HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-88-0838'1 a
J-88-873
9/13/88 RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
REDUCE THE RETAINAGE IN THE CONTRACT BETWEEN
THE CITY OF MIAMI AND DANYILLE-FINDORFF INC.
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF BAYFRONT PARK
REDEVELOPMENT -PHASE III (CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM, PROJECT NO. 331302) FROM 10% TO 5¢.
WHEREAS, there exists a contract dated June 15, 1987
between the City of Miami and Danville-Findorff Inc., in the
amount of $3,654,000 for the construction of Bayfront Park
Redevelopment Phase III; and
WHEREAS, Danville-Findorff Inc. has essentially completed
the work required by the contract, having only small items of
work that have been delayed by changes required by the City to
complete; and
WHEREAS, all completed work has been found acceptable by
the City; and
WHEREAS, the City wants the contract to remain open so that
an electronic display sign for the Amphitheater may be installed
on Biscayne Boulevard under the contract, and so that additional
work related to improving wheelchair access to the amphitheater
may be designed, approved by the proper officials, and done by
Danville-Findorff Inc.; and
WHEREAS, holding the contract open to add the
aforementioned work is imposing an unjustified hardship on
subcontractors, most of whom will not be involved in the proposed
additional work, in that they are being denied complete payment
for work performed because of the 10% of payment being retained
by the City; and
WHEREAS, Danville-Findorff Inc. has requested reduction of
the retainage on the project from 10% to 5% so that they can make
additional payments to the subcontractors; and
CITY COMMISSION
MEETING OF
SEP 27 1988
it 4
WHEREAS, the Project Manager and the Director of Public
Works, agree that the City will not adversely affect the control
and ultimate completion of the project and recommend the
reduction;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF MIAMI, FLORIDA:
Section I. The City Manager is hereby authorized to reduce
the retainage in the contract between the City of Miami and
Danville-Findorff Inc. for the construction of Bayfront Park
Redevelopment Phase III from 10% to 5¢.
PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 27th day of September 1988.
ATTE
•
CITY U=r—
PREPARED AND APPROVED BY:
Z�•:^'W� Aoamr -
CHIEF DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
r
ara►ivvu.i, ai
DEPARTMENT
FARTMENT
: I•i i •A
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS:
E I-. FIJRNANDEZ -nlr
4Y—�*
ATZWEY
—2—
CITY OF MIAMI. FLORIDA
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO Honorable Mayor and DATE SEP 20 1988
Members of the City Commission
SUBJECT Resolution to
Bayfront Park
Phase iII
FROM (9 Cesar H. Odio REFERENCES
City Manager
ENCLOSURES Resolution
RECOMMENDATION
0
FILE B-3205-F
Reduce Retainage
Redevelopment
It is respectfully recommended that the City Commission adopt a
Resolution authorizing the City Manager to reduce the retainage in
the contract between the City of Miami and Danville-Findorff, Inc.
from 10% to 5.0%.
BACKGROUND
The Project manager and the Director of Public Works agree that
the reduction of retainage on this project will not affect the
control and ultimate completion of the project and therefore
recommend the reduction in retainage.
The City of Miami is currently holding a 10% retainage on payments
to the contractor on the Bayfront Park Redevelopment -Phase III
project, in accordance with the terms of the contract. The
contractor has essentially completed the work required by the
contract, having only small items of work to complete. Completion
of these work items was delayed by changes in the work ordered by
the City.
The City wants the contract to remain open so that an electronic
display sign for the Amphitheater may be installed on Biscayne
Boulevard under the contract, and so that additional work related
to improving wheelchair access to the Amphitheater may be
designed, approved by the proper officials, and done by the
contractor.
The contractor, Danville-Findorff, Inc. is willing to hold the
contract open so that we may do the additional work but have
requested that the retainage on the project be reduced from 10% to
5% so they may make payments to their subcontractors, many of whom
will not be involved in the additional work. Holding the contract
open and not reducing the retainage would impose an unjustified
hardship on these subcontractors.
• ♦ •