scheduled.
E. CONTACT PERSON/ADDITIONAL INFORMATION/ADDENDA
Requests for additional information or clarifications must be made in writing to the
Procurement Director no later than the date specified in the RFP timetable. Facsimiles will
be accepted at (305) 673-7851.
The City will issue replies to inquiries and any other corrections or amendments it deems
necessary in written addenda issued prior to the deadline for responding to the RFP.
Proposers should not rely on representations, statements, or explanations other than those
made in this RFP or in any addendum to this RFP. Proposers are required to acknowledge
the number of addenda received as part of their proposals. The proposer should verify
with the Procurement Division prior to submitting a proposal that all addenda have
been received.
F. PROPOSAL GUARANTY
None required.
G. MODIFICA TION/WITHDRA W ALS OF PROPOSALS
A proposer may submit a modified proposal to replace all or any portion of a previously
submitted proposal up until the proposal due date and time. Modifications received after the
proposal due date and time will not be considered.
Proposals shall be irrevocable until contract award unless withdrawn in writing prior to the
proposal due date or after expiration of ninety (90) calendar days from the opening of
proposals without a contract award. Letters of withdrawal received after the proposal due
date and before said expiration date and letters of withdrawal received after contract award
will not be considered.
H. RFP POSTPONEMENT/CANCELLATION/REJECTION
The City may, at its sole and absolute discretion, reject any and all, or parts of any and all,
proposals; re-advertise this RFP; postpone or cancel, at any time, this RFP process; or waive
any irregularities in this RFP or in any proposals received as a result of this RFP.
RFP NO.: 27-99/00
DATE: December 16, 1999
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
5
I. COST INCURRED BY PROPOSERS
All expenses involved with the preparation and submission of proposals to the City, or any
work performed in connection therewith, shall be the sole responsibility of the proposer(s)
and not be reimbursed by the City.
J. VENDOR APPLICATION
Prospective proposers should register with the City of Miami Beach Procurement Division;
this will facilitate their receipt of future notices of solicitations when they are issued. All
proposer(s) must register prior to award; failure to register will result in the rejection of the
proposal. Potential proposers may contact the Procurement Division at (305) 673-7490 to
request an application.
Registration requires that a business entity complete a vendor application and submit an
annual administrative fee of $20.00. The following documents are required:
1. Vendor registration form
2. Commodity code listing
3. Articles of Incorporation - Copy of Certification page
4. Copy of Business or Occupational License
It is the responsibility of the proposer to inform the City concerning any changes, including
new address, telephone number, services, or commodities.
K. EXCEPTIONS TO RFP
Proposers must clearly indicate any exceptions they wish to take to any of the terms in this
RFP, and outline what alternative is being offered. The City, after completing evaluations,
may accept or reject the exceptions. In cases in which exceptions are rejected, the City may
require the proposer to furnish the services or goods originally described, or negotiate an
alternative acceptable to the City.
RFP NO.: 27-99/00
DATE: December 16, 1999
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
6
L. SUNSHINE LAW
Proposers are hereby notified that all information submitted as part of a response to this RFP
will be available for public inspection after opening of proposals, in compliance with Chapter
286, Florida Statutes, known as the "Government in the Sunshine Law".
M. NEGOTIATIONS
The City may award a contract on the basis of initial offers received, without discussion, or
may require proposers to give oral presentations based on their proposals. The City reserves
the right to enter into negotiations with the selected proposer, and if the City and the selected
proposer cannot negotiate a mutually acceptable contract, the City may terminate the
negotiations and begin negotiations with the next selected proposer. This process may
continue until a contract has been executed or all proposals have been rejected. No proposer
shall have any rights in the subject project or property or against the City arising from such
negotiations.
N. PROTEST PROCEDURE
Proposers that are not selected may protest any recommendations for contract award by
sending a formal protest letter to the Procurement Director, which letter must be received no
later than 5 calendar days after award by the City Commission. The Procurement Director
will notify the protester of the cost and time necessary for a written reply, and all costs
accruing to an award challenge shall be assumed by the protester. Any protests received after
5 calendar days from contract award by the City Commission will not be considered, and the
basis or bases for said protest shall be deemed to have been waived by the protester.
O. RULES; REGULATIONS; LICENSING REQUIREMENTS
Proposers are expected to be familiar with and comply with all Federal, State and local laws,
ordinances, codes, and regulations that may in any way affect the services offered, including
the Americans with Disabilities Act, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the EEOC Uniform
Guidelines, and all EEO regulations and guidelines. Ignorance on the part of the proposer
will in no way relieve it from responsibility for compliance.
RFP NO.: 27-99/00
DATE: December 16, 1999
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
7
P. DEFAULT
Failure or refusal of a proposer to execute a contract upon award by the City Commission,
or untimely withdrawal of a proposal before such award is made and approved, may result
in forfeiture of that portion of any proposal surety required as liquidated damages to the City;
where surety is not required, such failure may result in a claim for damages by the City and
may be grounds for removing the proposer from the City's vendor list.
Q. CONFLICT OF INTEREST
All proposers must disclose with their proposal the name(s) of any officer, director, agent,
or immediate family member (spouse, parent, sibling, child) who is also an employee of the
City of Miami Beach. Further, all proposers must disclose the name of any City employee
who owns, either directly or indirectly, an interest of ten (10%) percent or more in the
proposer or any of its affiliates.
R. PROPOSER'S RESPONSIBILITY
Before submitting proposal, each proposer shall make all investigations and examinations
necessary to ascertain all conditions and requirements affecting the full performance of the
contract. Ignorance of such conditions and requirements resulting from failure to make such
investigations and examinations will not relieve the successful proposer from any obligation
to comply with every detail and with all provisions and requirements of the contract
documents, or will be accepted as a basis for any claim whatsoever for any monetary
consideration on the part of the proposer.
S. RELATION OF CITY
It is the intent of the parties hereto that the successful proposer be legally considered to be
an independent contractor and that neither the proposer nor the proposer's employees and
agents shall, under any circumstances, be considered employees or agents of the City.
T. PUBLIC ENTITY CRIME (PEC)
A person or affiliate who has been placed on the convicted vendor list following a conviction
for public entity crimes may not submit a bid on a contract to provide any goods or services
to a public entity, may not submit a bid on a contract with a public entity for the construction
or repair of a public building or public work, may not submit bids on leases of real property
to public entity, may not be awarded or perform work as a contractor, supplier, sub-
contractor, or consultant under a contract with a public entity, and may not transact business
with any public entity in excess of the threshold amount provided in Sec. 287.017, for
CATEGORY TWO for a period of36 months from the date of being placed on the convicted
vendor list.
RFP NO.: 27-99/00
DATE: December 16, 1999
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
8
SECTION II - SCOPE OF SERVICES
OBJECTIVE(S):
To investigate and evaluate potential sites within the Redevelopment areas of South Beach
for the implementation of an intermodal facility to serve as a full-scale electric shuttle
storage/maintenance/charging/fueling/dispatching facility, a center for transportation mode
transfer, possibly a medium size park-and-ride garage, as well as a transit station for local
and regional bus lines.
To produce a feasibility study which is creative and innovative. The City is looking for a
project which will fit in, add to, and complement the South Beach 'sense of place,' while
being neighborhood and environmentally friendly, and enhancing the area's quality oflife.
Nothing typical or common place is expected or desired from this study.
The City is seeking a proposal which demonstrates the highest level of understanding of the
study objectives and produces the best detailed plan to meet these objectives.
SCOPE OF SERVICES: Besides identifYing, investigating, and evaluating potential sites, the
feasibility study should be encompassing enough in nature and, at a minimum, address the following
Issues:
1. Site feasibility, site marketing analysis
2. Potential impacts to surrounding areas, plus mitigation measures (as needed)
3. Circulation plan, and intermodal connections
4. Full scale electric shuttle facility needs (storage, maintenance, dispatching, etc.)
5. Rail transit terminus connection
6. Other transit modes needs
7. Ridership projections and profiles
8. Potential connection to Greenways (bicycle/pedestrian facilities)
9. Joint mixed-use development potential and consequences
10. Potential on-site economic development opportunities
11. Potential to generate revenues to fund shuttle operations
12. Conceptual design and program
13. Preliminary cost estimates, including right-of-way acquisition (if needed)
14. Project phasing requirements, the main phases being:
* Site acquisition (if needed)
* Electrowave facility/transit center construction
* Medium size park-and-ride garage construction (if so decided)
15. Identification of potential funding scenarios
16. Production of attractive and effective marketing/briefing brochure, this being a very
important element of the feasibility study.
* The feasibility study should consider and determine the optimum combination of
transportation modes to be served by the intermodal facility. These modes may include, but
RFP NO.: 27-99/00
DATE: December 16, 1999
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
9
not be limited to the Electrowave and County buses, automobiles, motorcycles, bicycles,
scooters, taxicabs, water taxi, and an eventual regional rail service.
* The study will be sufficiently thorough to determine the approximate size necessary to
accommodate the intended requirements.
* The study will also include a significant public involvement component, City
committee meetings, and presentations to City and County officials.
END PRODUCTS:
I. A report which documents the data gathered and the ensuing analysis, and makes a
recommendation.
2. A marketinglbriefing brochure.
NOTES:
All sites under consideration for the Intermodal Center are within the City-designated
redevelopment areas. This Intermodal Center will be responsive to the mobility and livability
needs of area residents, commuters and visitors, will allow for ease of travel between
modes, enhance passenger safety, and alleviate congestion. The Center will be planned and
constructed for maximum economic and performance efficiency, and will encourage
coordination among the various agencies involved to ensure efficient management and
delivery of services.
The Intermodal Center Project is one of the priority projects in the Municipal Mobility Plan,
which is the City's "blueprint" for addressing its transportation needs into the 21 st Century,
as well as the implementation tool of the traffic circulation element of the Miami Beach
Comprehensive Plan.
P ARTICIP A TING AGENCIES:
City of Miami Beach
Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO)
Miami Beach Transportation Management Association (MBTMA)
Miami-Dade Transit Agency (MDT A)
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT)
STUDY DURATION: Approximately five (5) months
STUDY FUNDING:
The Study is funded by a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) grant, and Miami
Beach Parking Enterprise Funds.
RFP NO.: 27-99/00
DATE: December 16, 1999
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
10
SECTION III - PROPOSAL FORMAT
Proposals must contain the following documents, each fully completed and signed as required.
Proposals which do not include all required documentation or are not submitted in the required
format, or which do not have the appropriate signatures on each document, may be deemed to be
non-responsive. Non-responsive proposals will receive no further consideration.
A. CONTENTS OF PROPOSAL
1. Table of Contents
Outline in sequential order the major areas of the proposal, including enclosures. All
pages must be consecutively numbered and correspond to the table of contents.
2. Proposal Points to Address:
Proposer must respond to all minimum requirements listed below, and provide
documentation which demonstrates ability to satisfy all of the minimum qualification
requirements. Proposals which do not contain such documentation may be deemed
non-responsIve.
3. Price Proposal
Proposer must include price which will be charged to the City.
4. Acknowledgment of Addenda and Proposer Information forms (Section VIII)
5. Anv other document required bv this RFP. such as a Questionnaire or Proposal
Guaranty .
B. MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS / QUALIFICATIONS:
The Respondent shall provide a listing of representative clients in the public transportation
field on the Proposal Forms provided.
The Respondent shall submit a description of the firm's organizational structure, history,
legal status (i.e., partnership, corporation, etc.), list of owners and officers, capabilities and
experience, and management philosophy. The City is particularly interested in the
Respondent's creative and innovative approach to the intermodal transit center concept,
organizational resources an expertise available, and the primary businesses or range of
diversified businesses in which the Respondent's form is involved.
C. STAFFING
Respondent must submit a proposed staffing plan indicating all management and staff
employee positions and the number of full-time equivalent employees at each position. The
staffing plan shall outline the qualifications and level of responsibility of each. A Project
RFP NO.: 27-99/00
DATE: December 16, 1999
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
11
Manager, a Project Supervisor, etc., shall be designated and identified by name, and detailed
resumes shall be submitted.
If subcontractors are used, describe the arrangement with the Contractor as well as their role
in the project.
The staff plan shall indicate where management and administrative staff will be located.
SECTION IV - EVALUATION/SELECTION PROCESS; CRITERIA FOR
EVALUATION
The procedure for proposal evaluation and selection is as follows:
1. Request for Proposals issued.
2. Receipt of proposals.
3. Opening and listing of all proposals received.
4. An Evaluation Committee, appointed by the City Manager, shall meet to evaluate each
proposal in accordance with the requirements of this RFP. If further information is desired,
proposers may be requested to make additional written submissions or oral presentations to
the Evaluation Committee.
5. The Evaluation Committee shall recommend to the City Manager the proposal or proposals
acceptance of which the Evaluation Committee deems to be in the best interest of the City.
The Evaluation Committee will base its recommendations, grade and rank responsive
proposals in accordance with the criteria set forth below:
Evaluation Criteria:
a. Demonstrated understanding and interpretation of proiect and
City's obiectives
35%
b. Quality of the detailed plan to meet obiectives
30%
c. Qualifications and experience of key personnel
20%
d. Experience and history of proposer/entity
10%
e. Cost to City
5%
Total:
100%
RFP NO.: 27-99/00
DATE: December 16, 1999
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
12
7. After considering the recommendation(s) of the Evaluation Committee, the City Manager
shall recommend to the City Commission the proposal or proposals acceptance of which the
City Manager deems to be in the best interest of the City.
8. 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 proposal or proposals. In any case, City Commission
shall select the proposal or proposals acceptance of which the City Commission deems to be
in the best interest of the City. The City Commission may also reject all proposals.
9. Negotiations between the selected proposer and the City Manager 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 proposer other than the top-ranked proposer ifthe negotiations with the top-
ranked proposer fail to produce a mutually acceptable contract within a reasonable period of
time.
10. A proposed contract or contracts are presented to the City Commission for approval,
modification and approval, or rejection.
11. 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.
Important Note:
By submitting a proposal, all proposers shall be deemed to understand and agree that no
property interest or legal right of any kind shall be created at any point during the aforesaid
evaluation/selection process until and unless a contract has been agreed to and signed by both
parties.
RFP NO.: 27-99/00
DATE: December 16,1999
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
13
SECTION V - GENERAL PROVISIONS
A. ASSIGNMENT
The successful proposer shall not enter into any sub-contract, retain consultants, or
assign, transfer, convey, sublet, or otherwise dispose of this contract, or of any or all
of its right, title, or interest therein, or its power to execute such contract to any
person, firm, or corporation without prior written consent of the City. Any
unauthorized assignment shall constitute a default by the successful proposer.
B. INDEMNIFICATION
The successful proposer shall be required to agree to indemnify and hold harmless
the City of Miami Beach and its officers, employees, and agents, from and against
any and all actions, claims, liabilities, losses and expenses, including but not limited
to attorneys' fees, for personal, economic or bodily injury, wrongful death, loss of or
damage to property, in law or in equity, which may arise or be alleged to have arisen
from the negligent acts or omissions or other wrongful conduct of the successful
proposer, its employees, or agents in connection with the performance of service
pursuant to the resultant Contract; the successful proposer shall pay all such claims
and losses and shall pay all such costs and judgments which may issue from any
lawsuit arising from such claims and losses, and shall pay all costs expended by the
City in the defense of such claims and losses, including appeals.
C. TERMINATION FOR DEFAULT
If through any cause within the reasonable control of the successful proposer, it shall
fail to fulfill in a timely manner, or otherwise violate any of the covenants,
agreements, or stipulations material to the Agreement, the City shall thereupon have
the right to terminate the services then remaining to be performed by giving written
notice to the successful proposer of such termination which shall become effective
upon receipt by the successful proposer of the written termination notice.
In that event, the City shall compensate the successful proposer in accordance with
the Agreement for all services performed by the proposer prior to termination, net of
any costs incurred by the City as a consequence of the default.
Notwithstanding the above, the successful proposer shall not be relieved of liability
to the City for damages sustained by the City by virtue of any breach of the
Agreement by the proposer, and the City may reasonably withhold payments to the
successful proposer for the purposes of set off until such time as the exact amount of
damages due the City from the successful proposer is determined.
RFP NO.: 27-99/00
DATE: December 16, 1999
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
14
D. TERMINATION FOR CONVENIENCE OF CITY
The City may, for its convenience, terminate the services then remaining to be
performed at any time without cause by giving written notice to successful proposer
of such termination, which shall become effective thirty (30) days following receipt
by proposer of such notice. In that event, all finished or unfinished documents and
other materials shall be properly delivered to the City. If the Agreement is terminated
by the City as provided in this section, the City shall compensate the successful
proposer in accordance with the Agreement for all services actually performed by the
successful proposer and reasonable direct costs of successful proposer for assembling
and delivering to City all documents. No compensation shall be due to the successful
proposer for any profits that the successful proposer expected to earn on the balanced
of the Agreement. Such payments shall be the total extent of the City's liability to the
successful proposer upon a termination as provided for in this section.
RFP NO.: 27-99/00
DATE: December 16, 1999
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
15
SECTION VI - SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS
None
SECTION VII - ATTACHMENTS
1. Cone of Silence, Ordinance No. 99-3164
RFP NO.: 27-99/00
DATE: December 16, 1999
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
16
SECTION VIII - PROPOSAL DOCUMENTS TO BE COMPLETED
AND RETURNED TO CITY
1. PROPOSER INFORMATION
2. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF ADDENDA
3. DECLARATION
4. QUESTIONNAIRE
RFP NO.: 27-99/00
DATE: December 16, 1999
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
17
PROPOSER INFORMATION
Submitted by:
Proposer (Entity):
Signature:
Name (Typed):
Address:
City/State:
Telephone:
Fax:
It is understood and agreed by proposer that the City reserves the right to reject any and all
proposals, to make awards on all items or any items according to the best interest of the City,
and to waive any irregularities in the RFP or in the proposals received as a result of the RFP.
It is also understood and agreed by the proposer that by submitting a proposal, proposer shall
be deemed to understand and agree than no property interest or legal right of any kind shall
be created at any point during the aforesaid evaluation/selection process until and unless a
contract has been agreed to and signed by both parties.
(Authorized Signature)
(Date)
(Printed Name)
RFP NO.: 27-99/00
DATE: December 16, 1999
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
18
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS NO. (Number)
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF ADDENDA
Directions: Complete Part I or Part II, whichever applies.
Part I: Listed below are the dates of issue for each Addendum received in connection with
this RFP:
Addendum No.1, Dated
Addendum No.2, Dated
Addendum No.3, Dated
Addendum No.4, Dated
Addendum No.5, Dated
Part II:
No addendum was received in connection with this RFP.
Verified with Procurement staff
Name of staff
Date
(Proposer - Name)
(Date)
(Signature)
RFP NO.: 27-99/00
DATE: December 16, 1999
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
19
DECLARATION
TO: Sergio Rodriguez
City Manager
City of Miami Beach, Florida
Submitted this
day of
,1998.
The undersigned, as proposer, declares that the only persons interested in this proposal are named
herein; that no other person has any interest in this proposal or in the Contract to which this proposal
pertains; that this proposal is made without connection or arrangement with any other person; and
that this proposal is in every respect fair and made in good faith, without collusion or fraud.
The proposer agrees if this proposal is accepted, to execute an appropriate City of Miami Beach
document for the purpose of establishing a formal contractual relationship between the proposer and
the City of Miami Beach, Florida, for the performance of all requirements to which the proposal
pertains.
The proposer states that the proposal is based upon the documents identified by the following
number: RFP No.27-99/00
SIGNATURE
PRINTED NAME
TITLE (IF CORPORATION)
RFP NO.: 27-99/00
DATE: December 16,1999
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
20
Proposer's Name:
Principal Office Address:
Official Representative:
Individual
Partnership (Circle One)
Corporation
If a Corporation. answer this:
When Incorporated:
In what State:
If Foreie:n Corporation:
Date of Registration with
Florida Secretary of State:
Name of Resident Agent:
Address of Resident Agent:
President's Name:
Vice-President's Name:
Treasurer's Name:
Members of Board of Directors:
RFP NO.: 27-99/00
DATE: December 16, 1999
QUESTIONNAIRE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
21
Ouestionnaire (continued)
If a Partnership:
Date of organization:
General or Limited Partnership*:
Name and Address of Each Partner:
NAME
ADDRESS
* Designate general partners in a Limited Partnership
I. Number of years of relevant experience in operating similar business:
2. Have any similar agreements held by proposer for a project similar to the proposed
project ever been canceled?
Yes ( )
No ( )
If yes, give details on a separate sheet.
3. Has the proposer or any principals of the applicant organization failed to qualify as a
responsible bidder, refused to enter into a contract after an award has been made,
failed to complete a contract during the past five (5) years, or been declared to be in
default in any contract in the last 5 years?
If yes, please explain:
RFP NO.: 27-99/00
DATE: December 16, 1999
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
22
Ouestionnaire (continued)
4. Has the proposer or any of its principals ever been declared bankrupt or reorganized
under Chapter 11 or put into receivership?
If yes, give date, court jurisdiction, action taken, and any other explanation deemed
necessary .
5. Person or persons interested in this bid and Qualification Form
(have) (have not) been convicted by a Federal, State, County, or
Municipal Court of any violation of law, other than traffic violations. To include
stockholders over ten percent (10%). (Strike out inappropriate words)
Explain any convictions:
6. Lawsuits (any) pending or completed involving the corporation, partnership or
individuals with more than ten percent (10%) interest:
A. List all pending lawsuits:
B. List all judgments from lawsuits in the last five (5) years:
C. List any criminal violations and/or convictions of the proposer and/or any of its
principals:
7. Conflicts of Interest. The following relationships are the only potential, actual, or
perceived conflicts of interest in connection with this proposal:
(If none, so state.)
RFP NO.: 27-99/00
DATE: December 16, 1999
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
23
Ouestionnaire (continued)
8. Public Disclosure. In order to determine whether the members of the Evaluation
Committee for this Request for Proposals have any association or relationships which
would constitute a conflict of interest, either actual or perceived, with any proposer
and/or individuals and entities comprising or representing such proposer, and in an
attempt to ensure full and complete disclosure regarding this contract, all Proposers
are required to disclose all persons and entities who may be involved with this Proposal.
This list shall include public relation firms, lawyers and lobbyists. The Procurement
Division shall be notified in writing if any person or entity is added to this list after
receipt of proposals.
RFP NO.: 27-99/00
DATE: December 16, 1999
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
24
The proposer understands that information contained in this Questionnaire will be relied upon by the City in
awarding the proposed Agreement and such information is warranted by the proposer to be true. The
undersigned proposer agrees to furnish such additional information, prior to acceptance of any proposal relating
to the qualifications of the proposer, as may be required by the City Manager.
The proposer further understands that the information contained in this questionnaire may be confirmed
through a background investigation conducted by the Miami Beach Police Department. By submitting this
questionnaire the proposer agrees to cooperatewith this investigation, including but not necessarily limited to
fingerprinting and providing information for credit check.
WITNESSES:
IF INDIVIDUAL:
Signature
Signature
Print Name
Print Name
WITNESSES:
IF PARTNERSHIP:
Signature
Print Name of Firm
Print Name
Address
Signature
By:
(General Partner)
(print Name)
(Print Name)
WITNESSES:
IF CORPORATION:
Signature
Print Name of Corporation
Print Name
Address
By:
President
Attest:
Secretary
(CORPORA TE SEAL)
RFP NO.: 27-99/00
DATE: December 16, 1999
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
25
I
I
I
!
r
.j
!
.. ....
j
,
ORDINANCE NO. 99-3164
AN ORDINANCE OFTBE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF no: CITY OJ' MIAMI
BEAOl, FLORIDA J:ST A.BLISHING A ~NE
OF SILENCE" FOR CITY COMPETITIVE
BIDDING PROCEsSEs. BY AMENDING
CHAP1'ER 2 OF THE CODE OF'I"BJ: CITY OF
MIAMI BEACH ENTITLED
.ADMlNIS'l'RAno~" . BY AMENDING
ARneLl: vn TB:EUoJ' EN'I1TLED
"'ST ANDARDSOPCONDUCT." BYCltEATING
DIVISlON' 4 EN'l1TLb MPROC't1REM!NT,"
BY C'JtEATlNG SECnON ~ I'.N'TJTLED
"CONI: OF SII.ENCJ:- .V PROVIDIl'iG FOR A
DEFINITION. PaOCEDt1IlE5. AND
PENAl. TIES; PROVIDING .JOlt UP.I.ALI:R.
SEVERABILITY, INCLUSION' IN TIlE aTY
CODE, AND AN U'lECTIVE DAtt
WlII:RI:.A$, the Mayor I:Dl1 City Com"';~CIl of 1be City of Miami Bcacb ~ ~ud of
~ · '"Caae of SlICDCe'" JlI'Qc:edure 10 ~ the ~"ioaal ~dy of 1be City's
~~li1I'C biddma' J1l'DCZU b1 qiaoW:, die City's ~:~, aft a1
w-.:~rAS..1bepaicyJRP-d "'~!be ~...... of~ pc:rIOb or
h";- TI_ Yt'bo - pctoflbe CitYI ~tivc pI'OC 'Ies 10 ~ aU iOl_nm..~ with the
City", pllJ~.'t:,.r aft; IDd
WRDrA8. ~,~. .-.~ bel.....,. '*-d o1Iicia1s IIKI tbe City'-s ~ :.:~~ Jt.tfdariDa
a ~".~ciYe hiMl",~ sboaId be in wimac to tbM it ~ ~ . pIl't <<me public ftlCOrd; IDd
WIIl:REAs, tbc prgpoICII policy prcxe.... the riahtI of iDcIiYiduafs to.PctiUma their
goVf:mme:Jr .a their.eiccted ofticiaa; ad
\VIIEJtEAs. the polley p.~ herem -'--a tbe spirit of Florida's Gove.I...~ul in the'
Sll'n~~ Law.
NOW, THEREfORE. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR A:'iD CITY
COMMISSION or THE crTY OF MIA.\fi BEACH:
SE.CTION t. S.:cticn 2-4::26. of Division': of A..""ticJe VII of Chapld 2 of the t..1ia..'ni B~ch City
Code is hereby cre:::.ted to read as tollows:
Article VII. St:lnd:lrds of Cj)nducc
~
.
Division 4. ?r-ocur~:nent
See. 2-486. Cone of Silence
.L ~onr~ for the pmvision of vnods and services othe1' than audit and [r.l'pc..,dcrn
PI;" :..:~ S<.'Ctar [..:J.....~~t:9r C':1".~ rrr~TCi con~&;:.
~ '"Cone of Silence" is h.erebv defined to mean a prohibition on' (a) an....
communication re23:Tdinqo 3 nanicular Reouest for Pmnosal ("R..PP") R.eqll~st
for Ot:.:lI;:;c:lt1cnc: ("R FO"t ReoueST for Lene~ of!!"t~est ~RFr..I-) ;; bid
between a ~~ial ven~or service 'provi~er. bidde:' IQ~b\o~ ~~~('li:~
and t~~ .Cltv c; .mof~s~onal staff' rncludIni. but. not !~ml~_d ~ ~ ",_
Manltier and hl~ or her rta.ff~ and (bl llnv communlCatTO~a
pa:rtieular RFP. RF() RFtr Or bid ~ the MBVor. City C_' ~
or their r~ve ST.Ilffs and any member of me Crrv'~ pmfessi~~I~ff
ineludrnv but !lot I;m~ tn the City Manaf~ l'Uld hi.. or h; ~ff.
~twilhmndin2' t.."'e fnrl!:~ino the Cone of Sil~ shall ~~t 'a~i.. .~
competirivc "roce.c;se.. for ~ award of CDBG HO~~-:d :mw::
Fund~ admini~ered bv the M"wni Beach Office ofComm' _IQ...._ r.
and comm!lTllcrions with the Crt'-- Attornev and hi.. or h;- staff
.au Procedure
ill A C~ ofSilenc~ shall be imoosed Upon each RFP_ RFO RFLI. and
bid 2lfW- the 2ldvmi..ement of said RFP. RFO. RF1i 0; i,lci ;..~ the
time of imposition nfth~ Cone ofSiJence the C: ~::;~ ~ ~ o~
Mr desi~~ shall pro"ide fnr public notic~ of e .. ~ iI ee_
The Cil,,' .Manager shall inc!u~e in ~v cubfic 9~ii~j:0; fo:~~~:
:lnd o;ervtces a ~atement dlsclogm~ the reqUl~ s ___"-__
()rdini!rICe.
!ill
TbeCon~ ofSi!ence $~aH tennln.a~ a' at ~he time [he~:;::n:r;
makes hIS or !leT wnn~ recommendatlon a5 10 I .
:2
v
oanicu!ar RFP RFO RFU. or bid to the (it,," o,mmission' pmvided,
\h)wever th:lt if the Cit'.' Commission refers the:: M:l11a~~r' ~
~mmend;Jtion bade [0 [he Ci",' f\,bm1~~ or stllff for furthc::r rev1~
(~ C\)r!~ of ~ilence <;nnll h~ reimtlosed until .such rime as th~
:\'br.:l""r mnke... :l <;tJh"~ue71r wnner; ~~<"r"'Icn~d.)rion Or r.) il" the
e~'enr of c:ontr<:lc:t<: for less (han S 10 non O() when The ("iT"; ;a.,(an.llzer
!::'I'ecut~ the contract
~ E:<c~~tions Th~ Tlfo'liision:s of this ordin:tn~ shall no! arml... to oral
communications :l.t nre-bid conterences ot"::ll ~~5en[arions before jlc!cc;tiMt
e.....aluation committees COnlr:lCT !!'C~!)~i~tie,n::! discu~s1on~ durin~ :m.... dul....
noticed oublic m~tino pun tic: nre<;em<lrinnot; m.ade to the erty Commis~ione:;
durinsz atw dul\i noticed DUblic m~n~ contract ne~oliations with Citv st:!ff
follcv.in~ the award of a."l RF? RFO RFLT or bid bv the Citv Com~issjo~
or ..:-ommunicarions in writina at an" time wirh :lU'" Ci\,-' emp[ovee. official or
member of (he Cif'.,' Commission unr~ss ~~e1tieall'" urohibited b.... th~
2T'\nlicable RFP RFO RFT r Qr bid dOC1.l~ncs The bidder or proposer shsJl
file :l. CQIW of any ~ commW'licntiOr1s y,;rh the Cirv Cl~k Th~ Citv
Clerk shall make copi~ 3v.lilable to am.. person uoon recru~5t
...
-
A.udi~ .)!'!d :rSIC ConrT'3.c's
.w "CQne of Silem:~" is ~rehv defin~ In mean a prohibition on: (a) an\'
commnnicariono; re!!'ardj~ :l narncular RFP RFO. RFLT. or bid between a
~~~~~~;~~;~~~e~~~l=~~= ~ ::~;:;:~an;f::
Cit....s orotessional .taffi"c1\Jdi~ but not limited to the City Man2~er and
his or her staff 2!'td (bl !!TV oral eommunication re:ardil'lf a ;>arric:n13f' RF?~
RFO RFLI or bid between theMa~"or Cit".. Comr;i~~oners or their
feS:)ecrive ~llff~ and a.rty member oftl)e Citv's professional ~aff indudins,
bUT nnr limited to the City Man~ and his or h~ staff. "\iotv\.;rh~djng m';
for~"oing the Cnne of SilenO!! shall not aw1v tC communications with the
Cit', Arrame<.' and his or her staff
au E.'(ceot as t'mvided in ruhsec:tion~ 7(c) and 2{d) hereof II Cnne ('tf Silence
shall be imposed Unon ~ac:h RFP. RFO. RFLI. or bid for audir 1!rll! WSTG
5e:"'\.'[C~ m~ th~ adven:isemenr of said RFP RFO R.FU. or bid. At me rime
of tl,e imnosition of the Cone of Silence. the City Mana"er or his or b.~
des[i1t~ shall rnnvide for m~ tmhlic notice of the Cone of Silence TheC~~e
of Silence shall rermin:ue w+t~1'\ the Cj~' M!!.!'ll:~f netl:l!~ l. p,,;r~:n ~
,,~ E'SI'.: eer.c:~ct 3) at the time the City Man~2'er mak~ hi;~r _ 'n
,.recommendation ~s to the seLection of 4 particular RFP. RFO RFLI ~ bid
ID the Citv Commission: pm"ided. hov..e'\Ier~ that if the City Co;~i~si~~
~ers the Man~er.! recomm~d!!rion back to the City Man8.2'~ Or !itaffi~r.
3
SECTION 2. REPEALER.
That all Ordinanc..-s or parts ofOrdinancr::s in conflict herewith ~ and the same are hc.-eby
re~aled.
.
SF.CTTON 3. SEv'"ER.ulfLITY.
rf any se=tion, subsection. clause Or provision of this Ordinance is held invalid, the remainder
scaH not be affec!~d by such invalidity.
SECTION 4. COOmCATJON'.
r t is the intention of the lYf'..ayor and. Ci ty Cor:unis3ion 0 f the City of Miami Bc::ach. and
it is hereby ordained that the provisions of this ordinance shari become and be made a par:: of the
Code oftb.e Cicy of Miami ~h, Florida. The sectiocs o(mis ordinance may be recumbe:ed Or
relenered to accomplish such inr.ection. and the word "ordinance" may ~ chan~ed to "secllOO".
"article," or other ~priate word.
SECTIONS. EFYEcnvF. DATE
1"hU Ordinance s1Wl take effect on the ~ day of J'aauary
, 1999.
PASSED and ADOPTED this ~ day of January
.1999.
ATIEST:
~cr f tU&.-
11
MAYOR
CITY CI.ERX
Nf'R0\IED AS TO
FORM & lANGUAGE
& fOR exeCUTION
. "'~"._"--.......c-.IaC__.'"
ise read~i 12/16/98
2nd re4d1ng 1/~/99
5
1!ti1t/)~
c:-~ "'Mo"...
~}i9f}-
~
!i.Hther review th~ Cone ofSilen.ce sball be reimpo~ until $~C~ ti:: ~~
M;:na~er mak~.a sumeqtlell.C wnttm ~ommend.1tlon Or b) r In :v~~
of cnntT3cts for less than S r 0.000 00 wn~n Th~ Citv MQna~;r ;~~~r l:
contract
~
""orhi'1~ cOr1laincd herein snJ.lJ I"lrl)hibir Lln~' .,idd"'r nr 1"lroDO~'" r i) fmm
~,aki~!:' .~ubfic ~t;uior.<; .;;It dul'l n~'iced pre~bid C~~f~:e~;~ ~tfo~
duf.... nonc= ~~~.~11'''1 ~v31~C1on co~mItTee meetm~' (ll) Ii. ~nO'~~ n.~..I~
conrrllCt ~C~ ,tt~r,u" . d'SCIJ~S1on~ d~nnlt :l.nv d~II.' n=;~ ~~~ :e~~ir~i
from ::n~al!lIW m cont!'3C! ~Otlallons !l'1th Cltv s . 1 ~ r= ~
an RFP R.FO RFU. or bid for aud!t bv the Cirv Commis~~~'~;(i....., ;:;;,
rnm~unica.t~!! i~ writin" W.i(.h nnv .ritv ~~Iovee or Offi~~~ ~r ::ose~
seektng cJanfrC<'1tlon or :1ddm 0 r'm I mformn.no!"l fmm tht: .. r ondtn"
ro the Cirv"s request fo~ cb,;ficanon or additional inforrnati~n. ~u*~ to th;
!m\;..ions of the npnlic:1kie RF? RFO R..FI.I or bid docum~{so bidder
or' l"lrooo~er ~;'a'l file a COPy of any "-'rirren c:ommunicati~~ v..:: t~; ~
Cleric: Th~ Crt... rl~ shaH mak~ copies av:tilable to the..e I hl"c 'II
reQue<;T
(ct)
NOfh'"t' contained ~ere~n. shall m:nhihit anv (~bbvi~ ~~~~~::~:;;
(Hhe~ ?~on or eft(tfV from pubhdv addressYnV- rh . J _
durin.r :mv duly ncriced public medina ~in(J arnon on an'\," ~~i~i
~ COnm.C1. ,The C,:, Mnna~r shan i~clude. in ~v ~~bii~ ~ol:~[~~ir
audlOn~ eY. rPS,C c:~\ces a 'mlremenr d!scJoSlnll the ~ rem s
ordinance.
~
Vio_~tion~~alti~ an~ ?mced~es. {~ ~C:::~I'\ t~ the ;c~~~~~;c: i1~~.;~
~ An :l!l~~ ,,"relanon armIS SectIon ~ b,y a ~.lI .:;-' ~r =
shaH mblec1' said bid4er Or proposer t[) the ~~ ;~;~~~...u ~ bi~ .~
2..457(2}and (1). shall rendc:r any R~ avvard. RFO _ _ _ :~. ~ ~~.. :~=
to said bi~ OT rn'Ot'll"l~ void~ and 5aid bid~ ~r t)~ seT ~ :.~~ ~
consid~d fer!lnV R~ RFO RFU or bid for a ~~~~~ =~:~~~~. ~(;:;;~
or ~~S fOT a pen~ ?f one vest ~nv r>~n w:~ ;;~~; ;~~:~~:~:
ornnnnce shall hi! proFnbired from Ser\rmf ;; ~ tv , .r. -:!l _.
commiTt~~ rn :1ddition (0 any ocher ~[tv prov;ded hy t~w~ ~~t~tion oI;~v
Drovision of thi! ordimlnce bv :J Citv emolm."~ ~~~:ffect S2.~~:lo"'~e ~~
disci~!inarv action un to and if'lc'udin~ dic;mi"~~ ~ .. h,"o af'lv ~.... , Wh~ n"""
~rsonal knou:led2~ ()fa viof.3rion ofrhis ordin~; f~l r~~ ~ ~~latiOn to the
State Arrame\" l1ndior' ma.." file :l c::ompl;;~r ~o [e Mia"- e unrv Ethics
Commission.
.:+
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
CITY HALL 1700 CONVENTION CENTER DRIVE MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA 33139
http:\\cLmiami-beach.f1.us
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM NO. ~'1
TO:
Mayor Neisen O. Kasdin and
Members of the City 'ssion
DA TE:December 15, 1999
FROM:
Sergio Rodriguez
City Manager
SUBJECT:
A RESOLUTI N OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE
ADMINISTRA TION TO ISSUE A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) FOR
THE DEVELOPMENT OF A FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR A PERMANENT
ELECTRIC SHUTTLE FACILITY! INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTER,
SUCH STUDY BEING FULLY FUNDED AT $67,800; AND FURTHER
APPROPRIATING A $47,800 GRANT A WARDED FOR THE PURPOSE BY
THE METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION, PLUS THE CITY'S
$20,000 MATCH UTILIZING PARKING ENTERPRISE FUNDS, AS
AUTHORIZED BY RESOLUTION NO. 99-23233, DATED JULY 7, 1999.
ADMINISTRA TION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
ANALYSIS
City Commission Resolution No. 99-23233, dated July 7, 1999, authorized the Administration to
submit a grant application to the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), under the FY 1999-
2000 Municipal Grant Program, to perform a Feasibility Study for a Permanent Electrowave Facility!
Intermodal Transit Center at a cost of approximately $70,000. The funding distribution proposed
by the grant application was $50,000 by the MPO, matched at $20,000 by the Miami Beach Parking
Enterprise Fund.
MPO Governing Board Resolution No. 18-99, dated September 23, 1999, awarded $47,800 toward
this feasibility study. The City of Miami Beach ranked number one among the four successful
applicant cities, which also included Coral Gables, North Miami Beach, and North Miami (Exhibit
A). All awarded applications were for transit or transit-related studies
Study Funding: The cost of the study shall not exceed $67,800, which is funded at $47,800 by the
MPO and at $20,000 by the Parking Enterprise Fund. A Request for Proposals (RFP) packet for the
feasibility study, including a basic scope of services, is herein attached for your review.
AGENDA ITEM
CIO
I 2 -I S - Cj 9
DATE
What is expected of this feasibility study?: It is essential that this study reflect a creative and
innovative thinking process. The City is looking for a project which will fit in, add to, and
complement the South Beach 'sense of place,' while being neighborhood and environmentally
friendly, and enhancing the area's quality of life. No typical or common place transit facility is
expected or desired from this study and prospective project, which shall set the tone for future
development and redevelopment projects of the kind in South Beach. The prospective RFP
respondents will be required to submit their own interpretation of the City's basic scope of services,
herein attached as part of the RFP packet.
The components of the study: The study will investigate and evaluate potential sites within the
redevelopment areas of South Beach for the implementation of a permanent electric shuttle vehicle
storage/maintenance/dispatching facility, a transit center for transportation mode transfer, a station
for local and regional transit lines, and, possibly, a medium size parking garage. This study shall be
encompassing enough in nature and, at a minimum, address the following issues:
1. Site feasibility, site marketing analysis
2. Potential impacts to surrounding areas, plus mitigation measures (if needed)
3. Circulation plan, and intermodal connections
4. Full scale electric shuttle facility needs
5. Rail transit terminus needs
6. Other transit modes needs
7. Ridership projections and profiles
8. Potential connection to green ways
9. Joint mixed-use development potential and consequences
10. Potential on-site economic development opportunities
11. Potential to generate revenues to fund shuttle operations
12. Conceptual design and program
13. Preliminary cost estimates, including right-of-way acquisition (where needed)
14. Project phasing requirements, Phase I being the shuttle facility
15. Identification of potential funding scenarios and sources
16. Production of attractive and effective marketinglbriefing brochure.
The importance of producine a marketinefbriefine brochure is twofold:
* To help with the extensive public involvement process required in the RFP (several
committee and neighborhood meetings, and presentations as needed); and
* To help with the multi-year request for right-oj-way acquisition and construction Junding
before the U. S. House Appropriations Committee, and the City's request for matching funds
from FDOT using State toll revenue credits, a soft match.
The need for a permanent Electrowave Shuttle facility: A most important component of this
study and prospective project is the provision of a permanent and all-encompassing storage/
maintenance/fueling/dispatching facility for the Electrowave Shuttle Service. The temporary facility
provided by the City at Terminal Island will operate beyond capacity as soon as the four additional
shuttle vehicles arrive in December, 1999. In addition, there is no room to expand the facility at its
present location. If the Electrowave shuttle service is to continue on its successful path, it is
imperative that a permanent and all-encompassing facility be constructed in South Beach.
The City may accomplish diverse and important goals by embracing this feasibility study and
prospective project, thereby setting the tone for development/redevelopment projects of the kind in
South Beach, providing a permanent home for the shuttle project, as well as a station for service
transfers from the larger County buses to local circulator shuttles, and possibly providing a medium
size garage to support a park-and-ride program for South Beach employees.
The Administration recommends approval of the Resolution.
Attachments: MPO Ordinance/Ranking of Awarded Projects (Exhibit A)
RFP Packet
sg~
(inlcrmdl)aj