Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutExhibitATTACHMENT A Concept 1 Concept 2 "Enhanced Concept 3 "Connector" Connector/Destination" "Iconic Destination" Phase 1 $ 501,268.96 $ 501,268.96 $ 501,268.96 Phase 2 Task 2.1 $ 144,757.30 $ 406,761.31 $ 572,105.00 Task 2.2 $ 663,971.13 $ 1,865,728.13 $ 2,624,124.70 Task 2.3 $ 8,286.75 $ 23,285.38 $ 32,750.62 Task 2.4 $ 53,803.88 $ 151,186.41 $ 212,641.91 btotal Phase 2 i $ 870,819.06 $ 2,446,961.23 $ 3,441,622.23 Reimbursable Expenses $ 24,309.33 $ 35,000.00 $ 45,000.00 Owner's Contingency $ 87,081.91 $ 244,696.12 $ 344,162.22 Grand Total $ 1,483,479.26 $ 3,227,926.31 $ 4,332,053.41 Titiv of ART-ami CONSULTANT WORK ORDER PROPOSAL Date: May 18, 2021 Dear Mr. Hansen: EXP US Services, Inc., in association with our team members, proposes to provide the services identified below for the project entitled "Professional Engineering Services for 1-395 Pedestrian Baywalk and Bikeway Bridge Project," pursuant to its Professional Service Agreement with the City of Miami for engineering services. I. GENERAL Along Biscayne Bay in Downtown Miami, the 5-mile shared -use waterfront path known as the Baywalk is 88% complete. Currently the largest publicly owned barrier preventing the Baywalk from being fully complete runs from Maurice A. Ferre Park in the south, under the MacArthur Causeway Bridge to the former Herald Plaza site in the north. This 500-foot section forces pedestrians and bicyclists to circumnavigate the site and effectively closes off the Baywalk The Baywalk will not realize its full potential as the spine of Downtown Miami, the open space amenity that connects three distinct neighborhoods, and the conduit that allows waterfront access to all residents/visitors, until this barrier is eliminated. This project aims to complete the connection, creating an iconic connection to the Baywalk, as it passes under the MacArthur Causeway. The description as "iconic" is defined as widely known and acknowledged especially for distinctive excellence and as such, the project should capture national/international attention and achieve notoriety and distinctions for design excellence. The proposed Project study area begins 500 feet south of the I-395 MacArthur Causeway in Maurice A. Ferre Park (1103 Biscayne Blvd. Miami, FL 33131), extending north within Maurice A. Ferre Park, traversing under the I-395 MacArthur Causeway; continuing north along the property owned by Resorts World Miami LLC/Genting (1 Herald Plaza, Miami, FL 33131), to the southerly ROW line of the Venetian Causeway. The City owns the submerged lands in Biscayne Bay to the east in front of both the Park and Genting properties, and the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) owns the submerged lands underneath the causeway and 100 feet north and south of it. In May 2019, FDOT granted the City a lease agreement to build and maintain the pedestrian and bicycle bridge underneath the causeway. Per the RFQ No. 19-20-031, the design will be conducted in two phases. In the first phase (Phase 1), the Consultant shall prepare and provide a Feasibility Study that will develop 3 Concepts for an approximately 20-foot wide, over -the -water pedestrian and bicycle (ped/bike) bridge passing underneath the MacArthur Causeway that will connect the existing Baywalk within Maurice A. Ferre Park and the future Baywalk on the Genting property. The approximate centerline length of the new ped/bike bridge is anticipated to be about 500 feet. In conjunction with the development of the 3 concepts, the Feasibility Study will also investigate enhanced usage of the waterfront via kayak launches, water taxis, mooring docks, and other connections to the maritime community. The City of Miami prefers that the Concepts create a destination and a sense of place for the public to enjoy in addition to simply traversing the FDOT right of way. It is understood that the iconic solutions may exceed current funding availability. It is also assumed that the Consultant shall, as part of the Phase 1 Scope of Services, provide the City with some initial analyses of potential funding sources, public and private, to supplement current budgets; and that these analyses will include addressing impacts on schedule Therefore, certain assumptions and tasks have been identified that provide sufficient data to clearly define and then evaluate the parameters of the concepts, including technical requirements, costs and schedule impacts. Negotiation meetings between the EXP Team and the City were held on March 4, April 7 and April 22, 2021. Much of the discussion at these meetings centered around the current and foreseeable budget constraints of the project, versus the real and perceived appetite in the City for a truly iconic destination. On April 22, 2021, the City and the EXP team agreed on a path forward that preserves the possibilities of enhanced and fully developed destinations, while respecting the possibility that only limited additional funding could become available. PHASE 1: Phase 1 will fully develop (as detailed below) three concepts for the Baywalk pedestrian bridge: 1) The Connector Concept is a pedestrian and bicycle (Multi -Use) bridge approximately 20-foot wide, over -the -water, passing underneath the MacArthur Causeway, connecting the existing Baywalk within Maurice A. Ferre Park northward to the future Baywalk on the Genting property. The approximate centerline length of the new ped/bike bridge is anticipated to be about 500 feet. The Connector Concept is a single continuous alignment on one level, that serves the purpose of filling the gap in the Baywalk at MacArthur Causeway. The concept envisions that the Connector is more than a basic bridge, incorporating modest enhancements in surface, railings, and other elements, while fulfilling all the structural marine and functional requirements of the shared use connector. The Connector Concept assumes the available project budget is equal to or slightly larger than the monies currently available, and it was agreed that this concept would be developed around a budget of $6.5 to $8.0 Million. 2) The Enhanced Connector/Destination Concept is envisioned to be the mid -range design level solution, developed around a budget of $13 Million. The Enhanced Connector/Destination Concept incorporates additional design features, creates nodes of place along the alignment and begins to develop a design vocabulary that builds on the enhancements of the Connector Concept. The Enhanced Connector/Destination Concept may also introduce design elements and features that are not included in the Connector Concept. Iconic features may be introduced into the destination themes of certain nodes along the bridge, and lighting and other features could be introduced as part of the design vocabulary. 3) The Iconic Destination Concept is envisioned the truly Iconic version of the Baywalk Pedestrian bridge. In this concept the iconic features and enhanced design vocabulary create one or more destinations along the path from the Maurice A. Ferre Park to the Baywalk on the Genting property. Destinations could be theme -based, or unique elements respecting but complimenting the surrounding design features. Enhancements are envisioned to be developed in a menu format allowing stakeholders and the public the opine on those that create the most W excitement and emotion in the environments of the Baywalk The Iconic Destination Concept is to be built around a project budget of $18Million. PHASE 2: The City and EXP Team agreed during the negotiations on April 22, 2021 that Phase two would include a Not to Exceed (NTE) budgets to complete Phase 2 services for each of the three Concepts developed in Phase 1. Using the assumed design and complexities, the level of environmental processing, the detailed design and construction administration assumptions for each of the Concepts described above, the EXP Team developed NTE budgets for Phase 2 for each of the three design Concepts: 1) The Connector Concept Phase 2 fees for this concept would be developed around a budget of $6.5 to $8.0 Million. The bridge is assumed to span the footprint of the MacArthur Causeway, and that minimum below water construction is developed. The design assumes an Environmental Assessment Type 1 processing format, and minimal upland survey or geotechnical involvement. A fully developed Phase 2 proposal has been developed for this concept, following FDOT estimating protocols and spreadsheets, was submitted on April 16, 2021 to the City and is incorporated by reference. The Scope of services for Phase 2 for this concept is also detailed below. 2) The Enhanced Connector/Destination Concept is envisioned to be the mid -range design level solution, developed around a budget of $13 Million. The Enhanced Connector/Destination Concept incorporates additional design features, creates nodes of place along the alignment and begins to develop a design vocabulary that builds on the enhancements of the Connector Concept. The design assumes an Environmental Assessment Type 2 processing format, greater data collection and environmental scrutiny resulting in similar permits but requiring increased effort to secure. A fully developed Phase 2 proposal has been prepared for this concept; was submitted on March 1, 2021 to the City and is incorporated by reference. 3) The Iconic Destination Concept is envisioned the truly Iconic version of the Baywalk Pedestrian bridge. In this concept the iconic features and enhanced design vocabulary create one or more destinations along the path from the Maurice A. Ferre Park to the Baywalk on the Genting property. The design assumes an Environmental Assessment Type 2 processing format, greater data collection and environmental scrutiny, resulting in similar permits but requiring increased effort to secure. The Iconic Destination Concept is to be built around a project budget of $18 Million. Pricing for a Not to Exceed proposal is included herein. PHASE 1: FEASIBILITY STUDY AND DEVELOPMENT OF 3 CONCEPTS The proposed concepts for the ped/bike bridge will be sited over a portion of Biscayne Bay but will not impact any navigable waterway channels. Preliminary engineering will be conducted to assess engineering sufficiency of the developed concepts and facilitate a probable cost of construction. Access for inspection and maintenance of the MacArthur Causeway bridge and the proposed ped/bike bridge will be considered when developing the 3 concepts. The assumption is made that the MacArthur Causeway is inspected and maintained by FDOT and the proposed ped/bike bridge will be inspected and maintained by the City of Miami. The Feasibility Study will conclude with the selection and approval of one concept by the City of Miami, the Miami DDA and FDOT. This concept will become the "Build Alternative" in Phase 2 in accordance with the NEPA and FDOT PD&E procedures. 3 The Feasibility Study will consist of the following items: • Study Background and Purpose This section will provide the project background and purpose; and describe the need for the proj ect. • Study Area and Process This section will describe the limits of the study area, the process followed to achieve the objectives of the project, and the steps taken ultimately resulting in its completion and the completion of the Miami Baywalk. • Existing Conditions and Data Collection Inputs City will make available to Consultant all available data from previous studies in both electronic and hardcopy format (as available). Consultant will review this data and prepare maps and exhibits using the information. Data to be collected includes the following: • As -built drawings, previous survey notes • Existing field survey or mapping • Copies of project reports/plans for ongoing studies in the area, including (but not limited to): • Copies of pertinent correspondence • Past reports • Existing drainage information (reports, plans, atlases) and known flooding conditions • Existing right-of-way Plats and encroachments • Electronic aerial photography, contour maps (from Aerial survey) and GIS data (land use, etc.) as available • Underwater reports for the seawalls within the project limits • Existing utility information Published studies for the area will be reviewed including, but not limited to, the South Florida Regional Climate Change Compact's 2019 Compact Unified Sea Level Rise Projection, Miami -Dade County Flood Study, and recent Miami -Dade Back Bay Coastal Storm Risk Management Feasibility Study. Readily available preliminary information will be obtained to assess potential impacts to current aesthetics, natural resources, cultural resources, and sociocultural aspects resulting from the proposed concepts. Detailed investigations of these topics as well as noise, vibration, and air quality will not be conducted until the Design Phase and after the Environmental Class of Action (COA) has been determined. The project will have Section 4(f) property involvement with the Maurice Ferre Park. It is anticipated that the project will not have a detrimental effect on the Park and any required documentation in this regard will not be initiated until the Design Phase. Readily available information will be obtained to define ownership/easements of submerged lands to assess the feasibility of concepts. M Utility atlases and available information will be reviewed to assess potential impacts from the proposed concepts and evaluate the elimination of any potential conflicts. Coordination with designated utilities will be conducted to identify sources of water and electricity for irrigation, lighting, and maintenance. Existing Security/surveillance devices (CCTV, emergency call boxes) will be noted and potential conflicts will be identified. Consultant will visit the site to confirm existing conditions and compare with historical records. Consultant will take project site photos and maintain a photo log. • Coordination with City Departments Consultant will coordinate with various City Departments such as Real Estate Asset Management (DREAM), Office of Capital Improvements (OCI), and Public Works to obtain input to design parameters. Upon approval by the City, coordination will also be initiated with Bayfront Park Management Trust who maintains and operates Maurice A. Ferre Park. • Coordination with FDOT related to I-395 MacArthur Causeway Bridge Consultant will coordinate with FDOT to identify design related issues, and FDOT access for inspections and maintenance. • Coordination with other Planning and Development Entities Consultant will coordinate design efforts with planning and development agencies such as the Smart Plan Beach Corridor Transit project, the Miami DDA, and the City of Miami Beach Transportation Master Plan. • Upland Survey No field survey will be conducted during the Feasibility Study Phase. Horizontal and vertical dimensions will be derived from as -built plans of the MacArthur Causeway and the PAMM property. • Bathymetric Survey Consultant will conduct bathymetric field surveying to provide seabed elevation data within the project area in the Biscayne Bay to support the analysis and design of the proposed marine works. Water depths will be collected along the seawall, overpass, and surrounding areas to support engineering design. The survey will be completed using automated hydrographic equipment consisting of a survey echo sounder (fathometer), DGPS or similar, and HYPACK software for logging data on board the survey vessel. Horizontal positioning will be obtained with commercial satellite DGPS service or similar to provide horizontal sub -meter accuracy, which is generally suitable for hydrographic mapping. The bathymetric data collected in the field will be compiled and reduced to the horizontal coordinate systems and vertical datum established for the Project. Contours reflecting bottom elevations at 1-foot intervals will be reflected. The bathymetric data will be collected in areas accessible by boat with varying spacing to obtain representative data. The general survey limits are bounded by the seawall to the west and a line initiating at 50 feet east of the seawall at the southerly ROW line of the Venetian Causeway extending to the 2nd bridge pier of the MacArthur Causeway, then under the Macarthur Causeway from the 2nd bridge pier to a point 50 feet east of the seawall and 500 feet south of the southerly ROW line of the MacArthur Causeway. The survey will be tied into a project datum by referencing discernable elevations on the as -built plans of the MacArthur Causeway bridge piers. 5 • Marine Reconnaissance Survey A reconnaissance -level qualitative marine resource survey will be conducted to identify potential seagrasses, corals, or any other marine resource of significance within the limits described for the bathymetric survey. The purpose of the survey will be to identify potential seagrasses, hardbottom and corals or any other marine resource of significance within the proposed Project boundaries, which could be directly or indirectly impacted and should be considered in the design of the Baywalk. The survey will be conducted by experienced marine biologists who will document the extent, species, and general density of corals, seagrass, sponges, macroalgae, and other important marine organisms observed within the survey area. Data (e.g., species, percent coverage, and location of any marine resources observed) will be collected on prepared underwater paper; GPS coordinates will be collected when important marine resources such as corals and seagrass are observed, and representative photographs will be taken. A field observation report will be prepared that summarizes the data collected and will include photographs and a base map of resources. As the Project site is located within Johnson's Seagrass (Halophila johnsonii) Critical Habitat, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) recommendations for sampling Halophila johnsonii will be followed. Following Owner selection of a concept, a permit -level quantitative marine resource survey conducted, during Phase 2, between June 1 st and September 30th, will be required to accompany environmental permit applications. The scope for the permit -level survey is not included in this Feasibility Study. • Initial Geotechnical Investigation For the Feasibility Study Phase of the Project, the geotechnical investigation will be limited to research of existing available geotechnical reports for the MacArthur Causeway, the PAMM property, the Beach Corridor Trunk Line — Rapid Mass Transit Project, and the Genting property. These reports will be utilized to determine soil engineering properties for use in the preliminary design of the ped/bike bridge and any potential redesign/modifications to the existing seawall. Geotechnical Engineering analysis will provide recommendations for foundation systems, load capacities and foundation construction methods. The scope of a soil exploration program to be performed during the Design Phase of the Project will be developed after the selection of a Final Concept. This will allow soil borings to be taken at the proposed foundation locations of the Final Concept. • Three (3) Iconic Design Alternative Concepts Analysis Three design concepts will be developed for evaluation and consideration. The process will consist of an Input Phase and a Design Phase. The process is outlined as follows: INPUT PHASE Pre -Design Planning Consultant will plan and schedule activities related to the pre -design or Input Phase of the project that will take place during the initial 12 weeks. This process will be collaborative with the City of Miami; however, the Consultant will provide valuable no insights and an initial outline of activities for consideration of activities which will include: • Site analysis • Precedent study • Programming research • Stakeholder engagement planning • Community engagement planning Design Team Data Collection & Assimilation The primary focus will be a detailed site analysis from a design perspective and collaboration with the comprehensive team to understand all considerations and design implications prior to beginning concepting. The process will require research, documentation, analysis, and presentation to design team members, including a comprehensive SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) analysis. Team Research Presentation Following the research, assimilation and analysis of all data pertaining to the project, discipline experts will participate in team charrettes and present their findings for the design team. Every effort will be made for presentations to be done in person. Team Site Visit Orchestrated experientials walk through with the design team to elaborate on critical findings and opportunities for the project. Goals of the site visit include a detailed personal knowledge and understanding of the site and preparing strategies for stakeholder engagement and community engagement process. Stakeholder Input Preparation Consultant will prepare presentation content and discussion topics for qualitative and useful input from each of the key stakeholders and groups. The intent is to provide the City of Miami relevant analysis for productive sessions. Stakeholder Input Meetings After first review of potential key stakeholders, Consultant will conduct three (3) independent stakeholder meetings to focus these sessions on information relevant to each representative group and to ensure open communication can occur without fear of competing agendas. The independent stakeholders' meetings will be conducted with the following: 1. FDOT 2. Phillip and Patricia Frost Museum of Science 3. Resorts World/Genting Cooperation of stakeholders to meet in a timely fashion will be essential to maintaining the 12-week scheduled duration of the Input Phase. Meetings with additional potential stakeholders exceed the scope of this proposal. Other potential stakeholders are: 1. City of Miami DREAM 2. City of Miami OCI 3. City of Miami Public Works 4. City of Miami Planning 5. Miami Downtown Development Authority (DDA) 6. Maurice A. Ferre Park/ Bayfront Park Management Trust 7 7. Perez Art Museum Miami (PAMM) 8. Downtown Neighborhood Association (DNA) 9. Biscayne Homeowners Association (BHA) 10. I-395 Advisory Board Community Input Workshop Preparation With an iconic public project of this magnitude, it is critical to organize a productive public input process. Consultant will create a single day event that is part educational workshop and part solicitation of public response. The workshop preparation is intended to organize key analysis and design criteria into +/-10 stations that address certain design topics or analysis items that will be relevant to the design process. Staffing of the workstations will be split between the Consultant key and City of Miami staff. Community Input Workshop The workshop event is intended to be a well -publicized public event with an organized process for participants. The event will take place at the project site with a well -placed welcome tent for pre -registered attendees of the public to check -in. Significant COVID protocols can be put in place to address social distancing and the proper wearing of masks. +/-10 stations will be strategically placed throughout the site and members of the public will proceed from station to station in a pre-set sequential path. Each station will be facilitated by 1-2 individuals of the various key disciplines charged with the content creation and City staff to provide insight into the educational content and assist in filling out the public input for each station. City Progress Review Meetings Consultant will conduct bi-weekly City/Design Team meetings to update progress on scope items and solicit input and approval of the process on a regular rhythm. Aggregate Input into Overview Presentation At the conclusion of the Input Phase of the project, Consultant will assemble all content into an overview presentation of all research, analysis, and public/stakeholder feedback. The document will be the summary of critical conclusions to influence the Concept Design Phase. Finalize Goals + Objectives As a collaborative effort, Consultant will facilitate synthesizing the final design goals and objectives for the design process with the team and present for City approval. The objectives will be prioritized and direct strategies for three unique concepts. The intent is that (3) concepts will capture the differing opinions generated in the Input Phase, but collectively they will need to meet the goals and objectives. CONCEPT DESIGN PHASE Initial Experience Concepting M Consultant will lead a process of design exploration to capture the essence of the experiences of the project throughout the site. The process will be collaborative with and centered on the following: • Programming • Ecology • Art • Urban Interaction • Wayfinding • Multimodal • AV/Lighting • Interpretive Education • Living Shoreline and Landscape Architecture • Historic and Cultural resource desktop studies These experiences will be documented through diagramming, sketching and precedent referencing. Alignment Design and Conceptual Plans Somewhat parallel to the Experience Concepting will be the development of conceptual plans and overall alignment of the bridge. The intent is to allow the Experience Concepting to influence the planning and conversely allow opportunities that develop in the plan to influence the concepts. Formal Developments This scope of work focuses on the 3-dimensional development of each concept into iconic form. The morphological development will not be purely sequential following the steps but will proceed in parallel with the Experience Concepting and Planning. Models will be developed in Rhino and Revit as project development platforms. Parametric design considerations will be explored with Python, Grasshopper and Dynamo. Models will be collaborative across all design disciplines and will provide BIM information to accommodate estimating. Intermediate City Review At a midway point in the Concept Design Phase, Consultant will conduct a formal review of the three concepts under development for relevant feedback to finalize the concept designs. This meeting will be conducted in person with a full presentation of all (3) concepts and an organized discussion facilitated by Consultant. Multi -disciplinary Performance Check Following the City Review, Consultant will facilitate a design team performance check to clarify all City feedback for design disciplines to be aligned for the second half of the Concept Design Phase. This meeting will be in person and directly following the City review. Final Conceptual Design Development Based on all relevant feedback, Consultant will continue to finalize the overall concept designs and layer in associated details into the designs to increase the level of comprehension for each of the schemes. Uniqueness of elements will be a focus of this phase to differentiate the proposals appropriately from one another. I Presentation Production A final presentation document will be created as a PDF to include a full description of the work summarizing the conceptual design scope. The document will include the following: • Research • Site Analysis • Documentation of Community Workshop • Summary of Goals + Objectives The document will be organized as follows: • Narrative of each design concept • Site plans • Enlarged Plan of key experience areas • Programming diagram • Ecology/Sustainability diagrams • Water Strategy • Lighting • Transit Diagram • Preliminary Cost Estimate • Design and constructability • Project Schedule and Timeline • Maintenance Cost • Axonometric view describing components + materials (1). Each perspective view will be a high caliber photorealistic rendering depicting each concept. These renderings will be generated through Rhino/Revit modeling software and taken into VizRender or Lumion for selected camera angles and base imagery. Final imagery including light, texture, landscape, entourage, and other elements will be edited in photoshop. Sample renderings are provided for quality: • Evaluation Matrix Summary An evaluation matrix will be developed to aid the City in assessing the 3 concepts. The parameters of the matrix will be: 1. Cost 2. Stakeholder preference 3. Maintenance Costs 4. Schedule Impacts from Permitting 5. Environmental Impacts Recommended Alternative and Conclusions Stakeholder/Community Presentations Consultant will conduct formal stakeholder and community presentations as necessary to communicate the three design concepts. The full presentation would be an organized summary in three distinct parts: Original research and site analysis Stakeholder and Community Input How the concepts interpreted the input in the contest of site appropriateness 10 • Resiliency and Material Evaluation Consultant will perform an engineering analysis to evaluate the effects of sea level rise, king tides, currents, and coastal storms (e.g., waves and surge) on the Project area. The projected water levels will be evaluated relative to impacts at the Project site and potential mitigation or adaption strategies to incorporate in the conceptual design. Consultant will adopt projections provided by the Miami -Dade County Office of Resiliency and/or the Unified Sea Level Rise Projections published by the Southeast Florida Regional Compact on Climate Change. Published tidal and recent king tide data will be adopted to provide water levels and extreme tide water levels. The exceedance probability and level of risk will be estimated for various tidal and sea level rise conditions. Consultant will review and adopt the storm surge elevations for various return period storms published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), as well as the more recent Back Bay Study conducted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, to evaluate low frequency storm events and water levels over the service life of the proposed Project components. The following sources will also be consulted: • Resiliency Florida • Southeast Florida Climate Compact • Florida Reef Resilience Program • The Resiliency Coalition • East Central Florida Regional Planning Council • Permitting Requirements and Outline Consultant will perform regulatory due diligence to consider environmental permitting constraints, past permit history, ownership research, listed species, essential fish habitat, water quality, the Manatee Protection Plan, and other environmental documents. Consultant will prepare for, lead, and summarize three (3) preliminary consultation meetings with the regulatory agencies, specifically the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE), the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), and the Miami -Dade County Division of Environmental Resources Management (DERM). An agenda and presentation will be prepared for each meeting to present the three (3) concepts. A Feasibility Letter Report will consolidate the results of the meetings and identify the following: • Anticipated challenges • Potential resource impacts and mitigation options • Points of contention that may arise during permitting • Comparison of the level of effort and timeline to permit each of the 3 concepts • Recommended path forward for the upcoming permit applications to FDEP, USACE, and DERM. • Determination of Environmental Class of Action for Build Alternative The use of Federal funds or assistance during any phase of the project development or implementation will necessitate compliance with the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA). Additionally, consultation with Federal permitting agencies may also necessitate NEPA compliance depending upon potential impacts. Consultant will meet with involved 11 Federal agencies to present the 3 concepts and determine if NEPA processing will be required. If NEPA processing is required, the required Class of Action (COA) will be determined. • Design Criteria Development Consultant will develop and document the design criteria to be utilized for the following disciplines: • Coastal Design • Structural design • Geotechnical design • Pavement design • Vertical and horizontal clearances • Vertical and horizontal geometrics • ADA compliance • Drainage design • Lighting design (Illumination and aesthetic lighting) • Structures Consultant will evaluate available geotechnical data and prepare preliminary structural designs of bridge concepts to prove structural adequacy. Preliminary designs of new or modified seawall concepts will be evaluated for structural and marine adequacy. Concepts and design criteria will be developed to satisfy the Florida Building Code Miami -Dade County "High Velocity Hurricane Zone" provisions requiring structures to withstand wind forces resulting from design wind speeds (146 Mph) and storm wave energy. Preliminary designs will include sufficient detail to facilitate estimating of probable construction cost. • Bike and Pedestrian Traffic Counts The continuity of the Baywalk resulting from the proposed link of the properties north and south of the MacArthur Causeway will eliminate numerous pedestrian/bike/vehicle conflicts that currently exist when pedestrians and cyclists detour around I-395. Current and projected pedestrian/bike traffic counts for the new link will be obtained from existing sources but no further study or analysis of these conflicts are included in the scope of services. • Baywalk Geometric Analysis Geometric analysis will consist of a preliminary design of horizontal alignment and vertical profile of the proposed bikeway. The Consultant will prepare preliminary plan and profile sheets showing existing and proposed horizontal and vertical geometry at a scale of 1" = 50'. A bikeway typical section will be developed for segments on embankment and on bridge structure. Sidewalk and ADA ramps will also be evaluated. Pedestrian and bicyclist access between the Baywalk and the existing Metromover station will be evaluated. • Drainage Consultant will evaluate existing drainage patterns and identify existing outfalls. Concepts will be evaluated for impacts to existing drainage patterns and Consultant will assess methods to provide adequate drainage for proposed designs. • Landscape Architecture/Resilience+Connectivity+Activation Consultant will perform physical and qualitative analysis to determine opportunities and project feasibility. Intangible factors such as cultural heritage, population demographics, local 12 history and traditions will also play an integral role during the feasibility/concept design phase. Experience and knowledge of the site and adjacent projects (PAMM, Frost Science Museum, Miami Herald/Resort World and the Baywalk) will influence the analysis. The design team will visit the site and its surroundings to document physical features and analyze potential opportunities with a focus of the following elements: ■ Boundaries, access, and views ■ Topography, slope, and drainage ■ Vegetation cover and characteristics ■ Environmental and geological features ■ Wind, temperature, rainfall, and humidity ■ Zoning, land use and permitting issues ■ Adjacent land use relationships and context The analysis will provide an understanding of the physical site and will help identify specific areas of opportunities and constraints as well as identify potential programming elements, design elements, and resiliency elements. The data acquired during site analysis will provide the basis for the development of the 3 concept options. The three (3) concepts generated will establish a vision for the bridge and location of design elements. Elements considered may include Baywalk improvements (seating, lookouts, shade canopies, trash receptacles and planting), support for collateral activities (fishing, kayaking, water taxi, pleasure craft mooring), and seascape and living shoreline (vertical native oyster beds, bird rookery, living shoreline, floating planters). • Signage Existing signage within the Study limits will be surveyed and documented. A conceptual plan of proposed signage will be prepared in conjunction with the wayfinding described in the Landscape section. • Lighting An assessment of existing lighting will include a site visit and data collection to determine existing lighting facilities within the Study limits. Coordination with each agency having jurisdiction over the lighting will be performed. A conceptual lighting plan will be developed for the ped/bike bridge and any new segments of the Baywalk that provides continuity with the existing lighting. • Funding Support Assistance will be provided to the City to help their grants staff with drafting text and reviewing application requirements for funding opportunities. Coordination on grant funding applications, identification of available grants applicable to the Project, notifying the City of upcoming grant application deadlines, and supporting grant applications will be provided. The City's grants staff would be responsible for preparation and submittal of the grant application and sharing information about any grants that have been applied for and/or awarded that may be used as leveraging for other grants, may affect permitting timeline goals, and may preclude the ability to apply for additional grants. 13 • Project Schedule A detailed schedule will be developed for the Phase 1 Feasibility Study and Development of 3 Concepts. The schedule will extend forward with approximate timelines for Phase 2 milestones and completion of the Project. • Opinion of Probable Cost Quantities and unit prices will be developed to facilitate cost comparisons of various components. The initial opinions of probable cost of proposed Concepts will occur at the midpoint in the Concept Design Phase. Costs will be updated, and contingencies adjusted as the Concept designs progress. • Administration and Management Technical management and coordination of the project will be performed using various management tools and production of related administrative reports to be used for tracking, invoicing, and management of subconsultants. • Quality Assurance/Quality Control Quality Assurance and Quality Control will be performed by Consultant and its subconsultants to provide a work product that meets the Standard of Care of the Industry. PHASE 2: SCHEMATIC DESIGN (10%) AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROCESSION (PD&E); DESIGN DEVELOPMENT (40%), CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS (90 AND 100%); BID & AWARD, AND CONSTRUCTION PHASE ADMINISTRATION The scope of professional services required for the Design Phase (Schematic Design and Environmental (PD&E), Design Development (40%), Construction Documents (90 and 100 percent), Bid &Award, and construction phase services) of the selected concept is based on the Concepts developed and the selected Build Alternative. The scope of services provided herein assumes a Categorical Exclusion, Type 1 NEPA determination for Concept 1- the Connector Concept. The preparation of a Categorical Exclusion Type 2, Environmental Assessment, or an Environmental Impact Statement, is assumed in the event the selected Build Alternative Is Concept 2 - Enhanced Connector/Destination or Concept 3 — Iconic Destination Concept. The Phase 2 Scope of Services for these two Concepts is included as a separate Attachment. In Phase 2, the Consultant shall provide full design and permitting services for the development of the selected alternative as described herein. • Upland Survey Upland topographic survey and base mapping will utilize the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88) with current adjustment. Consultant will research, recover, and confirm existing available horizontal and vertical control. Upland survey limits will be defined as follows: Northern Limit (200 feet north of north ROW line of I-395), Southern Limit (200 feet south of south ROW line of I-395), Eastern limit (waterline), Western limit (50 feet west of waterline on Genting property, 100 feet west of waterline elsewhere). 14 Low beam elevations on the MacArthur Causeway bridge from the west abutment to the 2nd pier will be obtained. LIDAR will be utilized to survey bottom of beam surfaces on the underside of the I-395 bridge from the abutment to the first pier located within Biscayne Bay. LIDAR will also be utilized to survey the bottom of beam surfaces on the fascia beams only from the first pier to the second pier located within Biscayne Bay due to limited line of sight from the shoreline. Within these limits, the following survey tasks will be performed: • Horizontal Project Control (HPC) HPC will be undertaken for the purpose of establishing horizontal control on the Florida State Plane Coordinate System or datum approved by the City. • Vertical Project Control (VPC) VPC will be undertaken for the purpose of establishing vertical control on the datum approved by the City (NAVD88). • Right -of -Way Survey: Property corner monuments where visible, and any apparent boundary evidence within the survey limits will be surveyed and documented. No other detailed rightof-way survey is included in scope of services. • Topography/Digital Terrain Model (DTM) (3D) All above ground features and improvements within the survey limits will be located by collecting the required data for the purpose of creating a DTM with sufficient density. Hard and soft locations will be surveyed from top of sea wall westerly to limits (50' west of seawall north of I395 and 100' west of seawall south of I395) within overall project limits noted above. All above ground features and improvements will be surveyed including existing sidewalk corners and ADA ramps, and the corners of the first, second and third bridge piers within Biscayne Bay taken near waterline. Drainage and utility structures will be surveyed and opened for identification. Invert and sump elevations will be measured for drainage structures. Identification of combined sewers vs storm sewers will be based on visual inspection and record plan information. Geotechnical Support Locations of soil exploration borings will be surveyed for 2 land -based borings and zero in -water borings. Borings will be located in 3-dimensions (X, Y, Z) at boring sites established by geotechnical engineer. Document Research Research of documentation to support field and office efforts involving surveying and mapping will be provided. • Bathymetric Survey Bathymetric Survey scope is detailed in Phase 1. No additional bathymetric survey will be performed in Phase 2. • Coastal Design Criteria a. Current Measurements: Current velocities and tidal variations will be measured at the Project site during both ebb and flood flow conditions. A dive team will mobilize and deploy one (1) Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler (ADCP) on the seabed for up to five (5) days of measurements. Upon completion of the measurements, the dive team will 15 remobilize to collect the ADCP unit. The measurement data will be downloaded from the unit and processed for subsequent engineering use. The water surface elevations and current measurements will provide an understanding of the magnitude of flow at the location of the proposed bridge structure, as well as be utilized for calibration of the hydrodynamic model. b. Hydrodynamic Model Development & Calibration: Develop a detailed model domain utilizing the bathymetric survey data collected under Phase 1, along with available nautical charts, ancillary survey data and land boundaries. Numerical model simulations will then be performed of the tidal hydrodynamics in the Project vicinity to analyze the flow characteristics. The state-of-the-art MIKE21 HD FM numerical model will be utilized. The model is based on an unstructured flexible mesh, which accommodates the detailed modeling of channels in varying sizes and configurations. The model will be calibrated to the period of tide and current measurements performed under paragraph (a). c. Modelling of Tidal and Storm Hydrodynamics: The calibrated numerical model will be utilized to simulate alternate tidal conditions (i.e., normal) experienced throughout the year outside the period of measurement collection and calibration, as well as extreme events with rapid increases in water levels (i.e., storm surge). The bridge design life and return period storm event will be determined amongst the Project team for simulation in the numerical model. Depending on the proposed design for the Project, the foundation elements may be included in the numerical model as warranted. The tide and storm induced flow dynamics at the location of the proposed structure will ultimately be utilized determine hydraulic loads and scour potential during both normal and extreme conditions. d. Modeling of Wave Propagation: Utilize the state-of-the-art DHI MIKE 3 Wave Model FM numerical wave model, or similar, to conduct an analysis of the wave propagation and overtopping occurring at the Project. The MIKE 3 Wave Model FM is a phase -resolving wave model based on the 3-dimensional Navier-Stokes equations that is capable of simulating wave processes from deep water to nearshore. The model is capable of handling non -linear wave transformation, wave breaking and run-up, coastal flooding, and the wave overtopping of marine structures. e. Wave and Hydrodynamic Loading: Utilize the wave modeling results to determine the wave loading on the proposed bridge components (up to 2 locations/configurations). The wave loads will be dependent on the specific local site conditions, thus specific higherorder wave computations will be performed to increase accuracy of wave loading estimates. Horizontal loads on vertical bridge structure elements as well as vertical uplift (wave slamming) and plunging forces on the bridge deck will be evaluated for extreme conditions based on the proposed bridge configuration. The influence of water level and wavelength will be assessed. The bridge design illustrating geometry, elevations and dimensions will be coordinated amongst the design team for use in the load calculations. f. Scour: The hydrodynamic and wave modeling results along with the proposed marine structure design will be evaluated to determine potential sediment transport characteristics in the structure vicinity. A scour analysis will be performed for the proposed bridge foundations, based on pier geometry, peak flow rates and local geotechnical conditions. The scour analysis will generally follow the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) 16 and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) guidelines. Apart from the structural design conditions, areas of potential localized erosion and deposition occurring during and after construction will be evaluated as it relates to direct and indirect impacts to marine resources adjacent to the proposed structures. g. Coastal Design Report: The detailed coastal engineering analyses described above will be summarized in an engineering report. The Report will include figures illustrating the results of the measurements, numerical modeling, analyses, and recommended design conditions to be utilized in the design of the bridge structure. • Updated Marine Resources Survey Based on the results of the recon survey performed during Phase 1, and the proposed Project footprint, Consultant will conduct an updated detailed benthic marine resource survey focused within and immediately adjacent to the boardwalk footprint during the federally recognized seagrass growing season (June 1st— September 30th). The survey will be conducted by experienced marine biologists on SCUBA who will document the extent, species, and general density of corals, seagrass, sponges, macroalgae, and other important marine organisms observed within the survey area. Data (e.g., species, percent coverage, and location of any marine resources observed) will be collected on prepared underwater data sheets. As the Project site is located within Johnson's Seagrass (Halophila johnsonii) Critical Habitat, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) recommendations for sampling Halophila johnsonii will be followed. The data will be processed and presented in a Field Observation Report. A marine resource basemap will be created in GIS that illustrates the location and percent coverage of observed marine resources with data extrapolated as appropriate. The marine resource basemap and representative photographs will be discussed and presented in the Field Observation Report. The survey will be used to evaluate anticipated impacts associated with the proposed Project and to calculate impacts and potential mitigation as needed. The updated survey will take two days in the field with a 4-person crew (3 divers and 1 boat captain) and will require equipment rental and expenses. • Geotechnical Investigation As described in Phase 1, the initial geotechnical investigation is limited to research of existing geotechnical reports for the MacArthur Causeway, the PAMM property, the Beach Corridor Trunk Line — Rapid Mass Transit Project (specific to the section traversing from downtown Miami to Watson Island), and the Genting property. The geotechnical investigation in Phase 2 will conduct two (2) land -based soil borings (one at each bridge abutment) to 130 ft. depth to supplement the research obtained in Phase 1. The proposed soil exploration plan is limited to land -based borings to eliminate costly overwater borings and work -barge related activities and costs. Therefore, the geotechnical scope of services will rely heavily on data from other nearby projects (for all overwater bridge pier and foundation locations). The City is advised that this presents a risk to the project as it is typical protocol to locate borings at proposed bridge pier locations and this may be required 17 as a future construction phase investigation and separate from the design phase and design contract. Borings will be drilled sufficiently into the lower limestone for evaluation of deep foundation alternatives. In addition to SPT sampling, 20 ft of rock coring will be conducted in each landbased boring location between the depths of 40 and 60 ft. The rock coring will be accomplished in an offset borehole at the targeted depths identified above. Three (3) undisturbed Shelby tube samples will be obtained if soft compressible materials are encountered in the upper 20 ft of the soil profile. Undisturbed sampling will be beneficial to develop parameters for design of modifications of the existing seawall, if required as part of this project. Rock coring is necessary for determining engineering parameters for design of drilled foundation elements and to conduct refined analysis per FDOT requirements specific to bearing of driven deep foundation elements underlain by weaker subsurface materials. Borings will be grouted upon completion and will be patched at the surface to match existing materials (concrete, asphalt). Select soil and rock samples collected during the field investigation will be returned to the laboratory for specialty testing. The final lab testing program will be determined based on the conditions encountered and the desired foundation type. The Sunshine State One Call (811) notification will be contacted prior to the start of the drilling. A private utility locate will also be performed for the land -based borings prior to the drilling being performed. Coordination with the Perez Art Museum Miami (PAMM) and Genting Property will be required to access the boring locations. Assistance will be provided by the City in contacting the property owners and coordinating this effort. Following completion of the final field investigation and lab testing, a final geotechnical investigation report will be prepared with final design recommendations for support of the proposed structure, renovation of the existing seawall (if required), and various geotechnical related aspects of the proposed construction. Recommendations will be provided based on FDOT guidance and standards. • NEPA Processing The Phase 2 design is scoped to be processed as a Categorical Exclusion Type 1. The following language is excerpted from the FDOT PD&E Manual. For Type 1 CEs, coordination with appropriate resource agency personnel may need to take place (such as coordination on historic resources, wetlands, listed species) in order to verify the finding that there is no potential to significantly impact certain environmental resources. Coordination and documentation are also important because it may affect environmental permitting. Coordination with FDOT OEM may also be required in order to make findings under concurrent laws [such as the ESA and Section 4(f)] prior to finalizing the COA Determination. A public hearing is typically not required for Type 1 CEs unless the project is considered a major transportation improvement by Section 339.155(5)(b), F.S. In addition, if the District determines that a sensitive community issue exists on or near the proposed project, a Community Awareness Memorandum (CAM) may be prepared recommending appropriate public involvement activities. Documentation consists of an evaluation checklist prepared IN after environmental analysis has been completed. This checklist is only prepared using FDOT SWEPT. This is typically completed at the end of the Plans, Specifications, and Estimates (PS&E) or 100% plans. The CE number/activity type from either 23 CFR § 771.117(c) or 23 CFR § 771117(d) is selected at the beginning of the form. For projects that may fall under two or more actions, the CE designation that is most appropriate is designated. Documentation of analysis, coordination, and results are uploaded to SWEPT for the project file. This documentation should include the results of desktop and/or field review, agency consultation, and any supporting documents and/or technical reports required to substantiate the responses on the checklist. Some of the questions may require consultation with OEM prior to completion by the District. It is important to document that the project will not have significant impacts and that environmental issues have been addressed. Approval of the Type 1 Categorical Exclusion Checklist will be granted by the District Environmental Manager or designee using SWEPT. Once the final Type 1 Categorical Exclusion Checklist is completed in SWEPT, the District Environmental Office will complete and provide the date of the determination on the Status of Environmental Certification for Federal Project. This form is required as part of the contract documents for federal -aid construction projects and is used when submitting all projects, including LAP projects, for approval to the Federal Aid Office. LAP agencies cannot make COA Determinations or certify projects for advancement. LAP agencies do not have signature authority for environmental certifications; therefore, The Status of Environmental Certification for Federal Project should be signed by appropriate FDOT personnel as noted on the form. The NEPA Processing will consist of Public Involvement, Engineering Analysis & Reports, Environmental Analysis & Reports, and the preparation of the Environmental Document. a. Public Involvement Formal Public Involvement required for the NEPA documentation of a Categorical Exclusion Type 1 is not required. All Public Involvement activities are outside this scope of services. b. Engineering Analysis & Reports Engineering analyses conducted during Phase 1 for the Feasibility Study will be compiled to support the required documentation in the Environmental Report. c. Environmental Analysis & Reports 1) Sociocultural Effects Sociocultural effects of the proposed link will be evaluated and documented. Six major issues to be considered are: Social, Economic, Land Use Changes, Mobility, Aesthetic Effects, and Relocation Potential. 2) Cultural Resources A Cultural Resources Assessment Survey (CRAS) will be prepared to identify and document cultural resources (archaeological and historic) identified within the defined Area of Potential Effect (APE). Two previously recorded resources are noted 19 within the Project Area. They are the MacArthur Causeway, which is ineligible for National Register, and the Venetian Causeway. The overall Venetian Causeway, including the bridges, is eligible for the National Register. No historic parcels are located within 100 feet of the Study area and no known archaeological sites are located within 100 feet. Following the CRAS, effects will be evaluated if needed, as part of the Section 106 process, including agency consultation and coordination with the local municipalities. If a determination of effects on any historic or archaeological resources is found, any required reports, case studies or Memorandum of Agreements are not included in the scope of services. The project is adjacent to Section 4(f) property, Maurice Ferre Park. No 4(f) involvement is included in this scope of services beyond identifying the 4(f) property when preparing the Categorical Exclusion Type 1 Checklist. Further documentation, analysis, or a Section 4(f) de minimis letter will require additional services. 3) Natural Resources A reconnaissance -level qualitative marine resource survey will be conducted to identify potential seagrasses, corals, or any other marine resource of significance within the limits described for the bathymetric survey. The purpose of the survey will be to identify potential seagrasses, hardbottom and corals or any other marine resource of significance within the proposed Project boundaries, which could be directly or indirectly impacted and should be considered in the design of the Baywalk. The survey will be conducted by experienced marine biologists who will document the extent, species, and general density of corals, seagrass, sponges, macroalgae, and other important marine organisms observed within the survey area. Data (e.g., species, percent coverage, and location of any marine resources observed) will be collected on prepared underwater paper; GPS coordinates will be collected when important marine resources such as corals and seagrass are observed, and representative photographs will be taken. A field observation report will be prepared that summarizes the data collected and will include photographs and a base map of resources. As the Project site is located within Johnson's Seagrass (Halophila johnsonii) Critical Habitat, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) recommendations for sampling Halophila johnsonii will be followed. Following Owner selection of a concept, a permit -level quantitative marine resource survey conducted between June 1st and September 30th, will be required to accompany environmental permit applications. The scope for the permit -level survey is not included in this Study and will be developed with the Scope of the Design Phase. No special waste is anticipated within the Study limits and a PESA is not included in the scope of services. Wetland impacts are not anticipated, and wetland mitigation is not included in the scope of services. Regulatory due diligence will be performed to consider environmental permitting constraints, past permit history, ownership research, listed species, essential fish 20 habitat, water quality, the Manatee Protection Plan, and other environmental documents. Three (3) preliminary consultation meetings with the regulatory agencies, specifically the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), and the Miami- Dade County Division of Environmental Resources Management (DERM) are anticipated. These meetings will present the three (3) concepts under consideration for final selection. 4) Noise and Vibration No investigation or analysis of noise or vibrations is included in the scope of services. 5) Air Quality No investigation or analysis of air quality is included in the scope of services. 6) Cumulative Effects Evaluation The Categorical Exclusion Type 1 assumes no impacts to resources and therefore no cumulative effects evaluation is included in this scope of services. • Environmental Document The Project is anticipated to be processed as a Categorical Exclusion Type 1. A Type 1 Categorical Exclusion Checklist will be completed. Supporting information will be included consisting of planning consistency documentation and agency correspondence containing concurrence or findings. The documentation will be submitted to FDOT. • Right of Way The City has a lease agreement with FDOT for the use of submerged lands within the MacArthur Causeway Right -of -Way. No additional Right -of -Way is anticipated for the project. Coordination with FDOT will be initiated for review of project compliance with the lease agreement. Consultant will delineate areas required for easements across the Genting property for construction access and future maintenance access as required. Preparation or negotiation of any agreements required for access or maintenance exceed the scope of this agreement. • Environmental Permitting a. DERM Class I Coastal Construction Permit Application & Processing: Consultant will prepare and process a Miami -Dade County Division of Environmental Resources Management (DERM) Short Form or Standard Form Class I Coastal Construction Permit Application, requesting authorization of the proposed Project pursuant to Chapter 24 of the Miami -Dade County Code. It is anticipated that the Project may have to be approved by the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) and the Shoreline Development Review Committee (SDRC). Consultant will maintain contact with DERM staff to review plans and provide additional information as it relates to DERM Class 1 permit processing, BCC and SDRC. The City will provide signed application forms from the upland and submerged landowners, mitigation contributions, and application and permit fees in amounts to be determined based on the estimated 21 construction cost. Structural and Zoning approvals as required by DERM will be provided by the City. b. SWERP Individual Permit: Consultant will prepare and process a Statewide Environmental Resource Permit (SWERP) Application with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), requesting authorization of the proposed Project pursuant to Chapter 62-330, F.A.C. Consultant will maintain contact with FDEP to review plans and provide additional information. The City will provide Consultant with a signed application form and aprocessing fee (estimated at $420-$1500). This scope assumes that the Project will fall within submerged lands deeded to the City of Miami via TIITF Deed No. 19447 for municipal purposes and therefore proprietary authorization will not be required. c. USACE Application & Processing: Consultant will prepare and process a Department of the Army Application through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) requesting authorization of the proposed Project. Consultant will maintain contact with the USACE staff to review plans and provide additional information (e.g., Section 7 or JaxBO checklists). The City will provide Consultant with a signed application form. d. FDOT Coordination: The Project is occurring within the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Right of Way (ROW); and therefore, it is anticipated that coordination and negotiations with FDOT will be required. Consultant will coordinate with the different FDOT departments for a letter of no objection for the proposed Proj ect. e. Mitigation (if required): If marine resources are present and not able to be avoided, the preparation of mitigation calculations and development of a mitigation plan suitable to offset impacts to marine resources will require additional services. This process typically takes significant negotiation with the respective agencies and multiple iterations. It is anticipated that the Project permits will include, but will not be limited to, the specific permit conditions as follows: 1) turbidity shall not exceed 0 NTUs during construction; 2) the selected contractor shall adhere to the Standard Manatee Conditions for In -Water Work; and 3) Endangered Species Act compliance during construction. • Utility Coordination Utility coordination in Phase 2 is limited to sending final Construction Documents to utility agencies identified to have facilities within the project limits. Resolution of utility conflicts or coordination of relocation of utilities exceeds the scope of this proposal. • Schematic Design (10%) and Design Development (40%) The scope of services is based upon the design of the "vanilla bridge" described in the Feasibility Study section. The bridge is assumed to be utilitarian with minor aesthetic enhancements. The alignment of the bridge is assumed to spring from the existing seawall 22 south of the proposed Beach Corridor bridge structure and extend approximately 175 feet into the Biscayne Bay. The alignment will continue under the proposed Beach Corridor bridge and the existing I-395 bridges for a length approximating 200 feet. The alignment will then return back 175 feet to the existing seawall immediately north of the I-395 westbound bridge. Only minor civil work is anticipated to restore the areas disturbed by construction of the bridge end bents at the face of the existing seawall. Drainage work is limited to scuppers or inlets on the bridge structure that drain directly into Biscayne Bay. No aesthetic lighting, illumination, or landscaping are included in the scope of services. Formal submittal of design documents will be made at the Schematic Design and Design Development milestones for review by the City. Review comments will be resolved and reflected in the subsequent milestone submittal. The following items will be addressed in the submittals: a. Civil/Drainage/Utilities The Consultant will perform drainage analysis to determine size and spacing of scuppers or inlets to drain the bridge deck directly into Biscayne Bay. No piping of drain lines is included in the scope of services. No encroachment on the existing floodplain is anticipated and any required compensation analysis is beyond the scope of this proposal. The Consultant will prepare a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan and erosion control measures limited to the activities to construct the bridge end bents. b. ADA Accessibility The bridge profile will comply with all ADA requirements. No segments off the proposed bridge will be evaluated for ADA accessibility. c. Structural/Bridge: The Consultant shall prepare a Bridge Development Report (BDR) for the Schematic Design Submittal. This task includes evaluating various bridge concepts and estimating bridge limits, span lengths, vertical and horizontal clearance requirements, and bent locations. The proposed bridge structure will not encroach upon any navigation channels and ship impact will not be evaluated. Superstructure type, span lengths and arrangements will be evaluated for structural performance, environmental impact, initial cost, and future maintenance costs. It is assumed for this proposal that medium span concrete girders will be the selected superstructure alternative. Foundation and Substructure Alternatives will be evaluated for structural performance, initial cost, and future maintenance costs. It is assumed for this proposal that in -water foundations and abutments will consist of pile bents comprised of driven concrete piles with cast -in -place concrete caps. 23 Deck System Alternatives such as concrete slab, wood decking, composite decking, open grating, and structural glass will be evaluated for structural performance, environmental impact, initial cost, and future maintenance costs. It is assumed for this proposal that concrete slab decking will be selected. Aesthetics of all structural elements will be evaluated in coordination with the overall architectural design. All structural elements will be evaluated for constructability requirements. The bridge structure will not be built utilizing staged construction and will not be evaluated accordingly. It is assumed that the proposed bridge deck elevation at the abutment south of the MacArthur Causeway will match the existing grade. No retaining walls are anticipated at the existing seawall. Modifications to the existing seawall to accommodate the proposed abutments and superstructure will be evaluated. Wingwall options will be evaluated for the abutment north of the MacArthur Causeway on the Genting property. It is anticipated that the bridge deck elevation at this abutment will be higher than the existing grade on the Genting property. Options will consider proposed configurations for the Baywalk along the Genting property being designed by others and a temporary transition to the Genting property if the Baywalk is not constructed in this area prior to this project. Major quantities of structural elements and their components will be estimated to facilitate an Opinion of Probable Cost. Unit prices will reflect the inclusion of miscellaneous items that are not quantified at the Schematic Design milestone. The BDR Report will summarize the selection of structural elements and depict the proposed bridge and structures layout with a General Plan & Elevation and deck cross -section. Exhibits will also be included to depict details unique to the proposed structure. An Opinion of Probable Cost based upon quantities and unit prices will be included. For the Design Development Submittal, the Consultant will further develop the structural design and submit a preliminary set of Construction Documents. All anticipated drawings for the Final CDs will be included in the submittal with an aggregate level of completion of 40%. Quantities, unit prices, and the Opinion of Probable Cost will be updated to reflect the further developed design. d. Marine Structural Engineering The marine structural components of the proposed bridge and adjacent bulkhead connection will be developed. The marine engineering design effort will be in concert with the architect(s), bridge designer and other Project team members. The design components will be based on the selected conceptual design developed by the Project team. The conceptual design will be further refined based on the results of the coastal engineering analyses, geotechnical investigations, and regulatory constraints. In addition, consideration will be given to construction access constraints, sequencing, and cost. 24 Typical sections and details will be developed illustrating the proposed layout, elevations, and proposed materials. The structural components are anticipated to include reinforced concrete elements and other materials suitable for the marine environment, although innovative materials with increased resilience will be explored. Future adaptation considerations will be explored considering the design life of the bridge and changes in water levels. The projections provided by the Miami -Dade County Office of Resiliency and/or the Unified Sea Level Rise Projections published by the Southeast Florida Regional Compact on Climate Change will be utilized. The marine structure elements will be designed for the live loads associated with the proposed use wave/hydraulic/scour design conditions. Piling type and size will be developed based on the geotechnical data obtained from available sources in Phase 1. Both desktop methods and computer software will be utilized in the structural analysis of the proposed structures based on the load configurations. e. Architecture The primary working design model from the Feasibility Study will be furthered developed in coordination with the other design disciplines. A final schematic design will be prepared for presentation including the following: ■ Color Site Plan ■ Explanatory Diagrams (4 total) o Programming o Circulation o Contextual Views ■ Color Elevations ■ Color Sections ■ Rendered Perspectives A limited set of drawings will be prepared for the Schematic Design ■ Cover Sheet ■ Standard Bridge Notes ■ Longitudinal Section ■ Transverse Sections (Typical per condition) ■ Abutment Drawings ■ Architectural bridge plan ■ Enlarged Bridge Plans as required ■ East Elevations (full, north -south) ■ West Elevations (full, north -south) ■ Preliminary Railing Elevations Sustainable and local materials will be researched for use in the bridge design. The IBC (International Building Code) will be researched for code review and AASHTO will be researched for design requirements, loading requirements and safety requirements. f. Landscape Architecture: No landscaping is anticipated in the design phase. All landscape design exceeds the scope of services. g. Lighting 25 No lighting for illumination or aesthetics are anticipated in the design phase. All lighting design exceeds the scope of services. • Final Design (90% submittal and 100% submittal) Final design will entail preparation of 90%, and final signed and sealed 100% Construction Documents (CDs). The 90% submittal will reflect resolution of all comments received during review of the Design Development (40%) submittal. The 100% CDs submittal will reflect the resolution of all comments received during review of the 90% submittal. The 100% CDs will be signed and sealed and for use in procurement of the Project. The following items will be addressed in the submittals: a. Civil/Drainage/Utilities Final horizontal and vertical alignments will be established with proper ties for reestablishment in the field during construction. Plans and details for erosion control, construction access control, and temporary signing will also be prepared. b. ADA Accessibility Final Plans, sections, and details will be prepared to comply with all ADA accessibility requirements. c. Structural/Bridge: The Consultant shall perform structural analysis and detailing to facilitate preparation of plans for the Baywalk Pedestrian/Bikeway bridge addressing the following elements. 1) General Layout Design and Plans The overall bridge final geometry shall be established. The analysis of expansion/contraction shall be performed, and details developed to accommodate or resist the predicted movements. The information will be conveyed on the General Plan and Elevation drawing. Construction Staging will not be addressed as it is assumed the bridge will be constructed in one stage. With only occasional emergency or maintenance vehicle usage, the structure will not require approach slabs and therefore will not be addressed. Miscellaneous details depicting general aspects of the architectural and aesthetic design elements will be depicted. 2) South End Bent Design and Plans The end bent (abutment) geometry will be established. Wingwalls are not anticipated at the end bent south of the MacArthur Causeway as the proposed bridge deck will match the existing grade elevations. Modifications to the existing tieback seawall will be designed and detailed to accommodate the new end bent and the new superstructure. Structural analysis will be documented for all the end bent components. End bents will be depicted in Plan & Elevation with sufficient sections and details to depict all dimensions, reinforcing steel and miscellaneous details including sawcuts and modifications to the existing seawall. Concrete quantities, reinforcing steel quantities and other miscellaneous quantities will be tabulated. 3) North End Bent Design and Plans 26 The end bent (abutment) geometry will be established. Wingwalls are anticipated at the end bent north of the MacArthur Causeway as the proposed bridge deck will be higher than the existing grade elevations on the Genting property. Dependent upon the status of new construction of the Baywalk along the Genting property, the wingwalls will be designed for temporary earth retention until the Baywalk is completed or the wingwalls will be modified as required to interface with the new Baywalk. Structural analysis will be documented for all the end bent components. End bents and wingwalls will be depicted in Plan & Elevation with sufficient sections and details to depict all dimensions, reinforcing steel and miscellaneous details. Concrete quantities, reinforcing steel quantities and other miscellaneous quantities will be tabulated. 4) Intermediate Bent Design and Plans Like the end bents, the geometry of the intermediate bents (piers) will be established. Structural analysis will be documented for all the intermediate bents and their components. Intermediate bents will be depicted in Plan & Elevation with sufficient sections and details to depict all dimensions, reinforcing steel and miscellaneous details. Concrete quantities, reinforcing steel quantities and other miscellaneous quantities will be tabulated. The locations of intermediate bents may be influenced by the locations of marine resources and preclude the use of repetitive span lengths. Variable span lengths will result in variable loading conditions and will make each intermediate bent design unique. 5) Miscellaneous Substructure Design and Plans A foundation layout will be provided indicating the proposed location of all foundations tied to a project baseline. Number, location, and any required batter of piles will be depicted. Each foundation design may be unique due to the inability to utilize unform superstructure span lengths or where foundations must span or cantilever over environmentally sensitive areas. 6) Superstructure Deck Design and Plans The geometry of the superstructure deck design will be established. Structural analysis will document the structural performance of the deck and any required diaphragms. Structural analysis will also verify the anchorage of railings and all architectural treatments. A Plan drawing and sections will be provided depicting all dimensions. Details depicting anchorages of railings, aesthetic treatments, and drainage scuppers will be provided. Deck waterproofing is not anticipated and if required will require additional services. Deck drainage scuppers are anticipated to drain directly into Biscayne Bay. If chases are required to accommodate stormwater drainage piping or utility raceways, additional services will be required. Finish grade elevations will be provided to facilitate deck construction and finishing. Concrete quantities, reinforcing steel quantities and other miscellaneous quantities will be tabulated. 7) Simple Span Concrete Girder Design 27 For this proposal it assumed that simple span prestressed girders will be utilized. The geometry will be depicted on a Framing Plan including girder elevations. 8) Bearings Bearing pads and bearing plates will be design and detailed. d. Marine Structural Engineering Consultant will prepare 90%, and 100% final signed and sealed Construction Documents. Sections and details will be prepared illustrating the design components and proposed materials. Specifications and details for material characteristics along with reinforcement details will be developed for various components as part of the design process. The construction plans will be prepared in CAD format using industry standards for this type of construction. Signed and sealed calculations for the coastal and marine design components will be prepared for building permit processing as appropriate. It is anticipated technical specifications will be incorporated into the design drawings. e. Architecture: Final Architectural Plans will be prepared to supplement the structural Plans where additional architectural detail is required. The following list of drawings are anticipated for architectural plans: a. Standard Architectural Notes b. Code Summary c. General Architectural Plan(s) d. Elevations (north/south/east/west as required) e. Longitudinal Section(s) f. Transverse Sections (per condition as required) g. Enlarged Plans (as required) h. Enlarged Sections (as required) i. Enlarged Elevations/Details j . Plan Details k. Section Details 1. Pier/Abutment Elevations/Details (Architectural Treatment Only) m. Walkway Decking Plans/Details n. Railing Plans o. Railing Elevations/Details f. Landscape Architecture No landscaping is anticipated in the design phase. All landscape design exceeds the scope of services. g. Lighting No lighting for illumination or aesthetics are anticipated in the design phase. All lighting design exceeds the scope of services. h. Preparation of Submittals, resolution of 40% and 90% review comments All milestone submittals will be documented and distributed for review via electronic distribution. Review comments from the City will be tabulated with responses and resolution of the comments. • Technical Specifications Construction Documents will be prepared utilizing the FDOT Standard Specifications. Special Provisions for non-standard items will be prepared in the format of the FDOT Standard Specifications. It is anticipated that several architectural items will require rewriting of specifications from MasterSpec for conversion to FDOT format. • Project Schedule The project schedule developed in Phase 1 will be further refined identifying Design submittals, review meetings, and Permit applications and approvals. The schedule will be maintained and updated on a regular basis. • Opinion of Probable Cost The Opinion of Probable Cost for the selected alternate will be updated as the design process progresses. Formal presentation of the Opinion of Probable Cost will be included at each milestone submittal. • Administration and Management As described in Phase 1, the administration and management of the project will carry forward into Phase 2. Technical management and coordination of the project will be performed using various management tools and production of related administrative reports to be used for tracking, invoicing, and management of subconsultants. • Quality Assurance and Quality Control As described in Phase 1, the Quality Assurance and Quality Control of the project will carry forward into Phase 2. Quality Assurance and Quality Control will be performed by Consultant and its subconsultants to provide a work product that meets the Standard of Care of the Industry. BID & AWARD Consultant will assist the City during the procurement phase of the construction contract. Responses will be prepared to all Requests for Information (RFI). Issuance of addenda is not anticipated and will require additional services if addenda are due to changes made by the City. Consultant will review bid tabulations provided by the City to identify any anomalies in the unit prices and provide recommendations to the City regarding award. CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION SUPPORT During construction Consultant will review structural beam, structural bearing, and bridge railing shop drawings. All other shop drawings and product submittals will be reviewed by the City's CEI Consultant. Consultant will provide responses to field generated RFIs. Site visits during construction and attendance at construction progress meetings will require additional services. II. SUB -CONSULTANTS he below listed Sub -Consultants will assist in the performance or the vvork. Sub -Consultant Name Specialty or Expertise Inform Studios I Iconic Architecture and Ped Bridges 29 Cummins Cederberg Environmental, Coastal Engineering and Resiliency ArgGeo Landscape Architecture Langan Engineering & Environmental Services Geotech, Survey and Mapping Janus Research Archaeologic and Historic PeDelta I Structures Hazen & Sawyer I Cost Estimating III. PHASE 1 & 2 - CONCEPT 1 SCHEDULE OF WORK — TIME OF PERFORMANCE Consultant shall submit the Deliverables and perform the Work as depicted in the tables below. (additional Daaes may be added as needed) SCHEDULE OF DELIVERABLES Task, Sub -task, or Activity ID # Major Task, Sub -Task, Activity, or Deliverable Duration (specify weeks or calendar days) Delivery Date* (cumulative weeks, or calendar days) Phase 1 Concept Design — 3 Bridge Concepts 180 Cal Days NTP + 180 Phase 2 Schematic Design (10%) 60 NTP +240 Design Development (40%) 90 NTP +330 Construction Documents (90%) 60 NTP+390 Construction Documents (100%) 60 NTP + 450 Bid &Award 60 NTP + 510 Construction Administration 365 NTP + 875 *An updated schedule, indicating actual delivery dates, based on the above durations, will be provided to the City upon receipt of the NTP. *Schedule to be reassessed in the event Concepts 2 or 3 are chosen V. COMPENSATION Consultant shall perform the Work detailed in this Proposal for a Total lump sum fee of dollars and cents ( ). The City shall not be liable for any fee, cost, expense or reimbursable expense or other compensation beyond this amount. Said fee includes an allowance for Reimbursable Expenses required in connection with the Work, which shall not exceed Said Reimbursable Expenses shall be used in accordance with the Agreement Provisions and shall conform to the limitations of Florida Statutes § 112.061. SUMMARY OF COMPENSATION* Task, Subtask, or Activity ID # Major Task Name and/or Activity Description Fee Amount Fee Basis Phase 1 1 Phase 1 — Concepts Development 501,268.96 Lump Sum Phase 2 Concept 1 - Connector 1 Phase 2 — Schematic Design / PD&E 144,757.30 Lump Sum 2 Phase 2 — Detailed Design 663,971.13 Lump Sum 3 Phase 2 — Bid & Award 8,286.75 Lump Sum 4 Phase 2 — Construction Administration 53,803.88 Lump Sum Subtotal Phase 2 — Concept 1 $ 870,819.06 Allowance for Reimbursable Expenses 24,309.33 TOTAL 1,396,397.35 Lump Sum *Note: At the end of Phase I, the EXP team will 30 present to the Miami DDA *Note: Compensation should match the Task, Activities, and/or Deliverables identified. Phase 2 compensation for concepts 2 & 3 replace Phase 2 compensation for concept 1 Allowance Phase 2 Concept 2 — Enhanced Connector/ Destination Task, Subtask, or Activity ID # Major Task Name and/or Activity Description Fee Amount Fee Basis Phase 2 Concept 2 — Enhanced Connector / Destination 1 Phase 2 — Schematic Design / PD&E 406,761.31 Lump Sum 2 Phase 2 — Detailed Design 1,865,728.13 Lump Sum 3 Phase 2 — Bid & Award 23,285.38 Lump Sum 4 Phase 2 — Construction Administration 151,186.41 Lump Sum Subtotal Phase 2 — Concept 2 2,446,961.23 Allowance for Reimbursable Expenses 35,000.00 TOTAL $2,481,961.23 Lump Sum Allowance Phase 2 Concept 3 — Iconic Destination Task, Subtask, or Activity ID # Major Task Name and/or Activity Description Fee Amount Fee Basis Phase 2 Concept 3 — Iconic Destination 1 Phase 2 — Schematic Design / PD&E 572,105.00 Lump Sum 2 Phase 2 — Detailed Design 2,624,124.70 Lump Sum 3 Phase 2 — Bid & Award 32,750.62 Lump Sum 4 Phase 2 — Construction Administration 212,641.91 Lump Sum Subtotal Phase 2 — Concept 3 $ 3,441,622.23 Allowance for Reimbursable Expenses 45,000.00 TOTAL $3,486,622.23 1 Lump Sum 31 VI. ADDITIONAL SERVICES The City may establish an allowance for additional services requested by the City and for unforeseen circumstances, which shall be utilized at the sole discretion of the City. VII. DATA PROVIDED BY CITY The following information or documents are to be provided by the City: VIII. PROJECT MANAGER CONSULTANT'S Project Manager for this ork Order assignment will be Byron Danley. Submitted by: Kyle Henry EXP U.S. Services, Inc. Reviewed and approved in con recommended by: Keith NJ of ct Manage/ Office of Capi Improvements 30