Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-26198 Reso RESOLUTION NO. 2006-26198 A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, WAIVING BY 5/7THS VOTE, THE CITY'S COMPETITIVE BIDDING REQUIREMENTS, FINDING SUCH WAIVER TO BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY, AND FURTHER ACCEPTING THE FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY MANAGER, CERTIFYING A VALID PUBLIC EMERGENCY, AND WAIVING THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 287.055, FLORIDA STATUTES ("CONSULTANTS' COMPETITIVE NEGOTIATION ACT"); ALL FOR THE PURCHASE OF THE NECESSARY PROFESSIONAL ARCHITECTURAL, LANDSCAPING, AND ENGINEERING SERVICES ( THE AlE SERVICES) FOR THE RENOVATION OF THE NORMANDY SHORES GOLF COURSE CLUBHOUSE, AND THE DESIGN, DEMOLITION, AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW GOLF COURSE MAINTENANCE BUILDING, CART BARN, AND TWO (2) RESTROOM BUILDINGS; FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AN AGREEMENT FOR THE AFORESTATED AlE SERVICES WITH ARCHITEKNICS, INC., IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $525,000; IN THE EVENT THE ADMINISTRATION IS UNSUCCESSFUL IN NEGOTIATING AN AGREEMENT WITH ARCHITEKNICS INC., AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE SECOND RECOMMENDED FIRM OF ARCHITECTS INTERNATIONAL; IN THE EVENT THE ADMINISTRATION IS UNSUCCESSFUL IN NEGOTIATING AN AGREEMENT WITH ARCHITECTS INTERNATIONAL, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE THIRD RECOMMENDED FIRM OF GURRI MATUTE PA; IN THE EVENT THE ADMINISTRATION IS UNSUCCESSFUL IN NEGOTIATING AN AGREEMENT WITH GURRI MATUTE PA, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE FOURTH RECOMMENDED FIRM OF SANTOS RAIMUNDEZ PA; AND IN THE ALTERNATIVE, IN THE EVENT THE CITY COMMISSION DOES NOT APPROVE THE AFORESTATED WAIVER, AUTHORIZING THE ADMINISTRATION TO ISSUE A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) FOR THE NECESSARY AlE SERVICES RELATIVE TO THE ABOVE REFERENCE PROJECT. WHEREAS, on October 8,1997, pursuant to Request for Qualifications No. 79-96/97 (RFQ), the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No. 97-22575, authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute an Agreement with the firm of Arthur Hill and Associates, for professional services for the design, construction, bidding documents, construction observation, project administration, scheduling, and cost estimating necessary for the renovation and improvement of three City golf courses: Miami Beach Golf Course, Miami Beach Golf Course /Par 3, and the Normandy Shores Golf Course (the Agreement) ; and WHEREAS, it is currently anticipated that the Normandy Shores Golf Course Renovation Project, will be competitively bid and awarded by the Winter of 2006, and completed by the Winter of 2007; and WHEREAS, on December 2, 2005, in an effort to minimize delays, the City's Capital Improvements Office (CIP) issued Pass International, one of the City's Job Order Contractors (JOC), a Notice to Proceed relative to design-build services for the renovation of the existing clubhouse, and demolition and design of a new maintenance building, cart barn, and two (2) restroom buildings; all at the Normandy Shores Golf Course (the Project and/or the ancillary facilities); and WHEREAS, shortly after Pass International commenced the design-build process, the Administration concluded that the inclusion of certain professional design services within the JOC contract, particularly architectural and engineering services, would not comply with the public announcement requirements under Section 287.055, Florida Statutes (the "Consultants' Competitive Negotiations Act" or "CCNA"); and WHEREAS, accordingly, on February 17,2006, the City terminated the services for the design/build contract with Pass International; and WHEREAS, in order for the Normandy Shores Golf Course to be operational by Winter, 2007, the Golf Course ancillary facilities (clubhouse, cart barn, maintenance building, and restrooms) need to be designed, permitted and built to coincide with the completion of the total Course renovation; and WHEREAS, in particular, the Golf Course maintenance facility is essential to the proper maintenance of the Course by the City's Parks and Recreation Department; and WHEREAS, CIP staff recommends that the most advantageous project delivery method to accomplish the successful completion of the Golf Course ancillary facilities in an expedited manner, would be to simultaneously retain the services of an architect/engineer (AlE) and a construction manager at risk (CMR) contractor, who would work as a team to provide the City with the most economical and practical implementation of the project; and WHEREAS, part of the team's task would be to make recommendations concerning the availability of construction materials, and the impact they may have on the design and the building type that can be delivered in today's market, within the time constraints required; and WHEREAS, were the City to procure the services of an AlE and a CMR through the required procurement process of issuing a Request for Proposals (RFP), (which process would also require compliance with the "Consultants' Competitive Negotiation Act"), it would take an estimated minimum of 120 days to award a contract; and WHEREAS, this would delay the start of design and construction by at least four (4) months; and WHEREAS, the Normandy Shores community has consistently demanded that the renovation of the closed-down Golf Course (and ancillary facilities) be completed as quickly as possible; and WHEREAS, these and other residents have complained that the abandoned Golf Course is attracting vermin, vagrants and vandals, which may not only potentially affect and impact the security of the neighborhood, but also raise health and safety concerns as well; and . WHEREAS, the damage caused by the 2005 Hurricane Season has also caused further deterioration of the Golf Course (and ancillary facilities) which requires immediate attention; and WHEREAS, given the need to make the ancillary facilities available at the time that the Golf Course Renovation Project is completed, as well as the other aforestated factors, which continue to represent an adverse and increasingly negative impact on the quality of life, health, safety and welfare of the surrounding community, the Capital Improvements Office (CIP) strongly recommends that the Mayor and City Commission waive, by 5/7ths vote, the City's competitive bidding requirements, as well as certify that a public emergency exists, permitting a waiver of the public announcement requirements under the CCNA; thereby allowing the expedited procurement of the required aforestated AlE Services; and WHEREAS, notwithstanding the preceding request for waiver of the formal competitive bidding process, the Administration intends to safeguard the integrity of the competitive process; accordingly on April 1 0, 2006, CIP staff contacted Miami-Dade County Public School (MDCPS) staff to inquire about AlE firms procured through its competitive selection process; and WHEREAS, CIP contacted MDCPS's AlE Selection Department to obtain the latest AlE evaluation scores for the third quarter of 2005; and WHEREAS, CIP also contacted two firms on the City's rotational AlE list, which have not previously provided design services to the City, but have gone through the City's selection process; and WHEREAS, CIP also contacted two firms outside of the City's rotational AlE list that were on the evaluation score sheet for the third quarter of 2005 (provided by MDCPS); and WHEREAS, the City's aforestated "due diligence" is set forth in further detail in the City Commission Memorandum accompanying this Resolution; said Memorandum attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein; and WHEREAS, the following are the City's scores and ranking of the firms: 1) Architeknics Inc.; 2) Architects Internationallnc; 3) Gurri Matute PA.; 4) Santos Raimundez PA.; and WHEREAS, . Architeknics has demonstrated previous experience in working with Construction Manager at Risk projects; and WHEREAS, Architeknics provided the requested risk assessment and quality control plans as well as letters of recommendation; and WHEREAS, in the alternative, in the event that the Mayor and the City Commission determine not to waive the City's competitive bidding requirements, and the requirements of the Consultants' Competitive Negotiation Act, as recommended above, then the Administration would request that the City Commission hereby authorize the Administration to issue a Request for Proposals for the necessary AlE Services relative to the above referenced Project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that the Mayor and City Commission hereby waives, by 5/7ths vote, the City's competitive bidding requirements, finding such waiver to be in the best interest of the City, and further accepts the findings and recommendation of the City Manager certifying a valid public emergency, and waives the requirements of Section 287.055, Florida Statutes ("Consultants' Competitive Negotiation Act"); all for the purchase of the necessary professional architectural, landscaping, and engineering services (the AlE Services) for the renovation of the Normandy Shores Golf Course clubhouse, and the design, demolition, and the construction of a new golf course maintenance building, cart barn, and two restroom buildings; further authorizing the City Manager to negotiate an agreement for the aforestated AlE Services with Architeknics, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $525,000; in the event the Administration is unsuccessful in negotiating an agreement with Architeknics Inc., authorizing the City Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement with the second recommended firm of Architects International; in the event the Administration is unsuccessful in negotiating an agreement with Architects International, authorizing the City Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement with the third recommended firm of Gurri Matute PA; in the event the Administration is unsuccessful in negotiating an agreement with Gurri Matute PA, authorizing the City Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement with the fourth recommended firm of Santos Raimundez PA; and, in the alternative, in the event the City Commission does not approve the aforestated waiver, authorizing the Administration to issue a Request for Proposals for the necessary AlE Services relative to the above reference Project. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 10th day , 006. AjFpT:' () . 'ULw} rCVv~ CITY CLERK Robert Parcher David Dermer APPROVED AS TO FORM & LANGUAGE & FOR ECUTION sJ,Jo, omey ~ 8 T:\AGENDA\2006\may1 006\Regular\NSGC-CH-Facilities-Waiver of AE Resolution-C-Raul Changes.doc COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY Condensed Title: A Resolution of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami Beach, Florida, accepting the findings and recommendation of the City Manager certifying a valid public emergency, and waiving the requirements of Section 287.055, Florida Statutes ("Consultants' Competitive Negotiation Act"), for the purchase of the necessary professional architectural, landscaping, and engineering services for the renovation of the Normandy Shores clubhouse, and the design, demolition, and the coqstruction of a new golf course maintenance building, cart barn, and two restroom buildings; further authorizing the City Manager to negotiate an agreement for the aforestated professional services with Architeknics Inc., in an amount not to exceed $525,000; providing further that, in the event the City Commission does not approve the aforestated waiver, authorizing the Administration to issue a Request for Proposals for professional architectural/ en ineerin services relative to the above reference ro'ect. Ke Intended Outcome Su orted: Ensure well designed quality capital projects. Issue: Should the City Commission accept the City Manager's recommendation to waive the competitive selection requirements and allow the City Manager to execute a contract, in an amount not-to-exceed amount of $525,000 for design and construction administration services for the facilities at the Normandy Shores Golf Course to the Architectural firm of Architeknics Inc.? Item Summary/Recommendation: In order for the golf course to be operational for the fall of 2007 the ancillary facilities (c1ubhou~e, cart barn, maintenance building and restroom buildings) of the golf course need to be designed, permitted and built by the completion of the golf course project. In particular, the golf course maintenance facility is essential to the proper maintenance of the golf course by the City's Parks and Recreation Department. CI P staff recommends that the most advantageous project delivery method to accomplish the successful completion of the golf course facilities in an expedited manner would be to simultaneously retain the services of an Architect and a Construction Manager at Risk Contractor who would work as a team to provide the City with the most economical and practical implementation of the project. Part of the Team's task would be to make recommendations concerning the availability of construction materials, and the impact it may have on the design and the building type that can be delivered in today's market within the time constraints required. If the City would procure the services of an Architect and Construction Manager at Risk through the City's standard procurement process of issuing a Request for Qualifications (RFQ), it would take a minimum of 120 days to award a contract. This would delay the start of design and construction by at least four months. The Normandy Shores community has consistently demanded that the renovation of the closed down golf course and facilities be completed as quickly as possible. The existing facilities have been abandoned for over a year. During this time, the facilities have deteriorated to such an extent that structural failures are visible. These building failures include missing and/or caved in roofs, deterioration of structural columns, water damage, and electrical and mechanical system failures. Further damage of the Normandy Shores Clubhouse, if left unattended may cause such structural deterioration that the facility may necessitate total demolition. In addition, the damage caused by the 2005 hurricane season has caused further deterioration of the facilities which require immediate attention. Advisory Board Recommendation: IN/A Financial Information: Source of Fund 1 Amount $525,000 Account Previously Appropriated GO Bond Funds for the Clubhouse Pro'ect. Approved Total $525,000 Financial Impact Summary: Ci Clerk's Office Le islative Trackin Graciela Escalante R.A., Senior Capital Projects Coordinator Si n-Offs: De artment Director Assistant Ci JECh TH T:\AGENDA\2006\may1006\Regular\NSGC-CH-Facilities-Waiver of AE Services Summary.doc lD ..... MIAMIBEACH AGENDA ITEM DATE R7L S-/O-oro ~ MIAMI BEACH City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: COMMISSION MEMORANDUM Mayor David Dermer and Members of the City Commission Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager~ ~. May 10, 2006. (jrrO A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, WAIVING BY 5/7THS VOTE, THE CITY'S COMPETITIVE BIDDING REQUIREMENTS, FINDING SUCH WAIVER TO BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY, AND FURTHER ACCEPTING THE FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY MANAGER, CERTIFYING A VALID PUBLIC EMERGENCY, AND WAIVING THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 287.055, FLORIDA STATUTES ("CONSULTANTS' COMPETITIVE NEGOTIATION ACT"); ALL FOR THE PURCHASE OF THE NECESSARY PROFESSIONAL ARCHITECTURAL, LANDSCAPING, AND ENGINEERING SERVICES ( THE AlE SERVICES) FOR THE RENOVATION OF THE NORMANDY SHORES GOLF COURSE CLUBHOUSE, AND THE DESIGN, DEMOLITION, AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW GOLF COURSE MAINTENANCE BUILDING, CART BARN, AND TWO (2) RESTROOM BUILDINGS; FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AN AGREEMENT FOR THE AFORESTATED AlE SERVICES WITH ARCHITEKNICS, INC., IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $525,000; IN THE EVENT THE ADMINISTRATION IS UNSUCCESSFUL IN NEGOTIATING AN AGREEMENT WITH ARCHITEKNICS INC., AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE SECOND RECOMMENDED FIRM OF ARCHITECTS INTERNATIONAL; IN THE EVENT THE ADMINISTRATION IS UNSUCCESSFUL IN NEGOTIATING AN AGREEMENT WITH ARCHITECTS INTERNATIONAL, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT . WITH THE THIRD RECOMMENDED FIRM OF GURRI MATUTE PA; IN THE EVENT THE ADMINISTRATION IS UNSUCCESSFUL IN NEGOTIATING AN AGREEMENT WITH GURRI MATUTE PA, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE FOURTH RECOMMENDED FIRM OF SANTOS RAIMUNDEZ PA; AND IN THE ALTERNATIVE, IN THE EVENT THE CITY COMMISSION DOES NOT APPROVE THE AFORESTATED WAIVER, AUTHORIZING THE ADMINISTRATION TO ISSYE A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) FOR THE NECESSARY AlE SERVICES RELATIVE TO THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT. ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION Adopt the Resolution. Commission Memorandum-NSGC-CH Waiver of AE May 10, 2006 Page 20f6 FUNDING Funding is available from the previously appropriated GO Bond funds for the Normandy Shores Clubhouse Project. ANAL YSIS On October 8, 1997, pursuant to Request for Qualifications No. 79-96/97 (RFQ), the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No. 97-22575, authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute an Agreement with the firm of Arthur Hill and Associates, for professional services for the design, construction, bidding documents, construction observation, project administration, scheduling, and cost estimating necessary for the renovation and improvement of three City golf courses: Bayshore Golf Course, Bayshore/Par 3, and the Normandy Shores Golf Course (the Agreement). On September 8,2004, the City adopted Resolution No. 2004-25665 for Amendment No.2 for additional services necessary for the renovation of the Normandy Shores Golf Course Project which included services relative to the drainage and irrigation system improvements. Currently, it is anticipated that the golf course renovation project will commence later this year, with anticipated duration of at least twelve(12) months. On December 2, 2005, in an effort to minimize delays, the City's Capital Improvement Projects Office (CIP) issued Pass International, one of the City's Job Order Contractors (JOC), a Notice to Proceed relative to design-build services for the renovation of the existing Clubhouse, demolition and design of a new Maintenance Building, Cart Barn, and Two Restroom buildings on the Normandy Shores Golf Course. Shortly after Pass International started the design-build process, the administration concluded that the inclusion of certain professional services under the JOC contract particularly architectural and engineering services would not comply with state regulatory requirements for a project of this size. Accordingly, on February 17, 2006, the City terminated the services for the design/build contract with Pass International. In order for the Normandy Shores Golf Course to be operational for the winter of 2007 the ancillary facilities (clubhouse, cart barn, maintenance building and restroom buildings) of the golf course need to be designed, permitted and built to coincide with the completion of the renovation. In particular, the golf course maintenance facility is essential to the proper maintenance of the golf course by the City's Parks and Recreation Department. CIP staff recommends that the most advantageous project delivery method to accomplish the successful completion of the golf course facilities in an expedited manner would be to simultaneously retain the services of an Architect and a Construction Manager at Risk Contractor, who would work as a team to provide the City with the most economical and practical implementation. of the project. Part of the Team's task would be to make recommendations concerning the availability of construction materials, and the impact it may have on the design and the building type that can be delivered in today's market within the time constraints required. If the City were to procure the services of an Architect and Construction Manager at Risk (CMR) through the required procurement process of issuing a Request for Qualifications (RFQ), it would take a minimum of 120 days to award a contract and, based on previous Commission Memorandum-NSGC-CH Waiver of AE May 10, 2006 Page 3 of 6 Experience, could take as long as 180 to 270 days from issuance of RFQ through execution of an agreement. This would delay the start of design and construction by at least four months. By waiving the selection and/or competitive bidding requirements, the City could start negotiating a contract with the Architectural and CMR firms immediately after the commission meeting making it possible for the City to give the Architectural and CMR firms a Notice to Proceed within four weeks from the Commission meeting. The facilitation of negotiating the contracts within four weeks would result in substantial savings to the City in terms expedited design and construction schedules. CIP reviewed three project delivery methods best suited for the ancillary facilities at the Normandy Shores Golf Course Project. The following project delivery methods were analyzed .for implementation on this project: 1. Conventional Design-Bid A ward: This method entails the competitive selection of an Architect, who designs the project and produces a set of construction documents that are advertised for bid and recommended for award by the City Commission. In this method the Architect and Contractor are independently under contract with the City. 2. Design-Build: This method entails the competitive selection of a Design Criteria Professional who produces a set of performance specifications which consist of a Design Criteria Package. Once the Design Criteria Package is approved, the competitive selection process for a Design-Build firm begins. Once the Design-Build Team is short-listed, a recommendation for award is made to the Commission and the Design Build Team can commence the construction documents thereafter. In this method, the Contractor and the Design Criteria Professional are under contract with the City. The Architect of Record is under contract and works directly for the Contractor. 3. Construction Manager at Risk (CMR): This method entails the selection of an Architectural firm and a CMR firm simultaneously through a competitive selection process based on performance. Under the CMR approach, the owner enters into agreements with both an AlE and a Contractor early in the process. They are both independently responsible for the design as well' as for the value of the project as it relates to established budgets. During the design process the Contractor provides constructability, value engineering, and construction methods advice so that the final construction documents lead to a more accurate price. The end result is a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) from the Contractor which is subject to restrictions in change orders requests and minimizes or eliminates additional costs to the owner. In this approach, the CIP staff is involved in monitoring both the AlE and the Contractor throughout the complete project process. This scenario tends to minimize additional services requests from the AlE since most of the issues which may arise during construction are addressed during the team design approach. Additional costs from the contractor, including time extensions, are also minimized since the GMP method prohibits most project cost adjustments. CIP staff recommends the CMR option as the most advantageous project delivery method to successfully complete the ancillary facilities at the Normandy Shores Golf Course by retaining the services of an Architect and a CMR firm, who would work as a team to provide the City with the most economical and practical implementation of the project. This would enable the City to commence with the design / construction documents immediately upon contract award and the CMR firm would assist the Architectural firm by providing pre- Commission Memorandum-NSGC-CH Waiver of AE May 10, 2006 Page 4 of 6 construction services and value engineering early in the design phases of the project. Thus, the CMR option enables the City to start the design ! construction documents phase immediately after award and gain the City the time it would take the Design-Builder to produce the Design Criteria Package. Another advantage of this option, is that the cost is negotiated upfront, is generally not increased during construction, and the responsibility for the project in term of time and cost is mostly on the contractor, with less flexibility than on a Design-Build approach. This leads to the contractor being more efficient, increased productivity, and few or no change orders. Under this approach, time is of the essence to the contractor because there will be no compensation considered for delays. In addition, the concept of partnering an Architectural firm with a CMR firm early in the design process through this team approach fosters a spirit of cooperation rather than the adversarial relationships inherent in the relationships arising from the "low bid" mentality. The teaming of the Architectural Firm and CMR firms lead to coordinated design documents, a thorough review of existing conditions, and detailed recommendations of building systems which would save the City, time and money without impacting quality. The Normandy Shores community has consistently demanded that the renovation of the closed down golf course and facilities be completed as quickly as possible. The existing facilities have been abandoned for over a year. During this time, the facilities have deteriorated to such an extent that structural failures are visible. These building failures include missing and!or caved in roofs, deterioration of structural columns, water damage, and electrical and mechanical system failures. Further damage of the Normandy Shores Clubhouse, if left unattended may cause such structural deterioration that the facility may necessitate total demolition. In addition, the damage caused by the 2005 hurricane season has caused further deterioration of the facilities which require immediate attention. Given the need to make the facilities available at the time that the golf course renovation project is completed, CIP recommends that the Mayor and City Commission waive the competitive selection process for an Architectural! Engineering firm, pursuant to Section 2- 367(e) of the City Code and Section 287.055(3) (a) of the Florida Statutes: Section 2-367(e) of the City Code: tiThe City Commission, upon written recommendation of the City Manager, may by resolution adopted by a five-sevenths vote of the City Commission waive competitive bidding when the City Commission finds such waiver to be in the best interest of the City. In the event of such a waiver the City Commission may authorize the execution of a negotiated contract". Section 287.0055(3) (a) of Florida Statutes:ti(a) 1. Each agency shall publicly announce, in a uniform and consistent manner, each occasion when professional services must be purchased for a project the basic construction cost of which is estimated by the agency to exceed the threshold amount provided in s. 287.017 for CA TEGORY FIVE ($250,000) or for a planning or study activity when the fee for professional services exceeds the threshold amount provided in s. 287.017 for CA TEGORY TWO ($25,000), except in cases of valid public emergencies certified by the agency head. The public notice must include a general description of the project and must indicate how interested consultants may apply for consideration. " Commission Memorandum-NSGC-CH Waiver of AE May 10, 2006 Page 5 of6 Evaluation Process: In order to exercise due diligence in the selection of an Architectural! Engineering firm, CIP Staff has done the following: 1. On April 1 0,2006, CIP staff contacted Miami-Dade County Public School (MDCPS) staff to inquire about AlE firms procured through a competitive selection process. CIP contacted the AlE Selection Department at the MDCPS to obtain the latest AlE evaluation scores for the third quarter of 2005. 2. CIP contacted two firms on the City of Miami Beach Rotational List that had not previously provided design services to the City but had gone through the City's selection process for projects that do not exceed $50,000 in design services. In addition, CIP Staff contacted two firms outside of the rotational list that were on the evaluation score sheet for the third quarter of 2005, provided by Miami-Dade County Public Schools. . 3. Based on the aforementioned documentation and the desire of CIP staff to attract quality Architectural firms, the City proceeded to contact four (4) Architectural firms. 4. The following firms were interviewed by Senior CIP Staff: . Gurri Matute PA . Architects International, Inc. . Architeknics . Santos Raimundez Architects, PA. Prior to the commencement of the interview process, CIP developed an evaluation criteria and score sheet to be used for the evaluation. This evaluation criteria consisted of a list of key questions based on the Best Value Procurement process, which the City is currently using as it's method of procuring qualified vendors and other City procurement criteria. CIP staff asked that the interested Architectural firms bring their qualifications for review during the interview process. All Architectural candidates were asked the same questions as listed on the Evaluation Criteria Questionaire. In addition, during the interviews all interested candidates were given an explanation of the City's intention to follow as closely as possible the recommendations of Best Value Procurement and the requirement that all firms were to submit a Risk Assessment Plan and a Quality Control plan as well as letters of recommendation from previous clients. This information was be analyzed by CIP Staff in evaluating the Architectural firms for the project. The interview and selection process included the evaluation of each firm's qualifications, past experience, size of firm, previous performance, public sector experience, size of projects completed and dollar value, previous AlE evaluation scores from MDCPS, reference letters, Project Team's qualifications, Project Manager's experience and qualifications, and their Risk Assessment and Quality Control Plans. Following the interview process, CIP staff independently evaluated the submittals of the Architectural firms and completed the Evaluation Criteria Questionnaire, scoring and ranking the firms. The following are the scores and ranking of the firms: Architeknics Inc.: Ranked Number 1 Architects International, Inc.: Ranked Number 2 Commission Memorandum-NSGC-CH Waiver of AE May 10, 2006 Page 6 of 6 Gurri Matute PA: Ranked Number 3 Santos Raimundez PA: Ranked Number 4 Please see attached Exhibit "A" for Architeknics Inc; The Risk Assessment and Quality Control Plan. CONCLUSION Considering the scores and ranking listed above, the Capital Improvements Office (CIP) recommends that the Mayor and City Commission waive the competitive bidding requirements with respect to procurement of the required AlE and CMR services and allow for the execution of a contract to the Architectural firm of Architeknics Inc., not to exceed $525,000. While the City Commission may waive the competitive bidding requirements, by 5/7ths vote, upon a finding that the public interest would be served, it is also necessary, in this case, to waive the requirements of the Consultants' Competitive Negotiation Act, finding and declaring the existence of a valid public emergency, thereby necessitating the expedited procurement of the required aforestated AlE services. In the event that the Mayor and the City Commission determine not to waive the requirements of the Consultants' Competitive Negotiation Act, as set forth above then in that case the administration would recommend that the City Commission authorize the Administration to issue a Request for Qualification for professional AlE services relative to the above referenced project. Attachment: Exhibits "A". T:\AGENDA\2006\may1006\Regular\NSGC-CH-Facilities-Waiver of AE Services-Memo May 102006 (2).doc Exhibit A": Risk Assessment & Quality Control Plan- Architeknics ARCHITEKNICS Ir~hilc:C:IS &. pl~n"~rs 7450 Soulhwcsl 48'" Slreel Miami. Florida 33155 Phone (305)661-5392 Fax (305)661-5832 info@archilcknics.colll April 17th, 2006 Capital Improvements Projects Office A ttn: Graciela Escalante, RA City of Miami Beach 1700 Convention Center Drive Miami Beach, Florida 33139 Re: Normandy Shores Golf Course Architeknics, Inc. and its consultants wish to express their interest in providing Architectural/Engineering services to the City of Miami Beach for the planning, design, and construction administration services needed to complete the Normandy Shores Golf Course. We have a combined team of professionals that are highly qualified, experienced, and proficient with the local construction methods and state building codes. We have provided services on many projects of similar scope and size, but we find that our unique breadth of experience with CM-at-Risk Delivery projects, phased- construction and projects that have enlisted more than one concurrent construction venture on a single site are of special use to you. We have over a decade of experience with other local municipalities utilizing CM-at-Risk projects. We believe this is an excellent choice for any project because it allows us to perform exploratory work with the contractor's involvement at the project's inception. We believe this is one of the most proactive methods of improving quality control. We understand that this project will involve bringing certain components online and operational before other components can reasonably be brought to occupancy. We have the capability to prepare a phased plan for the City's construction needs. Clearly, our best example of phased construction is found in experience with educational facilities, where nearly every venture requires careful management of ongoing usage. We have worked with the client's to ensure seamless operations throughout the school year despite the presence of intrusive construction needs. We've executed so many projects in this fashion that you can expect we will know all the tricks and are ready to protect the City from all of the potential pitfalls. This project has an emphasis on simultaneous construction of both site work and architectural work. We can bring our experience from other ventures where our office worked with other architects on the same site. As an example, we are currently executing the construction of 11 school sites in MDCPS Modular Classroom Program where we are performing site work and auxiliary architectural work in tandem with 'Edward C. Berounsky, RA Ramon G. Perez-Alonso, RA Lourdes Rodriguez. AlA An Equal Opportunity Employer License Ii AA COOO546 another firm I s installation of new classroom additions. Our role in the construction required full knowledge and assessment of the other firm's construction documents so that we could furnish all utilities, connections, and siting requirements for the building they designed. In addition, as a service to the client we organize bi-weekly meetings for coordination and construction progress assessment. A substantial proportion of the principals and staff members are Miami natives and graduates of Miami Colleges and Universities. We are hopeful that we will have a future with this project, and be able to further contribute to the growth of Florida's finest Cities. Thank you for your fair consideration of our firm. Lourdes 0 riguez, AlA President File: H:\__C)ocuiTlenis\Do!c\RFPS\P ,t.,RKSRECRE,ATiON\L.eHer of ir"l"t"erest.doc Design Reviews For each project we involve the client from day one. We use the latest software. and tools to ensure we can output our design solution in a form the client will clearly understand. Every design is a product of our design experience and the client's input and needs. Thorough examination of the scope of work reduces unnecessary change orders. Document Phasing Our firm is able to deliver phased development of Construction Documents. We are experienced with a variety of Phasing methods depending on what the scope of a given project demands. Within each phase we include easily reviewable levels of development based on the clients needs. Coordination To maintain a standard of coordination between our own documents and that of our consultants we use an original master drawing that is shared digitally between all disciplines. This guarantees that each discipline has full access to other disciplines for coordination control. A well-coordinated drawing reduces unnecessary change orders. Production Schedule To organize office production we establish timetables that allow us to balance different projects. This method is the start point for the project managers and coordinators to communicate deadlines of projects with staff and consultants and to review all of the firm's commitments in a single location. Cost-Analysis Developing an accurate budget begins with careful study of material costs and site-analysis prior to finalizing the Conceptual Review. We have experience with completing full feasibility studies and cost estimations prior the evolution of the construction documents. Preparing early budgets reduces unnecessary change orders. Project Approach & Quality Control Part One - Developing Construction Documents Concept Review 1 Concept Review 2 .. .; . j: . ~i : '~i - :'-:-'J j~I~~:~;:J;;j:: "'~"f :i;t~t::tj~f.~:~:r , . ... .' , . 'J' If j" 1',';" '.....''''''',... Phase I Phase II Concept Review 3 Phase III lR_. p=~ A::~ N._ of Pro"'et O.se.dol'l PIlo._1 Ph_..1 ~.s.11 ~._u Ph.;::. P~:.II o.-.,.R I .Pr.U D.." Sub. Owrl.,- o_ s... 0_..- ..". ....." Kinloch P..... EMfMnt.... A4lI<<on'~aOonl "'- "'- "'- "'- "'- .., "'- "'- "'- ",,, OCPC Old CutlM Pru iPfiM'l CI'M ~':~:=~:~ "'- <1000 ..... d~ <1000 <1000 <1000 dono d~ "'" .6.-0556 Ponci...P.rttEIMn.nc<< <10.. nI, nI, ," <1000 nI, ..,.. do.. "'- 01102 KinIoctt~ -" ..,.. <1000 nI, nI, .., <1000 ..,.. ..,.. .- Aa'C I'v1IaItIlCor.alP.... Vr Room. EiMmcal ..,.. nI, "'''''' ..... nI, nI, .., ..,.. ..... "'- O1m Aa'C 1-1........ MIdcIt ao..."", .., .., .., .., .., .., .., ......., -..... ~ oo 01112 AEPC AmMaE........IE~ ao-."", .., .., nI, nI, nI, .., nI, ...".., .......... ~ 01117 MDCPS Bf'M Tr.. E~n....nt. AiHOOfin d~ <1000 ..,.. ..., nI, 01' .., ..,.. d~ 10130/2002 01118 MDCPS 8... .,EJ.nw.nI.IoI Fl..,oofll'l <1000 nI, nI, <1000 10/01200' 01119 MDCF'S EmHsonEl<<n.I'll;.tf A....oofin "'- d~ ..... d~. nI, nI, nI, ..,.. d~ 1118/2002 ."", Aa'C TI..,.,.,T~h T ... nI, .""""''' 91101_ oo nI, nI, .., .,,,.,,,"" 12""2002 ~ 021015 AEPC SouthQ.Ml. h Food Sh.tt.. nI, 81:)012002 811812002 <1000 nI. nI, ... U)l1SI20llZ 'lW18I2002 ..... ."'" Aa'C T,..s~ ...... P.E.SMhr "', 11301_ ,,,.,_ 712&1200 nI, nI, nI, "'''- """.." "'- ..... """'SR VlldlirMP.,~ N40w Consuuetion "" ..,.. ..,.. ..... 7/1211002: 71121200Z WenOO2 t21261lOO2 11nOiZOO2: ..,.. "m AEPC MiMni C.nu ~ Hi Food Sht4t.. nI. 11I....ZOO2 1'\1412001 tv712002 nI, N' 121412002 lV2V1002 ..,.. .",. AEPC lJ.E..t'T\4'l'\l:'" R40'foofin N' M6nOO2 811612002 ..... 101$12:002: N' .., N' lV211002 d~, 02117 AEPC Mi~Sour"" .S.niQrHi h Food Sh.!t.. nI, 1)13'\12001 1(W2812OOZ .... nI, ... l"'l~-ol lV2V2002' ..,.. 02120 AEPC HorMSI...d Food Sh"'tf nI, Sl3OI2002 SlI6o'lOO2 d~ nI, N' nI. 1OI16o'ZOO2 1OI2U_ 02122 P'r1Y.t1. Fit Md Hous. N_ ~sldtnc. nI. ," 7~2002 11612002 nI. 71260'2002 712812002 1212'01ZOll2 \212012002 Vi""'" 02127 MOCC M.dical1OOO Nursihgl..s nI. 81612(102 91612'002 9/18'2002 10191'002 toI1W2002 do.. ..,.. ..,.. d~. 'E-.:I'I ifto;:t\ ~, S I SUll-lOrM ~. iUB rOlALI ". 125 Phasing Construction The key to providing the right phasing plan is to work closely with the client's and their end user staff. We have a long record of excellent relations with our project's end users. We cherish our record of performance in providing a construction plan that will be unobtrusive and efficient. We know this is a client's top concern. Budgeting As part of our construction administration our firm maintains an ongoing project summary that carefully records the status of expenditure and commitment to the construction budget. We report it in our construction meeting reports so the client has all vital information on the budget at their fingertips. Construction Administration Construction meetings are held as often as required to bring all parties to the table to discuss issues regarding the construction site, schedule, progress, and change orders. Proudly, our firm maintains a track record of less than 1.5% change orders E/O rate, due to careful and clear documents, specs, and hands-on administration. Site Reports The architect is the most qualified to represent the client on the jobsite. We review the contractor's progress. We verify the progress performed on site and compile the site conditions into concise reports that we furnish to the client and their representatives. We are thorough, and we always have the client's best interests in mind. Project Approach & Quality Control Part Two - Construction Administration ': . FtJl1J -- t "'~~4 , --l '~-, . .-~ i~~ ~~ I ..........-...'... . ~- It. ..~' '- Iw"9 ~ ........ 1r1f. _. lY"~ I __ __ ......,._.-J. If ~ Existing Demolition Phase I Phase II -(VJl: ~I :>UIVIIVIAK r ~IGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT: $3,059,000.00 :JpROVED CHANGE ORDERS: $0 lUSTED CONTRACT AMOUNT: $3.059.000,00 <:..Y REQUISITIONS TO DATE/%: $, .352.300.00/12% )NTRACT BAlANCE: $2.706.700.00 ORIGINAL AWARD DATE: 11-1~ OR IG INAL CONTRACT DAYS: 430 ORIGINAL COMPLETION: 1.22- APPROVED TIME EXTENSION:O ADJUSTED COMPLETION: 1.22- DAYS ELAPSED: 162 OA YS REMAINING: 267 EETING MlNCffES 01 Summer School- Needs to be resolved by Project Manager. n? ('nntr':ilrt.-., f"nItQ<;-tQN th~t tg:';lirhQr;; rQmn'W'Q Q\lQrvthinn frnm rl':l~C'rnnm~ int'lfI~in(' rQmn\linn !IN'!'~~t::,---.. -=~~- .- -'-- -- ~;-~ ~~ ~-:~ ~sf:? [is.. $t~~ <I{'lIi(-.I.==========--__=;::;.:::^""'O;: :E~~~-.::: .~-:<... B gf.;t:::=- . ~":":..~-- =.- a ~. -~-~-_._-_. ~-_.. ......_._~-_.-_._..- --.-.-.......-...-..-......-'... -.....-.-....---...---... -----... ::: ~ 1_'>",>",--- ~ g a-~ .EJ ~~__J a..?':;~..:'::---- ... .::-;...:.:...... l~=-_ .~,..... U!:il ---....~--- ~El _~~,T- -Jr- ~:::-- B l?=~;-- iii1"'~!!: '[1 .~ ~~ ,"l'lS,-_ - - -~- .~-~ !:"'._~.._-.....'!!:4"!"~-~ ~__..u.-_~____... .- - - - Summary: Contract Administration The greatest testament to the quality of our services is the long record of continuing contracts we have maintained with current public sector clients, our rate or return business from other agencies. We feel this is due to our willingness and ability to work so hand-in-hand with our clients. Our firm size, background, and dedication to work in the public sector promote this accomplishment. For Architeknics, Inc. we measure the successful handling of a contract by the quality of our relationship with our client at its conclusion. Our goal when working with any agency is to make the process as natural and transparent as possible. We see our services as an extension of these agency's own services and we want to be as readily available as their own employees. Project Specific Assessment: Normandy Shores Golf Course Assessment of Venture Risk and Management of Risk This project will require a tactical plan to respond to the obstacles associated with the construction process. The key areas that will require the design professional to prepare a plan to protect the project from construction related risks are in the delivery of Historical Authenticity, Site Layout Associated Limitations, Building Code Compliance and Permitting. The intent of this document is to provide a brief explanation of Architeknics Inc's approach and comfort with handling these issues. Historic Preservation Although not on the historical register, the main building is historically significant and these features should be recorded and maintained. We would start with the recording of all the architectural features of the building during the programming and design phase. Most of the recording will be photographic in nature. This will establish the language for the renovations and remodeling. Having the CM on board will allow us to further record the features for use in the renovation by make molds, saving portions of the building and other methods of recording (keeping) the features for use during re-construction. This is only possible with the use of the CM process from the onset of the project. Layout Since we will need to be working in the property where other firms will also be working, close coordination and scheduling will need to be addressed on an ongoing basis. We propose to establish the layout for the construction phasing from the beginning with the other firms on-site. We would also recommend ongoing meetings during the design and construction phases to communicate amongst the firms the conflicts and re-solutions thereof that have been encountered by any firm in order to benefit the other firms and more importantly the success of the project. Building Code Code issues present many challenges in keeping the historic significance of this project. Tolerances and architectural features that were built prior are usually not admissible by current codes. Some of these issues that usually pose problems are stair runs and handrails, door sizes (widths), windows, materials used, heights in ceilings, and others. Therefore, we would anticipate those areas of conflict and from the recorded material, recreate those features deemed important in a manner that is code compliant. Permitting The success of the project will be greatly determined in part by the ability to permit the project correctly and effectively. The process will need to start during the first phase of the project (programming and design). Communication with DERM from the outset will need to be established to mitigate the outfall from the buildings and the new parking and drive areas in conjunction with the coordination with the Course AlE team. We would recommend portions of the project to be fast-tracked so that the start of the maintenance and toilet facilities buildings can be completed when the Course is completed. This will require submitting for permit the demolition and footing portion of the project. Prior to that we would recommend that the City (if not already performed) perform asbestos (interior and roofing) survey and property survey for the buildings and surrounding areas. With the demolition and footing permit in hand, the CM will be able to start construction on those buildings while the Construction Documents are finalized and the permit is obtained for the remainder of the building portion. This will also allow more time for the design of the main clubhouse building that is the feature building for this project. We would also recommend a plan expeditor be contracted from the beginning to expedite the variety of plans processing.