Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-26300 ResoRESOLUTION NO. 2006-26300 A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, ACCEPTING THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY MANAGER PERTAINING TO THE RANKING OF QUALIFICATIONS RECEIVED PURSUANT TO REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ) NO. 26-05106 FOR ARCHITECTURAL, ENGINEERING, AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SERVICES FOR THE PLANNING, DESIGN, BID AND AWARD, AND CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION SERVICES FOR THE RENOVATION AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE SCOTT RAKOW YOUTH CENTER PHASE II PROJECT; AUTHORIZING THE ADMINISTRATION TO ENTER INTO NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE TOP-RANKED FIRM OF BROWN AND BROWN ARCHITECTS; AND SHOULD THE ADMINISTRATION NOT BE ABLE TO NEGOTIATE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE TOP-RANKED FIRM, AUTHORIZING THE ADMINISTRATION TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE SECOND-RANKED FIRM OF MC HARRY ASSOCIATES, INC.; AND SHOULD THE ADMINISTRATION NOT BE ABLE TO NEGOTIATE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE SECOND-RANKED FIRM, AUTHORIZING THE ADMINISTRATION TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE THIRD RANKED FIRM OF BEA INTERNATIONAL. WHEREAS, the Scott Rakow Renovation Project (the Project) was initiated by the Mayor and City Commission in 1994 and was a part of the original $15 million Parks Bond issue; and WHEREAS, on May 10, 2006, the Mayor and City Commission approved the issuance of Request for Qualifications (RFQ) No. 26-05/06 for Architectural, Engineering, and Landscape Architecture Services for the Planning, Design, Bid and Award, and Construction Administration Services for the Renovation and Construction of the Scott Rakow Youth Center Phase II Project; and WHEREAS, RFQ No. 26-05/06 was issued on May 12, 2006, with an opening date of June 27, 2006, and with apre-RFQ proposal meeting that was held on June 1, 2006; and WHEREAS, BidNet issued bid notices to 106 prospective proposers, resulting in 49 proposers requesting the RFQ document, which resulted in the receipt of the following seven (7) proposals from: • BEA International; • Brown and Brown Architects; • C3TS; • Gili-McGraw Architects, LLP; • MC Harry Associates; • Naya Architects; and • Sklarchitecture WHEREAS, in conjunction with approval of this Resolution, a motion was made by Commissioner Gross, and approved by the City Commission, to also refer the location of the playground on the Par 3 Golf Course to the Neighborhoods/Community Affairs Committee. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that the Mayor and City Commission accept the recommendation of the City Manager pertaining to the Ranking of Qualifications received pursuant to Request for Qualifications (RFQ) No. 26-05/06, for Architectural, Engineering, and Landscape Architecture Services forthe Planning, Design, Bid and Award, and Construction Administration Services for the Renovation and Construction of the Scott Rakow Youth Center Phase II Project; authorizing the Administration to enter into negotiations with the top-ranked firm of Brown and Brown Architects; and should the administration not be able to negotiate an agreement with the top-ranked firm, authorizing the Administration to negotiate with the second-ranked firm of MC Harry Associates, Inc.; and should the administration not be able to negotiate an agreement with the second-ranked firm, authorizing the Administration to negotiate with the third-ranked firm of BEA International. PASSED and ADOPTED this 6th day of September , 2006. TEST: c~ c~~~~(~-~ CITY CLERK Robert Parcher Matti Herrera Bower Vice-Mayor T:\AGENDA\2006\sep0606\consent\RFQ26-05-O6A-EScott Rakow-Reso.doc APPRO` QED AS TO FORM & LANGUAGE COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY Condensed Title: A Resolution Accepting the City Manager's Recommendation Relative to the Ranking of Firms Pursuant to a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) No. 26-05/06 for Architectural, Engineering, and Landscape Architecture Services for the Planning, Design, Bid and Award, and Construction Administration Services for the Renovation and Construction of the Scott Rakow Youth Center Phase II Project. Key Intended Outcome Supported: • Ensure Well-Maintained Facilities. • Ensure Welt-Designed Quality Capital Projects Issue: Shall the City Commission adopt the Resolution? Item Summary/Recommendatlion: The Scott Rakow Youth Center Improvement Project was initiated by the Mayor and City Commission in 1994 and was a part of the original $15 million Parks Bond issue. The original scope called for the expansion and renovation of the ice rink and other improvements to the Center. On May 10, 2006, the Mayor and City Commission approved the issuance of Request for Qualifications (RFQ) No. 26-05/06. The purpose of this Request for Qualifications (RFQ) is to obtain qualifications from professional consulting firms to provide Architectural and Engineering Services for the planning, design, bid and award and construction administration services for the renovation and construction of the Scott Rakow Youth Center Phase II Project. RFQ No. 26-05/06 was issued on May 12, 2006 with an opening date of June 27, 2006. Apre-RFQ proposal meeting was held on June 1, 2006. BidNet issued bid notices to 106 prospective proposers, resulting in 49 proposers requesting the RFQ document, which resulted in the receipt of the following seven (7) proposals from: ^ BEA International ^ Brown and Brown Architects ^ C3TS ^ Gili-McGraw Architects, LLP ^ MC Harry Associates ^ Naya Architects ^ Sklarchitecture The City Manager via Letter to Commission (LTC) No. 159-2006, appointed an Evaluation Committee which ranked the top three firms (3) firms accordingly: 1) Brown and Brown Architects 2) MC Harry and Associates, Inc. 3) BEA International ACCEPT THE CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION AND AUTHORIZE NEGOTIATIONS. Advisory Board Recommendation: Financial Information: Source of Amount Account Approved Funds: ~ 0 2 OBPI Total Financial Impact Summary: :ity Clerk's Office L~ Gus Lopez, ext 6641 Sian-Affc - -- Dep ment i r Assistant City Manager City Manager GL JC TH JMG ~--- - T:WGEN[~A~2~f06~sepa60~kon"sent~RFQ26-05-06A-EScott Rakow-Summary.doc ~~~ V ~ AGENDA ITEM G ~ DATE 9"~ -O~o m MIAMIBEACH City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov COMMISSION MEMORANDUM To: Mayor David Dermer and Members of the City Commission FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager DATE: September 6, 2006 SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, ACCEPTING THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY MANAGER PERTAINING TO THE RANKING OF QUALIFICATIONS RECEIVED PURSUANT TO REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ) NO. 26- 05/06 FOR ARCHITECTURAL, ENGINEERING, AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SERVICES FOR THE PLANNING, DESIGN, BID AND AWARD, AND CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION SERVICES FOR THE RENOVATION AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE SCOTT RAKOW YOUTH CENTER PHASE II PROJECT; AUTHORIZING THE ADMINISTRATION TO ENTER INTO NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE TOP-RANKED FIRM OF BROWN AND BROWN ARCHITECTS; AND SHOULD THE ADMINISTRATION NOT BE ABLE TO NEGOTIATE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE TOP-RANKED FIRM, AUTHORIZING THE ADMINISTRATION TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE SECOND- RANKED FIRM OF MC HARRY ASSOCIATES, INC.; AND SHOULD THE ADMINISTRATION NOT BE ABLE TO NEGOTIATE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE SECOND-RANKED FIRM, AUTHORIZING THE ADMINISTRATION TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE THIRD RANKED FIRM OF BEA INTERNATIONAL. ADMINISTRATIVE RECOMMENDATION Adopt the Resolution. ANALYSIS The Scott Rakow Renovation Project (the "Project") was initiated by the Mayor and City Commission in 1994 and was a part of the original $15 million Parks Bond issue. The original scope called for the expansion and renovation of the ice rink and other improvements to the Center. The following is a chronology of the work at the Scott Rakow Youth Center: ^ On June 19, 1996, the Mayor and City Commission approved the Master Plan for the improvements to the City's Parks and Recreation facilities of which the Scott Rakow Youth Center (Project) was a component. ^ On July 16, 1996, an Agreement was executed with The Corradino Group for design, bidding and construction administration for the Project. ^ On April 9, 2001, a Notice to proceed was given to International Builders. ^ On April 24, 2001, construction began on Phase I of the project. ^ On July 21, 2003, International Builders was certified in default of the contract. ^ On October 10, 2003, the permit was changed to F&L Construction, who was tasked to complete Phase I and achieve a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy (TCO) for the Commission Memo RFQ No. 26-05/06 -Architectural, Engineering, and Landscape Architecture Services for the Planning, Design, Bid and Award, and Construction Administration Services for the Renovation and Construction of the Scott Rakow Youth Center Phase II Project. September 6, 2006 Page 2 of 8 project. ^ On January 9, 2004, a TCO was achieved on the project. ^ On April 4, 2006, a Certificate of Occupancy was achieved on the Project for Phase I. On October 17, 2005, the City of Miami Beach tasked Brown and Brown Architects (an A/E firm on the City's rotational list), with developing a schematic conceptual master plan for the Scott Rakow Youth Center which would evaluate code concerns, including ADA and Fire Safety, validate the program and the budget and propose a phasing plan for construction. Brown and Brown participated in various site meetings to evaluate the existing conditions of the facility and meet with the users to review the scope of work which would be necessary to bring the facility into compliance and fulfill the operational and programmatic requirements the City has promised to offer to the community. After various meetings with the Parks and Recreation Department, the SRYC Advisory Board, the users, which comprised the day to day Managers of the Facility, Property Management, the Fire Department and the Building Department, Brown and Brown proposed an acceptable schematic conceptual master plan and budget which would be phased over an estimated two to three years while the facility would remain in operation. SCOPE OF SERVICES The scope of work for the renovation of the existing facility consists of but is not limited to the following components: expand the existing parking lot by 44 parking spaces and provide a bus drop off which separates vehicular and pedestrian traffic, provide ADA accessible walkways from the handi-cap parking to the main entrance and to the new outdoor playground area, convert the old ice rink into aMulti-Purpose Room, renovate the existing entry plaza, provide a new entry addition with security counter and lobby, a new handicap accessible elevator located at the entry addition, first floor renovations including new snack bar, new ADA accessible bathrooms, new fitness center, new lighting, flooring and ceiling treatments, second floor renovations include new classrooms, new music room, new reading room, storage, renovated Park staff office areas, and new lighting, flooring and ceiling treatments through-out the facility. The renovated facility will require a fire sprinkler system, a new central fire alarm system for the entire facility as well as an upgrade of the existing HVAC systems for the new design loads. In addition a new Pool Manager's office, a Golf Starter Office, a new trash collection area, and new Zamboni drainage pit (for the New Ice Rink) will be provided. The projected estimated construction cost is $5,660,870. The successful firm will be tasked with the following duties and responsibilities: Task 1 -Design Services Task 2 -Bid and Award Services Task 3 -Construction Administration Services Task 4 -Additional Services Task 5 -Reimbursable Services Task 1 - Design Services: The Purpose of this Task is to establish requirements for preparation of the contract documents for the Project based on the approved master plan for the renovations to the Scott Rakow Youth Center. The Project will be phased in 5 or more phases to be better defined after a thorough review of the existing conditions and the parameters established by the Fire Department and Commission Memo RFQ No. 26-05/06 -Architectural, Engineering, and Landscape Architecture Services for the Planning, Design, Bid and Award, and Construction Administration Services for the Renovation and Construction of the Scott Rakow Youth Center Phase II Project. September 6, 2006 Page 3 of 8 Building Department. The City's intent is for the Architectural Firm and its Sub- Consultant's is to phase the project based on practical construction limitations as well as integrate the Structural, Mechanical and Life Safety systems which comprise each phase to achieve Completion on a phase by phase basis and Final Certification upon the successful completion of all phases. It will be the responsibility of the A/E firm to work out these issues with the Agencies having Jurisdiction, since the facility will be in operation while under construction. Please note that the selected firm will be required to perform a variety of forensic tasks to verify, to the extent practicable, existing conditions and the accuracy of base maps to be used for development of the contract drawings. These tasks include, but may not be limited to, surveying, utility verification, and listing encroachments in the Right of Way using formats established for the City's Right of Way Infrastructure Improvement Program. In addition, the selected firm will follow the City standards for the preparation of contract documents, inclusive of drawings, specifications and front end documents, and cost estimates. Review submittals will be prepared at the 60% and 100% for City staff review and permitting completion stages. Contract documents will be subject to constructability and value engineering reviews to be performed by others. The selected firm will attend and participate in Community and/or user groups Design Review Meetings (CDRM) to present and discuss the design progress and concept at different stages during the design; and will work with the City to adjust /revise project scope as may be deemed necessary to meet established budgets as the design evolves through the stages of completion. The selected firm will also be responsible for reviewing and receiving approvals of its construction documents from all jurisdictional permitting agencies and boards prior to finalization. To facilitate the implementation of a Public Information Program, the selected firm will provide electronic files of all project documents, as directed by the City. City in-house Departments shall be required to respond, in writing, to all review comments. Presentation formats will be as directed by the City. Please note that the selected firm shall establish and maintain an in house Quality Assurance /Quality Control (QA/QC) program designed to verify and ensure the quality, clarity, completeness, constructability and bid potential of its contract documents. Task 2 - Bid and Award Services: The selected firm shall assist City in bidding and award of the contract. Such assistance shall include facilitating reviews of its contract documents with applicable Procurement, Risk Management and Legal Department representatives. In addition, the selected firm shall furnish camera ready contract documents for reproduction and distribution by the City, attend pre- bid conferences, assist with the preparation of necessary addenda, attend the bid opening and assist with the bid evaluation and recommendation of award to the City. The selected firm shall provide "As-Bid" documents for use during construction. The City may also consider awarding the project to one of the Job Order Contracting (JOC) Contractor already in place or thru the City's selection process contract with a CM at Risk Contractor to work with the A/E firm through the design and construction process. This will facilitate an expeditious construction contract Commission Memo RFQ No. 26-05/06 -Architectural, Engineering, and Landscape Architecture Services for the Planning, Design, Bid and Award, and Construction Administration Services for the Renovation and Construction of the Scott Rakow Youth Center Phase II Project. September 6, 2006 Page4of8 procurement and award period versus the common four to six months the City experiences when a project is advertised for competitive bidding. If the City decides to select a CM at Risk Contractor the A/E firm will be required to assist the City in the review and approval of a "Guaranteed Maximum Price" (GMP). This decision will be made as the project design progresses. Task 3 - Construction Administration Services: The selected firm shall perform a variety of tasks associated with the administration of the construction contract and construction management of the project. These shall include attendance at the pre-construction conference, attendance at weekly construction meetings, responding to Contractor requests for information /clarification, responding and evaluating Contractor requests for change orders /contract amendments, review of shop drawings, review of record drawings, review and processing of contractor applications for payment, specialty site visits, project closeout reviews including substantial and final punch list development and project certification, warranty administration. The City will provide day-to-day construction administration and observation service on the Project. Task 4 - Additional Services: No additional services are envisioned at this time. However, if such services are required during the performance of the Work, they will be requested by the City and negotiated in accordance with contract requirements, and awarded according to the City's procurement process. Task 5 - Reimbursable Services: The City may reimburse additional expenses such as reproduction costs, survey, geotechnical work and underground utility verification costs. It is anticipated that an Architectural Firm whose specialty and primary area of expertise is in design and construction of Recreational Youth Centers and Educational Facilities will head the selected Project Design Team, which should also include Structural, Electrical, Mechanical, Civil Engineers and a Landscape Architect as sub consultants. Interested teams must demonstrate their experience in design of Recreational Youth Centers and Educational Facilities, preferably in the design and construction of renovated Recreational Facilities and Educational facilities and have construction administration expertise, based on the successful completion of projects of similar size and complexity for other governmental and/or private entities. RFQ PROCESS AND SELECTION On May 10, 2006, the Mayor and City Commission approved the issuance of Request for Qualifications (RFQ) 26-05/06 Architectural, Engineering, and Landscape Architecture Services for the Planning, Design, Bid and Award, and Construction Administration Services for the Renovation and Construction of the Scott Rakow Youth Center Phase II project. The purpose of this Request for Qualifications (RFQ) is to obtain qualifications from professional consulting firms to provide Architectural and Engineering Services for the planning, design, bid and award and construction administration services for the renovation and construction of the Scott Rakow Youth Center Phase II Project. RFQ No. 26-05/06 was issued on May 12, 2006 with an opening date of June 27, 2006. A pre-RFQ proposal meeting was held on June 1, 2006. Commission Memo RFQ No. 26-05/06 -Architectural, Engineering, and Landscape Architecture Services for the Planning, Design, Bid and Award, and Construction Administration Services for the Renovation and Construction of the Scott Rakow Youth Center Phase II Project. September 6, 2006 Page 5 of 8 BidNet issued bid notices to 106 prospective proposers, resulting in 49 proposers requesting the RFQ document, which resulted in the receipt of the following seven (7) proposals from: ^ BEA International ^ Brown and Brown Architects ^ C3TS ^ Gili-McGraw Architects, LLP ^ MC Harry Associates ^ Naya Architects ^ Sklarchitecture The City Manager via Letter to Commission (LTC) No. 160-2006, appointed an Evaluation Committee consisting of the following individuals: ^ Jorge Cano, CIP Assistant Director ^ Kevin Smith, Parks and Recreation Director ^ Lisa Austin, Chair, Scott Rakow Youth Center Advisory Board ^ Jackie Fernandez, Middle Beach Resident ^ Jorge Exposito, Bayshore's Homeowners President ^ Thomas Mooney, Preservation and Design Manager ^ Graciela Escalante, Senior Capital Projects Coordinator Mr. Jorge Exposito, Thomas Mooney and Jackie Fernandez were unable to participate in the selection committee process and were replaced by Ricardo Guzman, Planner, Planning Department. On July 10, 2006, the Committee convened, the Procurement Division provided evaluation surveys on all 7 firms and Ms. Graciela Escalante, Senior Capital Projects Coordinator provided the scope of work for the RFQ responses being evaluated. Dr. Dean Kashiwagi from Arizona State and Florida Intemational University provided insight on "Best Value Procurement" and recommended questions (see Attachment No. 1) that could be used during the evaluation of the firms. The Committee also discussed the Selection Criteria, which was used to evaluate and rank the firms: A. The experience, qualifications and portfolio of the Principal (15 points). B. The experience, qualifications and portfolio of the Project Manager (15 points). C. The experience and qualifications of the professional personnel assigned to the Project Team (10 points). D. Risk Assessment Plan for ensuring quality of work (20 points). E. Willingness to meet time and budget requirements as demonstrated by past performance (5 points). F. Certified minority business enterprise participation (5 points). Either the Prime Consultant or the sub-Consultant team may qualify for proof of certification for minority business enterprise participation. Accepted minority business enterprise certifications include the Small Business Administration (SBA), State of Florida, or Miami-Dade County. G. Location (5 points). H. Recent, current, and projected workloads of the firms (5 points). I. The volume of work previously awarded to each firm by the City (5 points). J. Past performance based on number and quality of the Performance Evaluation Surveys (15 points). The Committee was able to discuss the above criteria in length, and after the evaluation of the proposals, the Risk Assessment and the Evaluation Surveys proceeded in ranking all Commission Memo RFQ No. 26-05/06 -Architectural, Engineering, and Landscape Architecture Services for the Planning, Design, Bid and Award, and Construction Administration Services for the Renovation and Construction of the Scott Rakow Youth Center Phase II Project. September 6, 2006 Page 6 of 8 seven respondents. Attached is the Committee's ranking tabulation for all seven firms: Evaluation Scores f or Shortlistin Firms Ranking Company Name Jorge Cano Ricardo Guzman Kevin Smith Grace F~calante Lisa Austin Jackie Fernandez 3 BEA International 73 (6) 83 (4) 85 (3) 95 (3) 97 (1) 83 (3) 1 Brown & Brown Architects 89 (1) 90 (2) 96 (1) 97 (1) 93 (2) 88 (2) 6 C3TS 79 (3) 81 (6) 80 (4) 90 (6) 91 (4) 77 (6) 5 Gili-McGraw Architects LLP 76 (4) 82 (5) 79 (5) 94 (4) 80 (5) 79 (5) 2 MC Harry Associates, N"1C. 75 (5) 91 (1) 87 (2) 96 (2) 92 (3) 90 (1) 7 Nays Architects 58 (7) 65 (7) 57 (7) 79 (7) 72 (6) 73 (7) 4 Sklarchitecture 84 (2) 88 (3) 75 (6) 92 (5) 70 (7) 80 (4) After the Committee had ranked all seven firms they decided to short list the top three (3) ranked firms, a motion was provided by Grace Escalante and seconded by Kevin Smith to short list the top 3 ranked firms and invite them to a 15 minute presentation and a 25 minute question and answer session. The top three ranked firms are as follows: 1. Brown and Brown Architects 2. MC Harry Associates, Inc. 3. BEA International The Evaluation Committee convened on July 20, 2006, and part of their evaluation of the firms, they were provided "Best Value" questions (Attachment 1) for the Project Manager of all three short listed firms. After all three firms were interviewed the Evaluation Committee deliberated and ranked the three firms. Brown and Brown Architects was unanimously ranked No.1, Mc Harry Associates, Inc. No. 2 and BEA International No. 3. Attached is the Committee's final scores for the three short list firms: Final Evaluation Scores for Total score RFQ-26-05/06 -Scott Rakow Youth Center Phase II Rank Jorge Ricardo Kevin Grace Lisa Jackie No. Company Name Cano Guzman Smtth Escalante Austin Fernandez 16 3 BEA International 77 (3) 87 (2) 88 (3) 94 (3) 82 (2) 84 (3) (2-2nd Place Votes & 4-3rd Place Votes) s 1 Brown 8~ Brown Architects 87 (1) 91(1) 98 (1) 97 (1) 91 (1) 90 (1) (6-1st Place Votes) 14 2 MC Harry Associates 85 (2) 86 (3) 91(2) 95 (2) 81 (3) 89 (2) (4-2nd Place Votes 8 2-3rd Place Votes) Commission Memo RFQ No. 26-05/06 -Architectural, Engineering, and Landscape Architecture Services for the Planning, Design, Bid and Award, and Construction Administration Services for the Renovation and Construction of the Scott Rakow Youth Center Phase II Project. September 6, 2006 Page 7 of 8 BROWN AND BROWN ARCHITECTS Brown and Brown Architects most recent projects, similar in nature to the Scott Rakow Center include: ^ Scott Rakow Youth Center -Master Planning Services ^ Miami-Dade College -Renovations & Remodeling of the New World School of the Arts building at the Wolfson Campus in downtown Miami ^ City of North Miami Beach -Renovations & Remodeling of City Hall Lobby, Administration office, and council chambers ^ The School Board of Broward County-Technical Services Building Renovations & Remodeling ^ St. Timothy School -New Construction of Gym Recreational Center, including renovations & remodeling of support facilities. ^ Morning Star Renewal Center -Major expansion to Archdioceses of Miami center. ^ Miami-Dade County Public Schools -Miami Norland Senior High School New State- of-the-Art Gymnasium and complete phased remodeling & renovation of old gymnasium building into new classroom building. ^ Miami-Dade County Public Schools -Miami Palmetto Senior High School New State-of-the-Art Gymnasium and complete phased remodeling & renovation of old gymnasium building into new classroom building. PROJECT MANAGER Albert Llorente, RA Project Manager Mr. Llorente has served as a Project Manager for over 15 years. He has been responsible for preliminary design efforts as well as construction administration on diversified project types. Partial list of project on which Mr. Llorente has been involved include: ^ Scott Rakow Youth Center, Recreational Facility Master Plan ^ Miami-0ade College, New School of the Arts • City of North Miami Beach, City Hall ^ Technical Service Building, School Board of Broward County ^ St. Timothy Recreational/Gym Center, Conference Spaces and Meeting Rooms ^ Morning Star Renewal, Retreat Center, Chapel, Meeting Rooms ^ Miami-0ade County Fire Training Center, $20M ^ Mother of Christ Catholic School, K-8, $4M ^ Whispering Pines Elementary School, Additions and Renovations, $3M ^ Coral Terrace Elementary School, Additions and Renovations, $3M ^ Roof Management programs for Miami Dade College, Kendall and North Campuses. REFERENCES: Mr. Carlos Espillaga, FIU Facility Manager "I have worked with Brown and Brown Architects on past project and have found them to be very professional." Commission Memo RFQ No. 26-05!06 -Architectural, Engineering, and Landscape Architecture Services for the Planning, Design, Bid and Award, and Construction Administration Services for the Renovation and Construction of the Scott Rakow Youth Center Phase II Project. September 6, 2006 Page 8 of 8 Mr. Angelino L. Garcia, Broward County Schools "The School Board of Broward County is very satisfied with the work provide by Brown and Brown Architects." Mr. Carlos Hevia, Dade County Public Schools "Mr. Albert Llorente is in good standing with Dade County Public Schools." CONCLUSION The Administration recommends approval of the attached Resolution accepting the recommendation of the City Manager pertaining to the Ranking of Qualifications received pursuant to Request for Qualifications (RFQ) No.26-05/06 for Architectural, Engineering, and Landscape Architecture Services for the Planning, Design, Bid and Award, and Construction Administration Services for the Renovation and Construction of the Scott Rakow Youth Center Phase I I project; authorizing the Administration to enter into negotiations with the top- ranked Firm of Brown and Brown Architects; and should the Administration not be able to negotiate an Agreement with the Top-Ranked Firm, Authorizing the Administration to negotiate with the second ranked firm of MC Harry and Associates, Inc.; and should the Administration not be able to negotiate an agreement with the Second-Ranked firm, Authorizing the Administration to negotiate with the Third-Ranked firm of BEA International. T:WGENDA\2006\sep0606\consent\RFQ26-05-06A-EScott Rakow-Memo.doc ATTACHMENT 1 AE Questions July 20, 2006 1. What experience and qualifications qualifies you to work on this project? 2. What similar projects have you worked on? 3. What is unique about this project? 4. What will you do differently on this project than previous projects? 5. What will you do differently from other designers on this project? 6. What are your personal goals on this project? 7. What value (difference in outcomes) do you and your company bring to this project? 8. What are your weaknesses and how will you minimize the impact? 9. How will you verify and justify the prices for the contract using baselines, other project costs, best value bids? 10. How will you select your critical staff? 11. How will you minimize the risk of over-design and scope creep? 12. Draw out the major activities during the design phase with major activities and time. 13. Are you willing to do a preplanning and quality control plan before the start of design? 14. Are you willing to take control of the project, and minimize the risk of nonperformance (late, over-designed, not coordinated well)? 15. Are you willing to send in a weekly risk report listing only unforeseen risks? 16. Do you understand that the quality control plans (schedule, milestones, prioritized list of risks and minimization of risks, and QA plan) will be in your contract? 17. Are you willing to be responsible for the project, which includes all coordination and preplanning? 18. Are you willing to do the coordination, setup all meetings, and keep all records with all client contacts, reviewers, and users? . 19. Do you understand that you and your firm will be rated on performance, and the rating will be used in any future competition? 20. Do you approve of your project being listed on the Internet website?