HomeMy WebLinkAboutOMNI-CRA-R-03-0006OMNI/CRA ITEM 15
RESOLUTION NO. 0 3- ® 6.
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
OMNI COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ("CRA")
SELECTING, ACCEPTING AND APPOINTING
ZYSCOVICH, INC. TO AMEND THE 1986 OMNI
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN; AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT, IN A FORM
ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, WITH
ZYSCOVICH, INC. AND RETURN FOR APPROVAL OF
THE AGREEMENT, BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, AT
THE NEXT SCHEDULED BOARD MEETING.
WHEREAS, the CRA is responsible for effectuating the
community redevelopment plan within the community redevelopment
area, in accordance with the Community Redevelopment Act of 1969
("Act") and
WHEREAS, the CRA has determined that it is necessary to
amend its redevelopment plan, dated 1986 and modified 1987, to
insure compliance with Sections 163.346, 163.360(7) and (8), and
163.361, Florida Statutes, and legislative enactments of the
governing bodies of Miami -Dade County, the City of Miami, and
the CRA.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF
THE OMNI COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF MIAMI,
FLORIDA:
MIN[/CRA
03- 06 J
s 0
Section 1. The recitals and findings contained in the
Preamble to this Resolution are incorporated herein as if fully
set forth in this Section.
Section 2. The Board of Directors hereby selects,
accepts and appoints Zyscovich, Inc. to amend the 1986 Omni
Redevelopment Plan.
Section 3. The Executive Director is authorized tc
execute an agreement, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney,
with Zyscovich, Inc. and return for approval of the agreement,
by the Board of Directors, at the next scheduled board meeting.
Section 4. This Resolution shall become effective
immediately upon its adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 27th da of January, 2003.
ARTHUR E. TEELE, JR., CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
9 F
PR SCILLA A. THOMPSON
CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS ORM AND CORRECTNESS:
DRO VILARELLO
C ATTORNEY
OMNI/CRA R-03-06:ELF
Page 2 of 2
®NM/CRA
03- 06
�11
9
•
CITY OF MIAN,lI_ FLORIDA
INTER -OFFICE 11\1ENWIZ1NDUM
To: Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. and
Members of the CRA Board
From: �FraZRollason
CRA Executive Director
ITEM 15
Date: January 13, 200 File:
Stit-ject: Selection of an Urban Planning
& Design Firm to amend the
1986 Omni Redevelopment
Plan
Rcfereiices:
Eiiclosures: Resolution
RECOMMENDATION:
It is respectfully recommended that the CRA Board of Directors adopt the attached resolution
accepting as the qualified respondent to the Omni CRA's solicitation for
an Urban Design and Planning Firm to Amend the 1986 Omni Redevelopment Plan; Further
authorizing CRA General Counsel and the CRA Executive Director to negotiate a contract with
said firm for approval by the CRA Board of Directors at its next scheduled Board meeting.
JUSTIFICATION:
On November 7, 2002, the Omni CRA, published a notice, in newspapers of general circulation,
requesting letters of interest from Urban Planning and Design Firms for the Amendment of the
1986 Omni Area Redevelopment Plan. Miami Dade County, as governing body of the Omni
CRA mandated that both the SEOPW and Omni Redevelopment Plans, dated 1982 and 1986
respectively, were outdated, and requested that both plans be updated and amended consistent
with the provisions of the Community Redevelopment Act of 1969.
The deadline for receipt of responses from interested firms was December 10, 2002 at 5:00 pm.
The CRA received responses from nine firms, seven operating locally throughout South Florida,
and two firms operating out of Pennsylvania. A twelve member selection committee (9 voting, 3
non -voting) reviewed the responses received from the firms and conducted interview sessions
with each firm during the month of January, 2003. Their ranking of the nine firms were
submitted to the Executive Director for review and final recommendation to the CRA Board.
Page 1 of 3 O1MNI/CRA
03- 006
0
Page 1 of 1
�-7cY7
Rollason, Frank
From: JORGEESPINEL@cs.com
Sent: Monday, January 27, 2003 11:47 AM
To: frollason@ci.miami.fl.us; asmith@ci.miami.fl.us; sgutierrez@ci.miami.fl.us
Subject: TODAY'S CRA MEETING
To give you a better printout, I am adjoining two documents I sent earlier by fax. If Mr. Rollason does't get this e-
mail, could you please print the copies I have asked for in the memo to pass out and have them ready for today's
CRA meeting. If there is any problem, please call me at 305 530-1300 before 1:00 pm. Thank you.
CWU/CRA
03- 006
1 /27/2003
® •
URBAN OWATCH
Design Research Center
Memo
From: Jorge Espinel, Urban Watch
To: Frank Rollason, CRA
Re: Selection of Urban Planning Firm for Omni Master plan
Date: January 26, 2003
CC: The Miami Herald, Miami Today, New Times
Thank you very much for sending me the material pertinent to the selection of the urban planning firm for Omni Mas-
ter plan. In our phone conversation you told me I could submit a statement to be read at the January 27, CRA meet-
ing. Could you please read the following statement and hand out copies of the adjoining article 'to members of the
CRA, the hiring committee and the firms responding to the RFP. Thank you.
To. the members of the CRA:
1. In developing a master plan for an area, the most critical initial steps in the process are: a) creating a committee to
examine how this process should be addressed, and b) determining who should be on the committee specifically re-
sponsible for selecting professionals to carryout the work. Opening the process to the public and providing an oppor-
tunity to participate, is its most important validating factor. This was done at Bicentennial Park, and this is why a
consensus was reached on the Bicentennial Park Charrette. .
2. Despite the arguments that decision -making in Miami is done in the "sunshine", for years, too many planning deci-
sions have been made behind close doors. People have been appointed to hiring committees according to bureaucratic
and political criteria, not necessarily on the basis of their capacity to discern the issues. The result has been a waste of
time and energy and a substantial loss of trust in our public officials. Miami's shelves are filled with studies that have
led no -where by firms with more bureaucratic know-how than creativity.
3. Materials furnished by Mr. Rollason of the CRA concerning the selection of urban planning firm to update the
Omni master plan, provide no evidence to show that the public was adequately informed about this issue, or to dem-
onstrate that an effort was made to invite members of the Omni area to participate in the process. Concerning the ap-
pointment of members to the selection committee, there are no criteria to show how this was done. Apparently, they
were appointed at the pleasure of CRA officials. While the list of appointees includes a member of the Omni Advi-
sory Board, hence; one might surmise this person was chosen as a representative of the Omni community, as a Board
member of the Omni Advisory Board, I can attest to the fact that this appointment was never brought before our
group for consideration.
4. Given the importance and complex ramifications of a new Omni Plan, the process by which determinations are
made on this issue must be impeccable from the very beginning. There should not be any room for doubt about its
legitimacy. The Omni is in a dire situation concerning I-395 precisely because FDOT failed to involve the commu-
nity at the beginning of the process. Hundreds of thousands of dollars and precious time has been wasted because
stakeholders have rejected FDOT's plan. No one in the Omni area can afford another unproductive and divisive dis-
pute over something that can be resolved with relative ease, in a short time.
5. For the above reasons, I respectfully urge the CRA to postpone the decision on the planning consultant for the
Omni area; and to revise the process in accordance with the points noted above. The adjoining article -recently pub-
lished in the Miami Herald: Community has right to decide Omni area's future, expands on these concerns. Thank
you.
®MM / CRA
0a— 008
Community has right to
decide Omniarea's future
BY JORGE ESPINEL
Agreat deal of money has been
spent on studies for the Omni area
that have only benefited their authors.
In a few days, the city of Miami will be
selecting yet another firm to develop
one more master plan for our district.
Since the necessary ground work to
involve residents and stakeholders in
the planning process hasn't been done,
hiring a consultant to decide what's
best for the Omni at this point is noth-
ing short of absurd. What's needed here
is a design charrette.
There are few things as important in
urban planning as getting a community
involved in the process from the very
beginning. Without the active partici-
pation of stakeholders in an area, any
proposed plan for its redevelopment
has little chance of success.
One of the .best ways to' get stake-
holders involved is through,a participa-
tory planning workshop_ known as a
charrette. During the past several years,
many charrettes have been held
throughout Miami -"Dade County at
places such as Overtown, the Design
District, Dadeland, Naranja and Bicen-
tennial Park. There is nothing new
about this concept. Government .lead-
ers know its value. The Omni is a well-
defined community with many resi-
dents actively involved in trying to
improve the area. Why, then, is the city
of Miami hiring, a planning firm, not to
do a charrette, but to develop yet
another master plan for the area with
little community input?
If residents of other communities in
Miami have had a chance to participate
in determining how their neighborhood
should be developed, why should Omni
stakeholders be denied this right? Why
hasn't the city informed everyone in the
Omni area about this new plan of
action? Why haven't representatives of
the community even been invited to
attend consultant selection committee
meetings? The very idea of hiring .a'
planning consultant to make determi-
nations about the Omni area without
first establishing some level of commu
nication with Omni activists is an insult
to the people in the neighborhood who
have spent.years working to improve
the area. How long will it take city of
Miami officials to realize that their top -
down, behind -closed -doors approach to
downtown Miami's revitalization cre-
ates ates unproductive :antagonism and sim-
ply doesn't work?
The best thing the city of Miami can
do at this point is to shelve the whole
idea of hiring a consultant to develop a
new master plan. Instead, the city .
should redirect available funds to orga-
nize a truly comprehensive charrette
one that also addresses the Interstate
395 issue and an immediate plan of
action for improving traffic conditions
and beautifying the area around the
Performing Arts Center. The local com-
munity — not city officials - should
decide who runs the charrette.
Once the charrette is finished, par-
ticipants — not city officials — should
choose the . consultant to develop
detailed plans.
The idea of working with, not at
odds with, a community, has been a key
factor in the revitalization of .cities
throughout the United States. A top -
down approach to urban redevelop-
ment does not work, and is inconsistent
with our democratic system.
Jorge Espinel is an architect based in
Miami.
TUESDAY, JANUARY 21, 2003 www.he0aid.com The Herald
OMNI / CRA
January 27, 2003
Frank Rollason
Executive Director
Omni CRA
300 Biscayne Blvd. Way, Ste 309
Miami, Florida. 33131
Subject: Selection Committee Ranking
Reference: Amendment to the 1986 Omni Redevelopment Plan
Dear Mr. Rollason;
As Vice -Chairperson of the Omni/CRA Selection Committee, 1 am submitting the committee's top .
three ranked UrbMi Planning & Design firms for consideration for the above referenced project. Tn
order of highest rmiked, the comnuttee members selected;
1.7...yscovich
2, RTKI,
3. Civic Design Associates
The Omni/CRA received nine responses from Urban Planning & Design firms, Based upon a legal
opinion by the Assistant City Attorney, the response from Urban Design & Associates (UDA) was
rejected as untimely — their response was received on December 11, 2002 at 9:48 AM. The
deadline was December 1.0, 2002 at 5:00 pm. Miinutes tiom the Interview & Presentation Phase, as
well as copies of the firm's responses will be made available at the City Clerks Office after January
28, 2003,
!y,
X'XiDirector
Avuio, P.L., P.L,.S
of City of Miami CIP Department
Vice -Chairperson
Cc: Jim Villacorta, Assistant City Attorney
OMW/CIA
03— 006
�-A
Zyscovich
THE ZYSCOVICH TEAM MANAGEMENT PLAN
Our team's combined, generous experience provides it a forceful and seasoned
ability to develop the amendment of the 1986 Omni Area Redevelopment Plan
which will be consistent with the City of Miami's Comprehensive Plan and which
will integrate the Omni Redevelopment Area with surrounding development
projects including the Bicentennial Renewal Project, the FEC Corridor renovation
project, the Southeast Overtown/Parkwest Redevelopment Plan, and the Design
District. As urban designers and master planners of the FEC Corridor Plan, we
have worked with many of the agencies required for this project. In addition, we
are particularly familiar with Chapter 163 Article 111 concerning modification
of Community Redevelopment Plans in the Florida State Statutes.
Our approach to planning begins with acquaintance of all stakeholders. As
strong believers in community consensus, we solicit input, listen carefully,
address stakeholders' fears, concerns, and goals, and hold formal meetings to
propose ideas and solutions. Our process is one of analysis: gathering
information, stimulating vision, and encouraging consensus. We then create
concrete proposals that fulfill articulated goals. Our specific expertise in
promoting sustainable urban growth will enable us to recognize and articulate the
diverse and creative potential of the Omni Redevelopment Area.
Together with our consultants, we will also be gathering extensive data from
economic, traffic, and transportation sources as well as geographic analyses of
all properties via the Global Information System. Additionally, we will conduct
research and develop recommendations and presentations according to the
following outline:
TASK I: 1986 OMNI REDEVELOPMENT PLAN EVALUATION
• Identify the Community Redevelopment Agency's goals in rewriting the
1986 CRA Plan
• Review the previous plan & amendments and briefly evaluate its
weaknesses and strengths, and its failures and achievements
• Review the requirements of Chapter 163 Article III concerning modification
of Community Redevelopment Plans in the Florida State Statutes
• Review the City and County Comprehensive Plans which must not conflict
with updated CRA Plan
TASK II: STAKEHOLDERS
• Identify stakeholder groups including Bicentennial Park/FEC Waterfront
Renewal Committee, the City of Miami, the Omni Advisory Board, the
OWU/CitA
00
ZyscoVich
Omni-Parkwest Advisory Board, the Performing Arts Center Trust
Committee and the Omni Development Committee
• Establish meeting schedule
• Invite stakeholders to participate in a reconnaissance tour of the Omni
area
• Clarify the stakeholders' role in the project
TASK III: DEVELOP A PROJECT TIMELINE TO INCLUDE:
• Plan completion date
• Submittal date to the local planning agency for review
• Date for considering the proposed community redevelopment plan (60
days after the local planning agency's review)
• Notification to taxing authorities 15 days before proposed action
• Formal submittal to the governing body and each taxing authority that
levies ad valorem taxes
• Public hearing after sufficient notice is given
• Plan approval
TASK IV: EXISTING CONDITIONS ANALYSIS
• Create an inventory of all buildings including building use, height,
massing, physical condition, and historic structures
• Evaluate the street grid and its relationship to open space and Biscayne
Bay
• Evaluate the homeless population
• Evaluate residential structures
• Analyze the existing boundaries of the redevelopment area
• Develop a photographic library of the neighborhood for future reference
• Examine surveys and photographs including utility maps and elevations
• Conduct a complete zoning and code review
• Review previous plans including plans for the Performing Arts campus,
Miami Herald campus, Miami Transportation Plan
• Review the local' transportation systems and circulation patterns
• Review economic and housing information to understand the market data
• Gather an overview of the local history
TASK V: MARKET ANALYSIS
• Develop Steps for Market Analysis
• Neighborhood Impact Element to evaluate impacts of development on the
low and moderate income population
• Opportunities for boundary changes
TASK VI: STUDY ALTERNATIVE URBAN DESIGN APPROACHES
• Identify civic users and needs
• Identify relationships to other proposed urban planning objectives
ONM / CRA
0.3 - 006
t.A
Zyscovich
• Identify private, public and public/private opportunities
• Study key traffic arteries
• Study overall parking
• Study architectural character of existing core
• Consultation with key stakeholders and staff
TASK VII: REDEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECTS
• Public facilities including parks
• Streetscape
• Civic opportunities
LAND USE
• Mixed -use opportunities
• Potential overlay districts
• Changes in FAR
• Affordable housing
• Zoning and land use changes
COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND SERVICES
• Community policing opportunities and crime prevention
• School improvements and childcare programs
• Public parks and open space
• Utilities including water lines and stormwater
TRANSPORTATION
• Pedestrian connections
• Access to water and parks
• Access to public transit
• Reduce negative impacts of 1-395 overpass and Biscayne Boulevard on
neighborhood cohesion
• General mobility improvements
HISTORIC PRESERVATION
• Historic districts
• Historic landmarks
• Fagade improvements
TASK VIII: BUILD COMMUNITY CONSENSUS
• Establish list of invitees
• Determine format for meetings
• Determine approach to responses
ONM/CRA-
03- 006
Zyscovich
• Publish notices and agendas
• Hold community meetings
• Hold stakeholder meetings
• Define concept revisions based on input
TASK IX: FINAL PLAN AND IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
• Develop final urban design plan
• Create architectural illustrations of design plan and concepts
• Develop more extensively detailed information for use in catalyzing new
public, private and public/private projects identified in the master plan
• Propose streetscape and arterial improvements, including waterways
• Propose transportation, traffic, and parking improvements
• Propose zoning and land use changes
• Develop outline of architectural guidelines specific to individual districts
and areas
• Define imagery appropriate to the character of each district
• Work with other consultants to articulate housing objectives and
opportunities
• Articulate and define market opportunities based on data obtained in
previous phases
• Propose open space and parks
• Conduct other specialty studies as applicable
• Present findings to consensus groups
• Propose implementation plan for phasing strategic projects and
public/private development opportunities including regulatory and capital
requirements
• Draft recommendations requiring public policy approval
• Action steps toward master plan realization including project listings for
consultant selections
• Develop measures to ensure the CRA will be implemented
• Impose necessary restrictions or covenants for land sold or leased for
private use within the CRA
• Provide replacement housing for displaced residents
• Set aside affordable housing for low and moderate income residents
including elderly residents
• Provide a 30-year timeline for project completion
TASK X: FINANCING AND MANAGEMENT
• Cost estimates for recommended projects
• Fundingmechanisms including increment revenues
• Project phasing plan
oNm/CRA
03- 006
THE OWL, Ill I REDEVELO F' M, EIN! T STRI RIC T
COI, Is rJI4�1ITY TIED EVELOP ISENT A OE IN, C'.'
OF THE
CITY OF Ian Ik M I_
REQUEST FOR LETTERS OF IRITEREST FROM,
PLANNING k ND URDJICI RESIGN FIRMS FOR THIE
DIMEIvT OF THE I19T6 OIL NI kREk_. RED'EVELOP'IdENT PLfi-,M
The Omni Redevelopment District Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of
Mianii (the "CRA") is seeking Letters of Interest from professional planning and urban
design firms for the preparation of an amendment to the CRA's 19'06 Omni Area
Redevelopment Plan. The Omni Redevelopment Area is located in Miami north of the
Central Business District and east of the Design District (See Boundary Trap). The
successful firm must demonstrate a proven ability to deliver a master plan that is
consistent with the City of Miami's Comprehensive Plan and which integrates the Omni
Redevelopment Area with surrounding development projects including: the Bicentennial
Renewal Project, the FEC Corridor renovation project, the Southeast Over'townNarkwest
Redevelopment Plan, and the Design District. In addition, the successful firm must have
a proven ability to deliver a master plan that reinforces open space and the public domain,
is human in scale, and which, while focused on the immediate needs of the site, its
surroundings and contest, acknowledges, integrates, and promotes future development of
the Omni Redevelopment Area. In preparing the amendment to the 1986 Omni Area
Redevelopment Plan, the consultant will work with the Bicentennial ParIdl--EC
Waterfront Renewal Committee, the City of Miami, the Omni Advisory Board, the
Omni-Parkwest' Advisory Board, the Performing Arts Center Trust Coininittee and the
newly established Omni Development Committee. The amendment will include design
guidelines and standards for redevelopment as well as proposed zoning overlays for the
OIVINI/CRA
03- 006
area. The tine irante for the prOJect Will not exceed 24 months. .Let'Eers 0-1 Faust
contain:
C The firm's qualifications.
o Resume ofprincipals in the rrn.
E;>ainples of prior relevant work.
Letters of Interest must be received no later than 5:00 pm., December 10, 2002, addressed
to Chelsa Axscotl-Douglas, Policy and Program Development Administrator- of the OnIiii
Redevelopment District Community Redevelopment Agency, at 300 Biscayne Boulevard
Wa-y, Suite 309 (liezzanine Floor), Miami, Florida 33131. It is -recori,rnended that all
interested parties pick up a copy of the 1986 Omni Redevelopment Plan (as aniernded in
1987) for review. Lard copies of the existing redevelopment plan are available in the
office at a cost of $10 each. For further information, please contact Rebekah Lowe at
(305) 579-3324.
The Omni Redevelopment District Community Redevelopment Agency reserves the right
to accept any Letter(s) of Interest deemed to be in the best interest of the agency. to waive
any irregularities in any response, to reject any and all responses, to cancel ibis request at
any time, and/or to re -advertise for Letters of Interest.
Annette Lewis
Acting Executive Director
Adv. No.
®M[NI/CIA
03 -- 006
lE'ROJ�EC:TNAIL,IVIE�AlVI�EaN�D1VIEriNT`TO`'::��IIE�1k986.�O.1VI$Ni �REI):EV'E'L�.:P1VI)E;N.TfiP!I�AN
CD
Cx?
I
Selection Committee Members — Tabulation Sheets
Amendment to the 1986 Omni Redevelopment Plan
Date: Wednesday, January 22-23, 2003
4 , � > .: �, r�. � SELECTION C01VIlVIIT,TEE'1VI>EIVIBE1tS ,
Ref
ID
Name
Title
Department
Initial
A
Ana Gelabert-Sanchez
Planning Director
City of Miami Planning Director
B
Jorge Avino
Deputy Director
City of Miami CIP Department
C
Michael Hardy
'.:Planning Director
Performing Arts Center Trust
D
B n Fin
P t t Di
�,i�izr et
170 01., „t
E
Gary Donn
FDOT, District 6
F
Tibor Hollo
Principal
Florida East Coast Realty
G
Robert Lacle
General Manager
Double Tree Hotel
H
Fred Joseph
Vice -Chairman
Omni Advisory Board (non -voting)
I
Sergio Vasquez
Planner-
Dover Kohl & Partners (non -voting
J
Richard Judy
CRA Consultant (non -voting
No �
=>F_irms/Respondents� t f
?No ,
`�Firms/iZesp�ondents, ,_,�;` �`
l
Zyscovich
5
Arquitectonica
2
Glatting, Jackson, Kercher etc.
6
Jonathan Barnett
3
1 Eran Spiro & Assoc.
7
RTKL
4
Civic Design Associates"
8
HOK Planning Group
e
Author: CMAD
❑ FILENAME \p CADocuments and Settings\charscott\Desktop\ALLFILES\PROJECTS\OMNI REDEVELOPMENT PLAN\tabulation score sheet.doc❑
11
•
�V""
10*: 011
4t
Selection Committee Members — Tabulation Sheets
Amendment to the 1986 Omni Redevelopment Plan
Date: Wednesday, January 22-23, 2003
S E'L ON 0M C -"S
Ref
ID
Name
Title
Department
Initial
A
Ana Gelabert'Sanchez
Planning Director
City of Miami Planning Director
B
Jorge Avino
Deputy Director
City of Miami CIP Department
C
Michael Hardy
Plannina Director
Performing Arts Center Trust
D
Bfyan Fin
Depa.-,mefit Difeeter
Dade County Ce
�eenfflmie and
e,v er.......ru
E
Gary Donn
MOT,* District 6
F
Tibor Hollo
Principal
Florida East Coast Realty
G
Robert Lacle
General Manager
Double Tree Hotel
H
Fred Joseph
Vice -Chairman
Omni Advisory Board (non -voting)
I
Ser io Vas uez
Planner
Dover Kohl & Partners (non -voting
J
Richard Judy
CRA Consultant (non -voting
/R
jfl"'�*;�
N4
iiin
I
Zyscovich
5
2
Glatting, Jackson, Kercher etc.
6
-Arquitectonica
Jonathan Barnett
3
Eran Spiro & Assoc.
7
RTKL
N::::i
Civic Design Associates
8
1 HOK Planning Group
0
uthor: MAD
u
F1 FILENAME \p CADocuments and Settings\charscott\Desktop\ALLFILES\PROJECTS\OMNI REDEVELOPMENT PLAN\tabulation score sheet.docil
0
E
Tuesday, January 21, 2003
REVISED SCHEDULE
Wednesday, January 22, 2003
0
ID #
Firm
Time
ff #
Firm
Time
8
HOK Planning Group
9:00 AM-9:50 AM
4
Civic Design Associates
9i00 AM - 9:50 AM
3
Eran Spiro & Associates
10:00 AM - 10:50 AM
=
5
Arquitectonica
10:00 AM - 10:50 AM
6
Jonathan Barnette
11:00 AM - 11:50 AM
2
Glatting, Jackson, Kercher, Angline
11:00 AM - 11:50 AM
Lopez...
WRAP-UP
12:00 NOON
LUNCH
12:00 PM-12:50 PM
7
RTKL
1:00 PM-1:50 PM
1
Zyscovich
2:00 PM-2:50 PM
4_:
WRAP -DTP & TABULATIONS
3:00 PM
�uthor: CMAD
0 FILENAME \p CADocuments and Settings\cliarscoft\Desk-top\ALLFILES\PROJECTS\OMNI REDEVELOPMENT PLAN\selection scoresheetfinal.docEl
L7
Points
EVAEUA'I IOiv CItI >EItIA v s �'>:. sn
1
2
3
4
5
Very Poor/
Strongly Disagree
Poor
Disagree
Satisfactory
No Opinion
Good
Agree
Excellent
Strongly Agree
WEIGHTS
Cate o .. "s. F...:; :::
X
.a0Aa7gmt4 Score : .
Dx, 1Vga idnu ;Score- :.
Professional Experience
X 5
25
5
Management Plan
X 4
20
4
Communication Skills
X 5
25
5
Knowledge of Area
X 4
20
4
General Overview
X 3
15
3
Listed below are the questions to be posed to each firm. The Committee may ask additional questions related to the firms qualifications
within the time allotted for the interview session until such time has ended.
QUESTIONS:
Professional Experience
1. Please describe the quality, and urban design & planning experience of the sub -consultants, staff and project managers on similar projects.
(Three major components to be addressed -Economics, Transportation, Planning). Please assess firms experience in planning projects
that are district wide/community wide rather than isolated block planning.
2. Please assess firms capability to produce redevelopment plans oriented towards the development of cultural districts.
3. Please describe the collaborative professional relationship between Prime and Sub consultants.
4. The CRA is governed by Florida Statute 163 which provides strict guidelines through which the CRA must operate. Please describe the
experiences of your firm to Redevelopment Authority regulations as well as the specific regulation of the State of Florida.
60 5. The CRA is currently partially funded with Federal Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) which provides strict guidelines for
I'
the use of such funds. Please describe your firms experience in working on projects and/or plans funded with CDBG or other federal
funds.
Author: CMAD
0 FILENAME \p CADocuments and Settings\cliarscottlDesktop\ALLFILES\PRO.TECTS\OMNI REDEVELOPMENT PLAN\selection scoresheet_final.doc❑
Management Plan
6. Please describe the percentage of work to be distributed to the prime consultant and sub consultant, including percentage of work to be
allotted to principal and junior staff. Where does the lead project manager fit in?
7. Please describe previous collaborations (track record) and public process on similar planning projects involving community/stakeholders
participation.
8. Assessment of Management Plan, including proposed timeline and milestones.
Communication Skills
9. Did the presenter explain the concepts and procedures clearly?
10. Was the presentation completed within the designated time (30 minutes)?
11. Did the presenters appear to be properly prepared for the interview?
Knowledge of the Area
12. Did the presenters show photos of the Omni CRA Area and/or talk about specific locations to convey their familiarity with the CRA area,
the problems currently facing the neighborhood, and ongoing projects (I-395 study, Biscayne Boulevard Study)?
General Overview
13..Please assess the general overview of the presentation.
14. With regards to the responses received by the firms, were the documents understandable, informative and organized? Please assess the
quality of the firms' response. 0
l
'�; �Iuthor: CMAD
�Ve FILENAME \p CADocuments and Settings\charscott\Desktop\ALLFILES\PROJECTS\OMNI REDEVELOPMENT PL_AN\selection scoresheet_final.doc❑
iT
- -- -, .,A—, 11 ' - -.— 1,11- - .. i e�- "84.14-01- N v- -- - - "-,T I�PRQ --- "- wffl ._QE -T N E W , �,Q TIE P9 �Vk gC�fflL_ _LffT 1, j OPMENIMM
Firm ID
ZYSCOVICH Firm Name
EXPEItIENC:
a)
b)
C)
d)
e)
GEME
a)
b)
C)
II M ' M N U, ICA
a)
b)
C) . .. ....
,K
VY NOW
a)
V.! OV ERWM,
EVALUATION CRITERIA
Very Poor/Strong Disagree
Poor/Disagree
Satisfactory/No opinion
Good/Agree
- Excellent/Strongly Agree
5
24
5
120
4
24
5
120
5
25
5
125
4
24
5
120
4
25
5.
125
5
26
4
104
5
25
4
100
5
24
4
96
5
25
5
125
5
26
5
130
5
26
5
130
5
27
4,
108
5
24
3
72
b) 4 5 3 4 3 5 1 1 24 1 3 72
--,-.-TOTAL 1547
Author: CMAD
D FILENAME \p C:\Docurnents and Settings\charscott\Desktop\ALLFILES\PROJECTS\OMNI REDEVELOPMENT PLAN\tabulation score sheet.docLl
0
Firm ID
Firm Name
EVALUATION CRITERIA
Very Poor/Strong Disagree
Poor/Disagree
Satisfactory/No opinion
4
Good/Agree
5:
Excellent/Strongly Agree
r
A �^
.'�
Y - �'3
..,,�. :.,:... N•.`•
-a" f�. r.i
4:
;-r.
I
: PROFESSIONA:L
> - ; ,µ
EXPERIENCE-
.lip.
Wei
,.
are'::;
-S o
a)
3
4
5
5
5
4
26
5
130
b)
3
4
5
4
5
4
1 25
5
125
c)
4
5
5
4
2
3
23
5
1 1 5
d)
5
4
5
4
3
4
25
5
125
e)
5
4
5
4
3
3
24
5
120
k,
1VI�A-NAGE'1VIENT
q
`r- 4-
.+, •wC ; j
h' ` .1
i 5
' `"•.•'_
t t
t
a)
4
4
5
4
5
3
25
4
100
b)
3
5
5
5
3
4
25
4
100
c)
3
4
5
4
4
4
24
4
96
°COIVIMLJNICATION SKILLS
III)
3
4
5
4
3
4
23
5
115
a)
b)
3
5
5
4
3
4
24
5
120
C)
4
5
5
4
5
4
27
5
135
'.IV
k
rANO'WLEDGE,,.OF.A'IZEA--
.:.. ,5
:7
_
..�.,4
` .
t;
a)
2
5
5.,.
4
25
4
100
a. -, J ,.,�'lt�J_•:: mow-: "k:. •f : - -
..
V,.. V W IE
O
CD a) 4 4 5 4 4 4 25 3 75
b) 4 5 5 4 3 4 25 3 75
t T.O:TA<L::S,COItE,: '`; 1531
Author: CMAD
❑ FILENAME \p C:\Documents and Settings\charscott\Desktop\ALLFILES\PROJECTS\OMNI REDEVELOPMENT PLAN\tabulation score sheet.doc❑
•
[in
Firm ID
CIVIC DESIGN ASSOCIATES Firm Name
I-E
a)
b)
C)
d)
e)
a)
b)
C)
II)
-�--
w !c 6MMUNfC
a)
b)
C)
EVALUATION CRITERIA
4
5
4
4
4
5
5
5
3
3
4
4
4
4
5
4
4
4
5
5
5
4
3
5
5
4
5
4
3
4
4
3
4
3
5
3
3
4
5
4
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
5
4
4
4
3
4
5
4
2
3
4
5
5
4
5
4
Very Poor/Strong Disagree
Poor/Disagree
Satisfactory/Nn opinion
Good/Agree
Excellent/Strongly Agree
'We g-Score
26
5
130
24
5
120
25
5
-125
27
5
135
25
5
125
22
4
88
23
4
92
24
4
96
25
5
125
21
5
105
27
5
135
a)
4
5
4
4
j
4
24
4
v()
V.':0
E
a)
4
4
4
4
4
4
24
3
72
b)
4
4
5
4
3
4
24
3
72
wo
L
1516
Author: CMAD
[I FILENAME \p CADocurnents and Settings\charscott\Desktop\ALLFILES\PROJECTS\OMNI REDEVELOPMENT PLAN\tabulation score shect.docD
0
rz
a
b
C
d
e
Firm ID
-ARQUITECTONICA Firm Name
EVALUATION CRITERIA
3
5
4
4
4
5_
4
4
4
4
5
4
4
5
5
4
3
4
3
4
5
4
3
5
3
4
5
3
3
-5
4
4
5
3
5
4
b)
3
4
3
4
3
4
C)
3
5
4
q
4
4
4
a)
4
5
5
3
4
5
b)
3
4
5
4
2
4
C)
4
5
5
4
4
4
481 "'KNOW.LE,
_'T
a)
3
5
5
3
4
4
EW:'':, I E,
"OVERVI
g _aLl*r.11_11,
"Id
a)
4
4
4
4
2
4
b)
4
5
5
4
3
4
0—
Author: CMAD
0 FILF-NAN4E\p C:\Documents and Settings\chaiscott\Desktop\ALLFILES\PROJECTS\OMNI REDEVELOPMENT PLAN\tabulation score shect.docO
Very Poor/Strong Disagree
Poor/Disagree
Satisfactory/No opinion
Good/Agree
Excellent/Strongly Agree
25
5
125
25
5
125
25
5
125
24
5
120
23
5
115
25
4
100
21
4
84
24
4
96
26
5
130
22
5
110
26
5
130
24
4
96
22
3
66
25
3
75
'AI ` SCORt' '.
1497
j
0
Firm ID
6 JONATHAN BARNETT Firm Name
EVALUATION CRITERIA
Very Poor/Strong Disagree
Poor/Disagree
.3'"
Satisfactory/No opinion
Good/Agree
Excellent/Strongly Agree
I
PR FE I AL 1 k i
ra
L. 'EXPERIENe/'E :
M A�NAGEIVIENT PLAN • . z
�-«-...--v... sy—,.
,C.O MUN'ICATIQN• SKILLS
..... ....._ . _..
NOW,LED °EF_�,
F
{130
a)
3
5
5
4
5
4
26
5
b)
4
4
5
4
5
4
26
5
130
C)
3
4
5
3
3
3
21
5
105
d)
3
4
5
3
2
3
20
5
100
e)
3
*
4
5
3
r
3
r;...>..., u
3
21
5
105
II -
a)
4
4
4
3
4"
3
22
4
88
b)
3
4
5
3
5
4
24
4
96
C)
„ILI) .
3
4
5
3
3
5
23
4
92
„ �
'�x,3:
_5
.4:
a)
4n
3�
4
23
5
115
b)
5
5
5
4
3
4
26
5
130
C)
3
5
5
4
5
5
27
5
135
IV
•g'.
,-
.
a)
3
5
5
3
4
5
25
4
100
1.
a) 4 4 5 3 4 4
b) 4 5 5 3 3 4
CIO
I
24
3
72
24 1
3
72
7.
1470
n
® Author: CMAD
®� ❑ FILENAME \p C:\Documents and Settings\charscott\Desktop\ALLFILES\PROJECTS\OMNI REDEVELOPMENT PLAN\tabulation score sheet.doc❑
Firm rD
GLATTING, JACKSON, KERQHER::; Firm Name
EVALUATION CRITERIA
MANAQE
b)
2
3
3
3
4
C)
3
4
3
5
2
d)
4
4
4
4
3
e)
4
4
4
4
2
a)
4
3
4
4-
3
b)
3
3
4
3
4
C)
3
3
3
4
2
Very Poor/Strong Disagree
Poor/Disagree
Satisfactory/No opinion
Good/Agree
Excellent/Strongly Agree
4X,'Wei ht
.core:
4
20
5
100
3
18
5
90
4
21
5
105
4
23
5
115
4
22
5
110
4
22
4
88
5
22
4
88
4
19
4
76
yM
a)
3
3
4
4
3
4
20
5
100
b)
5
4
5
4
5
4
27
5
135'
C)
3
4
3
4
2
4
20
5
100
4.,
j8T
a)
3
4
3
3
3
4
19
4
76
20
3
60
a) 3 4 3 4 3 3
3 1 4 2
4 2
4
19
3
57
COP'E"'
1300
Author: CMAD
P FILENAME \p C:\Docunients and Settings\charscott\Desktop\ALLFILES\PROJECTS\OMNI REDEVELOPMENT PLAN\tabulation score sheet.docD
9
L-A
Firm M
HOK PLANNING GROUP Firm Name
EVALUATION CRITERIA
-EXPERIE
AG
C O KIL
a)
3
4
3
4
4
b)
4
4
2
3
4
C)
3
4
3
3
2
d)
2
3
3
3
2
e)
2
3
2
3
3
a)
4
4
3
3
1
b)
5
5
3
3
3
C)
III
3
4
3
3
4
n-
a)
5
4
4
4
4
Very Poor/Strong Disagree
Poor Disagree
3:
Satisfactory/No opinion
Good/Agree
Excel lent/Strongly Agree
ed
c
Sre 0
4
22
5
110
3
20
5
100
3
18
5
90
3
16
5
80
3
16
5
80
3
18
4
72
4
23
4
92
4
21
4
84
2,
4
25
5
125
b)
K 0, *W,6t W_v
5
4
4
4
4
4
25
5
125
C)
3
5
3
4
5
5
25
5
125
4v '-,'-:�KNO
a)
2
5
2
3
3
4
19
4
76
V
a)
b)
Q
V J
4 4 2
4 4 1 3 1
3
3 1
3
3 1
4
4
20
3
60
21
3
63
-T 'OTAL`SCORE:
1282
C)
Author: CMAD
E FILENAME \p C:\Docurnents and Settings\charscott\Desktop\ALLFILES\PROJECTS\OMNI REDEVELOPMENT PLAN\tabulation score sheet.docl]
0
•
Firm M
ERAN SPIRO & ASSOCIATES Firm Name
a)
C7 �ff
2
2
2
3
b)
4
2
1
3
C)
2
2
2
2_
d)
4
1
l
3_
e)
3
l
1
3-
a)
4
1
3
2
b)
3
2
2
2
C)
3
5
2
1
3
a)
2
1
3
3
b)
3
4
3
3
C)
3
3
2
3
EVALUATION CRITERIA
Very Poor/Strong Disagree
Poor/Disagree
;3-
Satisfactory/No acto i S f ry/No opinion
Good/Agree
Excel lent/Strongly Agree
5
2
16
5
80
2
2
14
5
70
.3
2
13
5
65
2
2
13
5
65
1
1
10
5
50
5
3-
18
4
72
3
2
14
4
5
1
2
12
4
48
:J-
2
3
14
5
70
5
3
21
5
105
1
4
16
5
80
a)
5
3
3
2
4
3
20
4
so
%W
AMR
M
=,4D
a)
3
1
1
2
3
3
13
3
39
3
3
1
3
5
3
18--7
3
54
t
934
Author: CMAD
El FILENAME \p C:\DOCUrnents and Settings\ciiarscott\Desktop\ALLFILES\PROJECTS\OMNI REDEVELOPMENT PLAMabulation score shcet.docO
0
a
U-
r-
lJ
RJ
Q
CITY OF MIAMI �71
CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chelsa Arscott, Policy and Program Development Administrator, Omni CRA
FROM: James Villacorta, Assistant City Attorney
DATE: January 17, 2003
RE: Rejection of Letter of Interest
Our File A#03-TBA
You have asked whether the Omni Redevelopment District Community Redevelopment
Agency (the "CRA") must reject a late response to its "Request for Letters of Interest From
Planning and Urban Design Firms for the Amendment of the 1986 Omni Area Redevelopment
Plan" (the "Request").
The Request provided:
"Letters of Interest must be received no later than 5:00 p.m., December 10,
2002, addressed to Chelsa Arscott-Douglas, Policy and Program
Development Administrator of the Omni Redevelopment District
Community Redevelopment Agency, at 300 Biscayne Boulevard Way,
Suite 309 (Mezzanine Floor), Miami, Florida 33131."
The Request further provided:
"The Omni Redevelopment District Community Redevelopment Agency
reserves the right to' accept any Letter(s) of Interest deemed to be in the
best interest of the agency, to waive any irregularities in any response, to
reject any and all responses, to cancel this request at any time, and/or to
re -advertise for Letters of Interest."
The response in question was received at 9:28 a.m. on December 11, 2002.
The CRA must reject the response as untimely. The CRA may, however, cancel the
Request and readvertise.
JHV/reg
c: Frank K. Rollason, Executive Director, Omni CRA
Alejandro Vilarello, City Attorney
Rafael O. Diaz, Assistant City Attorney
jhv:Memo - Rejection of response o u / cRA
0lV3 006