HomeMy WebLinkAboutCommittee ReportVirginia, Key >Marina ;RFP:1G-17.011
Evaluation Forms Summary Tafly Sheet
Gary Milano GCM BMP VKLLC
Relevant Experience
10
10
10
Operational History
8
9
10
Availability of References
5
5
5
Financial Return to the City
10
10
10
Financial Capability
10
10
10
Reasonableness of Revenue
5
3
3
Improved Marina Efficiencies
10
10
10
Aesthetics and Functionality
4
3
5
Effective use during Const.
5
5
5
Consistent with VK Master Plan
5
3
3
Long Term Resiliency
5
5
5
Commitment & History of Env.
3
5
4
Green & Native Design
4
5
5
Public Benefits
3
3
3
Local Office
4
5
5
TOTAL
91
91
93
David Snow GCM BMP VKLLC
Relevant Experience
5
8
7
Operational History
5
10
8
Availability of References
4
5
4
Financial Return to the City
10
10
10
Financial Capability
7
10
10
Reasonableness of Revenue
5
5
5
Improved Marina Efficiencies
5
10
9
Aesthetics and functionality
1
5
4
Effective use during Const.
2
5
5
Consistent with VK Master Plan
2
5
5
Long Term Resiliency
2
4
5
Commitment & History Of Env,
1
5
5
Green & Native Design
1
5
5
Public Benefits
2
5
5
Local Office
4
5
5
TOTAL
56
97
92
Jose Galan GCM BMP VKLLC
Relevant Experience
4
8
10
Operational History
5
8
10
Availability of References
3
4
4
Financial Return to the City
4
6
8
Financial Capability
7
9
9
Reasonableness of Revenue
4
4
4
Improved Marina Efficiencies
7
8
8
Aesthetics and Functionality
2
4
4
Effective use during Const.
3
4
4
Consistent with VK Master Plan
3
3
3
Long Term Resiliency
4
4
4
Commitment & History of Env.
2
4
4
Green & Native Design
2
3
3
Public Benefits
2
5
3
Local Office
2
5
5
TOTAL
54
79
83
Maria Carballelra GCM BMP VKLLC
Relevant Experience
5
8
10
Operational History
6
10
9
Availability of References
3
5
5
Financial Return to the City
5
8
10
Financial Capability
7
9
10
Reasonableness of Revenue
3
3
4
Improved Marina Efficiencies
7
9
10
Aesthetics and Functionality
3
4
5
Effective use during Const.
3
4
5
Consistent with VK Master Plan
2
3
4
Long Term Resiliency
5
3
4
Commitment & History of Env.
3
5
4
Green & Native Design
2
5
4
Public Benefits
2
5
4
Local office
3
4
5
TOTAL
59
85
93
Amado Gonzalez GCM BMP VKLLC
Relevant Experience
4
5
9
Operational History
6
8
9
Availability of References
4
5
5
Financial Return to the City
7
8
9
Financlal Capability
7
9
9
Reasonableness of Revenue
4
4
4
Improved Marina Efficiencies
7
9
9
Aesthetics and Functionality
4
5
5
Effective use during Const.
3
4
4
Consistent with VK Master Plan
5
5
_ 5
Long Term Resiliency
4
4
5
Commitment & History of Env.
2
4
4
Green & Native Design
2
5
4
Public Benefits
3
4
4
Local Office
4
5
5
TOTAL
66
84
90
Alyce Robertson GCM BMP VKLLC
Relevant Experience
5
8
9
Operational History
6
9
9
Availability of References
3
5
5
Financial Return to the City
4
8
10
Financial Capability
5
8
10
Reasonableness of Revenue
4
4
4
Improved Marina Efficiencies
6
9
10
Aesthetics and Functionality
2
5
5
Effective use during Const.
3
5
5
Consistent with VK Master Pla n
2
5
5
Long Term Resiliency
3
4
5
Commitment & History of Env.
2
5
4
Green & Native Design
2
5
5
Public Benefits
2
4
4
Local Office
2
5
S
TOTAL
51
89
95
Penny Cutt GCM BMP VKLLC
Relevant Experience
3
6
8
Operational History
3
7
9
Availability of References
2
5
5
Financial Return to the City
7
8
10
Financial Capability
7
10
10
Reasonableness of Revenue
4
5
5
Improved Marina Efficiencies
5
10
10
Aesthetics and Functionality
2
5
5
Effective use during Const.
2
4
5
Consistent with VK Master Plan
2
5
5
Long Term Resiliency
2
5
5
Commitment & History of Env.
2
5
5
Green & Native Design
1
5
5
Public Benefits
2
5
4
Local Office
2
5
5
TOTAL
46
90
96
FINAL SCORES
Member GCM
6MP
VKLLC
Gary Milano
91
91
93
Maria Carba&leira
59
85
93
David Snow
56
97
_ 92
Amado Gonzalez
66
84
gin
Jose GaJan
54
79
if3w
Alyce Robertson
51
89
95
PennyCutt
46
90
96
TOTAL SCORE
423
615
642
Less Highest & Lowest Score L 286
439
Ye 4 J
Average of remaining scores
57.21_ 87.8
92.6
APPENDIX 11
w
-- EVALUATION MATRIX
Virginia Key Marina RFP 16-17-011
Project Description:: The City is inviting Proposers to bid on Request for Proposals (`RlF'P") No. 16.17-il11. for the Lease and Development of City -owned property, located on
Virginia Key for marinas •staurant/s1uip's star uses-
4
:/ /
raI�s�tnr Name: - Signature: / G-•'.- J r' T' ;�~ 17a1a• J, /
� . 7
Evaluation Categories.'
Max
Value
3
(GCiM1 I (SNI2 P) (VKLLC ' Comments
Overall Experience and Qualifications
Releva nt business and
Project team experience in
similar projects
10
Operational history
reflective of capacity to meet
Project goals
10
/U
Availability of
financial/business
references
5
5
.4-ram"/ eef7/
'1f additional space is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
be added as needed.
Financials & Proposed Revenues
Financial return to the City,
including Base Rent and
Participation Rent
10
/t/
Financial capability 10
/0-
i0
Reasonableness of Revenue
Forecasts
5
5
3
3
1/
*If additional space is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
be added as needed_
Design & Operational Plan
Improved efficiencies of
marina operation and site
utilization
r
10
/6
'0
Aesthetics & functionality of
proposed improvements
5
3
S
Effective use of site during
construction/redevelopment
S
5
Consistency with the
Virginia Key Master Plan
principles
5
5
//
'If additional space is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
be added as needed.
1
• Resiliency& Environmental Considerations
Long term resiliency of the
Project
5
Commitment to protection
of environmental assets and
history of environmental
stewardship
Incorporation of"green"
design and natural/native
elements
5
5
/r
/l
+1Fadditional space is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
be added as needed.
Public Benefits and Local Participation
Participation of Firms and
contractors that maintain a
local office
5
5
100
9
(
r 1/
"If additional space is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9.Additional pages may
be added as needed.
*Please see the Scoring Guidelines below for detailed criteria and guidelines.
Instruction4: 1) The Evaluation Criteria listed above is derived from the information provided in the RFP for this project. 2) Each Reviewer must sign and date their Evaluation
forms) in ink 3) Each Reviewer must base their evaluation on the same criteria so that value uniformity can be established. ONLY whole numbers should be used in scoring. 4)
Each Reviewer will evaluate and score all Proposals and provide the original completed score sheets. 5) Committee Chair will provide a written "Recommendation for Final
Selection" memorandum addressed to the City Manager.
Proposers: 1. (ACM Contracting Solutions, Inc. ("GCM") 2. Biscayne Mar ine_Partnets, LLC..CBMP")
3. Virginia ISey.l1,c ("Y1(LLC 1
PLEASE NOTE THE FOLLOWING IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONS:
1. Proposers may be granted zero (0) points in any one category only if they failed to address the category entirely. During the administrative review,
proposals are reviewed to determine compliance with minimum requirements and would not likely reach the Selection Committee phase of the Selection
Process if they failed to address a category. Nevertheless, failure to address any portion of a Category may result in a score of less than 25%.
2. Any investment or revenue received from the proposed parking arrangeurent SHALL NQI be considered in the evaluation of the Proposals.
However, parking may be considered in the overall aesthetics and functionality of the design proposed.
3. The number of restaurants provided in the Proposal SHAI,i, NOT be considered in the evaluation of the Proposals. However, configuration and
use of the site, including placement of restaurants, may be considered in the overall aesthetics and functionality of the design proposed.
4. Higher scoring nay be justified, but is not necessary, upon consideration of any other requirements or specifications included in the RFP and consistent
with the categories specified above.
2 Evaluator Initials
APPENDIX 1I
EVALUATION nvnifx
Virginia Key Marina UUFP tb-17•111 l
Project Description: The City is inviting Proposers to bid on Request for Proiipsals ("Rf l�j") No.16-17-011 for the j'ease and Development of City -owned property, located on
Virginia Key for marinas/restaurant/shift's store uses
Evaluator Name: Penny Curt
Evaluation Categories.
Max
Value
Signatut•e:'
l 2
(GCM) I (BMP)
Overall Experience and Qualifications
:3
(VKLLC)
Relevant business and -
Project team experience in
similar projects
• 6
8
Operational history
reflective of capacity to meet
Project goals
•
'10
g
Availability of
financial/business
references
•
Date: tune 14, 2017
Comments
GCM - No experience operating automated dry storage. comp projects not multi -use marina
(2 dry ctaek only, stand-alone buildings), not multi use w/ marine storage redevelopments,
some Leann members have been involved in design/development of comparable projects.
submitted project experience (I lamilton dry stack, Rose Marina dry stack, Cron rnanu bldg.,
Miramar bldg., Arcadia arena junder constri), 3 business references not for multi -use marina
facilities, 1 bank provided
3MP - r-lckenbackcr marina {multi use & public land), hurricane cove, sunny isles marina, 400
sunny isles, eden roc, condos - 2 autornated boat storage facilities in Argentina 1 since 2011 -
1 since 2C 1S, redevelopments not 100% comparable mixed -use w/ private land, references -
key int'l, Sahadeil bank hemisferio, cal bank, bbva loam agent, regions bank, nortbern trust,
sun trust, valley nat'I bank,
VSCLLC - M13 Marina (rnulti use & public land). Steefpoint Harbor (multi use & public land),
Bahia Mar (multiuse & public land), Liberty landing (multi use & public land), marina jack
(multi use & public land). snook bight (multi use), loggerhead marinas (private), Moriarty
huilt Port (automated), operate 1,7 mannas in FL with 2,148 wet slips and 1,480 dry storage
slips. RC1-Miami Beach & Bahia Mar (both in water), Suntex-43 marinas 15,1.20 slips-60
people carp office and 1,200 on site at marinas. 8 years operating Port Marina FLL automated
dry stack - only automated dry stack in US. First Nat'l bank, Dock & Marine. Golden Boatlifts.
City Nat'l l3ank, Palmdale Oil, luxury law group, Rok cnt, FL Comm flank, hydrohoist, West
marine, Mansfield oil, FI. comm bank, First united bank,
Financials &2 pos .1 Revenues
1
Financial return to the City. '+' • - i
including Base Rent and + 1 102
Participation Rent
E,
7.
yil
(gi
Sri
Financial capability
10i:
7
(_12)
4�r
Reasonableness of Revenue
Forecasts
4 i
5;
GCM - annual escalator of 2% for all revenues, 6% for wet and dry storage ops, fuel sales, and
sublease income (4% reqd for subleases but added 2%)/references financing corntnitments in
place - does not state ability to develop w/ all cash / less detail provided for market
assumptions r^d0-1 . L'rt,- • 51' .
BMP - base rent 3% or CPI. marina 6%. parts service repair 6%, store sales 6%. fuel 6%,
sublease 4%, concessionaires 4%, restaurant 4% / states ability to fund w cash, all financing
commitments in place / detailed revenue forecasts
VKLLC - 3% or CPI, commercial 6%, marina 6%, fuel G%, / states ability to fund with cash. all
financing commrtinents in place / detailed revenue forecasts
4. klL� r i�z;;� • (Y'J:t5c—�r
1'
(1)1%
fit, vajt i
Design &. Operational flan
1
LLe_
Improved efficiencies of
marina operation and site
utilization
Aesthetics & functionality of
proposed improvements
Effective use of site during
construction/redevelopment
/ 10
S
5
5:
f
2,/
( 51
Consistency with the
Virginia Key Master Plan
principles
5
(5(
GCM - fire rated dry stack segregates vessels into fireproof bays, hybrid dry stack improves
efficiencies over traditional dry stack by 15-25%, Brandy Marine on team, PDEP Clean Marina,
use available technical assistance to encourage env conscious practices. encourage retailers to
educate boaters on clean boating; practices, encourage boaters to use clean r cix a diei ` r
marinas/boatyards/retailers, adhere to dean vessel act, create safety first atmosphere w/ `"'11
briefings/training/emergency response drills, develop site specific operations manual w/
traffic plan/sewage plan/pollution control plan, SV M plan, fuel ops plan, emergency ops lilan, I
hurricane/severe weather plan, use MEP hurricane preparedness plan as template -
generally regurgitates 12F•P and FI)EP website - dry storage Facility can be adjusted based on
vessel size demand, building facade maximizes upland area, generally boxed, landscaping not
specified, automated parking garage, used IJSACE high forSLR and elevated above, utilizes
existing entrance, eliminates pedestrians passing forklifts (but they do in the boat launch
area), 1 large main bldg., lowest financial return to city, lack of understanding of env reg perm
process and assoc timeline, assumes.seagrass restoration
BMP - design w/ 1.13ED certified materials, efficiency of water and power usages, FI)EP clean
marina, clean marina action plan, marina environmental measures and BMPs including
hurricane prep, tire safety, petroleum control/containment/spill prevention/recovery,
management of fuel systems/nil/haz waste, bilge water prevention, boat cleaning practices,
engine repairs and maintenance, marina ingt and ops, lift bldgs. Above flood plain w/ parking
underneath, innovative automated dry storage system, storage can adapt to vessel demand,
green initiatives- SeaBin in water trash collection system, sifted buildings above flood plain
elevation with parking underneath, / extensive market/financial analysis, phased
implementation, design blends w/ nature, extensive use of native plants, natural shoreline,
solar roof panels, stornlwaLercapture and reuse system, step down to waiter's edge, anticipate
seagrass mitigation, middle financial return to city, understanding of env reg perm process
and timeline, redundancy in automated system, 1.01 (plan do see, Garcia, Intrepid, kite shop.
sightseeing tours)
VKLIC - sustainable design above FEMA reqts and SLR predictions, Responsible Boater
initiative, parking below building, innovative automated boat storage system, storage system
corn pater adjusts to vessel size demand automatically, marina market study provided, solar
roof panels, pedestrian access between buildings, exceeding I_El:]3 reqts, Green initiatives,
native plantings, architecture blend of marine stadium and rusty pelican roof lines, wetlands
for stormwater treatment, phased unplemenlatiun, efficient phasing of permuting process,
will evaluate whether seagrass areas will need to be dredged, planting will require min
irrigation, high efficiency plumbing fixtures, reuse boat rinsing water, cisterns for rainwater
reuse for irrigation and boat rinsing, smart metering on utility pedestals, energy star
appliances. high efficiency lighting and a/c, electric boat storage elevators, rooftop solar will
exceed demand for site, exterior building circulation to minimize a/c volume, overhangs to
shad bldgs and walkways, balance cut and fill volumes, recycle construction waste, operable
windovvs, shallow buildings with tall windows for daylight, natural ventilation, rooftop solar
details, rooftop rainwater details, Clean Marina Program, Aero docks system 111 can store 4&%
more boats in the same building, 20-30 boats per hour launch/retrieval, uscs 90% of available
linear footage, highest financial return to City, clear understanding of reg permitting process
and timeline and effective phasing presented with alternative strategy depending on agency
feedback, redundancy in automated system, 1)ockwa marketing consultants reaches 12M
boaters, Marinas-com, Waterway guide, social media, smart phone app, tenant 1.01 (marine
max, contender, Denison, tarpon lagoon dive center, MB delimarkel, section 7 ship store)
2
? I
Evaluator initials 'J t.
l � �
Resiliency & Environmental Considerations
Long terns resiliency of the
Project
1 5
Commitment to protection
of environmental assets and
history of environmental
stewardship
Incorporation of"green"
design and natural/native
elements
5 1
2 1
5
5
5i
GCM - Concrete bldg_, somewhat adjustable racks (limited depth/vessel length), clean marina,
park smart certified (min energy use/reuse of natural resources - irrigation water, optimal
traffic flow), protect native habitats (no details provided), low level lighting, USACE prod,
for SLR, tire proofbidg .P' '- t)i+E';l Ic t . iv- lr..r '
BMP - LEED Gold status, 50% of site open green space, solar powered boat launching facility,
grey water recapture system, living shoreline (where possible?), cisterns to collect rainwater
for boat wash downs/toilet flushing/irrigation, pervious pavement, electric car charging
stations, LED lighting, green roofs, elevated buildings above flood plain with parking
underneath,
VKLLC - bldgs. liaised above FEMA 100 yr I3FE, 2 full layers of parking underneath (exceeds
regts), plantings req little irrigation, high eff plumbing, cisterns capture rainwater for boat
rinsing and irrigation, treat and reuse boat wash water, smart metering to detect leakage,
energy eff appliances, high efflighting and a/c, rooftop solar exceeding demand, bldg.
circulation is exterior, overhangs for shading, local materials, long term durability, green
walls, balanced cut and fill onsite, recycle construction waste, operable windows, shallow
bldgs. And tail windows for lighting, natural ventilation, rooftop solar, rooftop rainwater
collection, mangroves and native veg preserved onsite, clean marina designation, cont'd op
during king tides and minor stones, entire site raised to 6' above sea level. storm water
retention areas onsite, critical access points at 6' above sea level, salt tolerant plantings that
can tolerate inundation, cat 3 storms. on site power backup, rapid recovery from storm surge
flooding - ground floor of dry storage facilities and restaurants allow water to flow through
and around structures, new retail and at 12' above sea level, restaurant and dry storage at
15.5' above sea level, dry storage boat handing equip at 20' above sea level, restaurant at 17'
above sea level, site channels storinwater to wetlands, living shorelines, no potable water for
irrigation, 1.ED lighting, shading over walkways and haywalk, witi, individual metering, lifts
similar to pools to facilitate ADA access, green signage
Public Benef4s and Local Participation
Benefits received by the
Public
Participation of firms and
contractors that maintain a
local office
f
t. 5 i
2
(2.
2
I
GCM - naming of facility open to public, dining, recreation, public boat ramp, access to
waterfront, deli, restaurant, ship store, bath house (restrooin?), rentals for kayaking/sup/jet
ski, tpool not open to public- members only)
iMP - restaurants, green spaces, community meeting venues, bay -walk, retail, marine
education center, beat ramp, fisherman's pavilion, staging dock, transient dockage,
promenade, fuel dock, civic/education center, passive and motorized watersports rentals,
sightseeing tours and lessons, rent free civic space to History Miami museum, Miami
Waterkeeper, Marjorie Stoneman Douglas Biscayne Nature Center, S25K annually to 13lack
Hospitality Initiative of Greater Miami, on site rnentoring programs through MDPS, water taxi,
kite shop, youth activities - fishing experiences/tournaments, sailing lessons/regattas, bike
racks, staging area for rally events, Miami sightseeing tours, 50% green space, cyclists
pavilion, Monica Burguera Foundation and US Coast Guard safe boating classes at no charge,
step downs for public access to water, publicly accessible swimming pool, restrooms,
VKLLC - baywalk, passive recreation, kayak dock (segregated channel from powerboat
ramp), water taxi, restaurants. shops, educational signage, ADA dock lift (similar to pool lift),
sailing school (seamanship, cruising, racing), recreational sailing and powerboat club w rental
vessels, community boating program in partnership w/ non-profit, Warrior Sailing program,
3 Evaluator initials
}
(_i
1(114
r _, �� ;
tik
kayaking / paddling program, events for adaptive sailing program, partnerships w/ high
schools incl MAST academy for apprentice programs, local organizations for boating
opportunities to all, water taxi/ferry/L113ER, civic space,
TOTAL 100
46
90
96
' Please see the Scoring Guidelines below for detailed criteria and guidelines.
Instructioele: 3) The Evaluation Criteria listed above is derived from the information provided in the 11.1 P for this project. 2) Each Reviewer must sign and date their Evaluation
form(s) in ink. II) Each Reviewer must hese their evaluation on the same criteria so that value uniformity can be established. ONLY whole numbers should be used in scoring. 4)
Each Reviewer will evaluate anti score all Proposals and provide the original completed score sheets. S) Committee Chair will provide a written "Recommendation for final
Selection" memorandum addressed to the City Manager.
Proposers: 1. GCM ContractjegSolutions ]nc. ("GCM"1 2. Biscayne Marieeeattner 11,, ,DMP"Z
:i. _.. _ Vi rirtia K eye Li_ ):"V€CLL.C'.]-
PLEASE NOTE THE FOLLOWING IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONS:
1. Proposers may be granted zero (0) points in any one category only if they failed to address the category entirely. During the administrative review,
proposals are reviewed to determine compliance with minimum requirements and would not likely reach the Selection Committee phase of the Selection
Process if they failed to address a category. Nevertheless. failure to address any portion of a Category may result in a score of less than 25%
2. Any investment or revenue received from the proposed parking arrangement SHALL NOT be considered in the evaluation of the Proposals.
However, parking may be considered in the overall aesthetics and functionality of the design proposed.
3. The number of restaurants provided in the Proposal SHALL NOT be considered in the evaluation of the Proposals. However, configuration and
use of the site, including placement of restaurants, may be considered in the overall aesthetics and functionality of the design proposed.
4. Higher scoring may be justified, but is not necessary, upon consideration of any other requirements or specif cations included in the RFP and consistent
with the categories specified above.
4 Evaluator Initials
APPENDIX 11
EVALUATION MATRIX
Virginia Key Marina RIP 16-1?-011
Project Description: The City is Inviting Proposers to laid on ltequrst for Pr
Virgi:>>a Key for mar -is ant/ •p's ,tore uses
Evaluator Name: ti
Evaluation Categories*
Max
Value
Signal
Overall Experience and Qualifications
Relevant busin ess and
Project team experience in
similar projects
10
B
r
isals L' FP"
Operational history
reflective of capacity to meet
Project goals
l0
Availability of
financial/business
references
5
3 �
i
& 17-till fur the Lease and i)e ]op ;entflay-owned property, located c ii
Date:
H
Comments
evs:thAs— (3) [9- "km
ore
14-` *If additional space is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
he added as needed.
Financials & Proposed Revenues
Financial return to the City,
including Base Rent and
Participation Rent
Financial capability
Reasonableness of Revenue
Forecasts
Improved efficiencies of
marina operation and site
utilization
10
10
5
Design & Operational Plan
Aesthetics & functionality of
proposed improvements
Effective use of site during
construction/redevelopment
Consistency with the
Virginia Key Master Plan
principles
10
5
5
a
3
3
4
8
IARescipm-iviik
l tif• - o,
i ,4
4
izt
ui
.T ona] sp' ce is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
be added as needed.
•
ow c6PkA doer
k t'1st !211 i ItQ°
*1f additional space is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Add itio •es may
be added as needed.
1
Resiliency & Environmental Considerations
Long term resiliency of the
Project
Commitment to protection
of environmental assets and
history of environmental
stewardship
Incorporation of "green"
design and natural/native
elements
5
4- 4 4
q-
3. ' 3
Public Benefits and Local Participat on
Benefits received by the
Public
Participation of firms and
contractors that maintain a
local office
5
5
(9-
a
s
•lf additional space is required far notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
be added as needed
Celf ddditional space is uired for notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
be added as needed.
TOTAL 100
l3
*Please see the Scoring Guidelines below for detailed criteria and guidelines..
Instructions: 1) The Evaluation Criteria listed above is derived from the information provided in the RFP for this project. 2) Each Reviewer mustsign and date their Evaluation
form (s)-in ink. 3) Each Reviewer must base their evaluation on the same criteria so that value uniformity can be established. ONLY whole numbers should be used in scoring. 4)
Each Reviewer will evaluate and score all Proposals and provide the original completed score sheets. 5) Committee Chair will provide a written "Recommendation for Final
Selection" memorandum addressed to the City Manager.
Proposers: 1. GCMContracting S9lutions. Ind("GCM") 2. Biscayne Marine Partners. LLC_("BMP")
3. Virginia Key. ',LC ('VKLLC")
PLEASE NOTE THE FOLLOWING IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONS:
1. Proposers may be granted zero (0) points in any one category only if they failed to address the category entirely. During the administrative review,
proposals are reviewed to determine compliance with minimum requirements and would not likely reach the Selection Committee phase of the Selection
Process if they failed to address a category. Nevertheless, failure to address any portion of a Category rnay result in a score of less than 25%.
2. Any investment or revenue received from the proposed parking arrangement .SBA LIVO t be considered in the evaluation of the Proposals.
However, parking may be considered in the overall aesthetics and functionality of the design proposed.
3. The number of restaurants provided in the Proposal SHALL NOT be considered in the evaluation of the Proposals. However, configuration and
use of the site, including placement of restaurants, may be considered in the overall aesthetics and functionality of the design proposed.
4. Higher scoring may be justified, but is not necessary, upon consideration of any other requirements or specifications included in the RFP and consistent
with the categories specified above.
2 Evaluator lni
APPENDIX 11
Project Descrlptioo: The City is inviting Proposers to bid on Requ
Virginia Key for nlarin3s/restauront/ship's store uses
Evaluator Name, David,iriow
Slgnattire
Evaluation Categories"
Max 1 2
Value A (GCM) c8MP)
Overall Experience and Qualifications
EVALUATION MATRIX
VlrgUsial(ey Marina II FP 16,-17.111 I
r j eoposais ('RPP"J N
(VKLLC) I
Relevant business and
Project team experience in
similar projects
10
5
Operational history
reflective of capacity to meet
Project goals
10
Availability of
Financial/business
references
5
4
b-1-7tf 11 for the Lease and Development of City -owned property,
Date:
l une L12.017
Comments
• Proposer experience has indicated NO examples of publicly owned land or true
urban projects.
• Not dear if team has worked together on projects in the past.
• Proposer has provided 3 business references and 1 financial reference
H
'If additional space is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
be added as needed.
Financials &Proposed Revenues
Financial return to the City,
including Base Rent and
Participation Rent
10
10
Financial capability
10
7 /
Reasonableness of Revenue
Forecasts
5
5
• Proposer complies with providing greater than minimum base rent and percentage
rent. (P-a- G $)
• Letter proposed by financial lender indicates willingness to work with proposer on
capital Sources.
• Provides good analysis of revenue forecast. Q+j- C,.%)
"If additional space is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
be added as needed.
Design & Operational Plan
Improved efficiencies of
marina operation and site
utilization
10 5
Aesthetics & functionality of
proposed improvements
5
1
Effective use of site during
construction/redevelopment
5
2
• Although marketing and business plan have been provided, specific details have
not been provided as to how proposed uses would compliment each other and
provide a significant benefit back to the public.
• Plan mainly detailed specific to Dry Dock operation.
• Design compatibility to other components of the Marina Park are not identified.
• Architectural element and facade articulation seems to be missing and valued
engineered.
• Given the emphasis of Urban Design, Architecture and Landscape Architecture
within the REP, the proposer has NOT considered all those elements fully.
• Pedestrian conflicts exist between dry dock operation and proposed baywalk
circulation.
1
Consistency with the
Virginia Key Master Plan
principles
5
L
�
2
• Other elements of proposed marina seemed to be disconnected from Marina Park
*If additional space is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
be added as needed.
Resiliency & Environmental Considerations
• Although proposed structural longevity seems to be sound, other elements of
resiliency to sea level rise and environmental impacts to sensitive areas of the
island have not been met.
No details to specific landscape specimens provided or other natural elements.
*If additional space is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
he added as needed.
Long term resiliency of the
Project
5
2
Commitment to protection
of environmental assets and
history of environmental
stewardship
5
1
Incorporation of"green"
design and natural/native
elements
5
',."
1
Public Benefits and Local Participation
-
• Aside from economic and marina use benefits, additional details of community
needs to water access and enjoyment have not been presented.
`�- o i -ONc Pt)." TIN, k
*If additional space is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
be added as needed.
Benefits received by the
Public
5
1
Participation of firms and
contractors that maintain a
local office
5
,,/
4
TOTAL
100
XS-s.
* Please see the Scoring Guidelines below for detailed criteria and guidelines.
instructions: 1} The Evaluation Criteria listed above is derived from the information provided in the RFP for this project 2) Each Reviewer must sign and date their Evaluation
form(s) in ink. 3) Each Reviewer must base their evaluation on the same criteria so that value uniformity can be established. ONLY whole numbers should be used in scoring. 4)
Each Reviewer will evaluate and score all Proposals and provide the original completed score sheets. 5] Committee Chair will provide a written "Recommendation for Final
Selection" memorandum addressed to the City Manager.
Proposers:
GCM Contracting Solutions. Inca"GCM")
3. Virginia Key..LC ("V1(LLc"i
• PLEASE NOTE THE FOLLOWING IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONS:
It I
2. Biscayne Marine Partners, LLC ("BMP')
1. Proposers rrxay be granted zero (0) points in any one category only if they failed to address the category entirely. During the administrative review,
proposals are reviewed to determine compliance with minimum requirements and would not likely reach the Selection Committee phase of the
Selection Process if they failed to address a category. Nevertheless, failure to address any portion of a Category may result in a score of less than 25%.
2. Any investment or revenue received from the proposed parking arrangement SHALL NOT be considered in the evaluation of the Proposals.
However, parking may be considered in the overall aesthetics and functionality of the design proposed.
2 Evaluator Initials
3. The number of restaurants provided in the Proposal SHALL NOT be considered in the evaluation of the Proposals. However, configuration
and use of the site, including placement of restaurants, may be considered in the overall aesthetics and functionality of the design proposed.
4. Higher scoring may be justified, but is not necessary, upon consideration of any other requirements or specifications included in the RFP and consistent
with the categories specified above.
3 Evaluator initials •Cl •
APPENDIX II
Project Description: The City Is lnvrting
Virginia Key for marinas/restaurant/ships store uses
Evaluator Name: David Snow Signatu
proposers to bid on Reg
EVALUATION MATRIX
Viraitltu key Mari noItFF.- 6-17.01 i,
or roposals ("RFP`) No. -7-011 for the Lease and Development of City -owned property, located on
Evaluation Categories*
Max 1 I 2
Value {GCM) I (BMPJ
Overall Experience and Qualifications
3
(VKLLC)
Relevant business and
Project team experience in
similar projects
10
8
Operational history
reflective of capacity to meet
Project goals
10
10
Availability of
financial/business
references
5
5
Date:
lune 13, Z01/
Comments
■ Proposer has provided relevant past project experience for marinas, but provide
limited experience with automated slip operation.
• Proposer has indicated good working relationships on other projects and
demonstrated experience with REP project elements.
Proposer bas provided 3 business references and 1 financial reference
`If.additionai space is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
be added as needed.
Financials & Proposed Revenues
Financial return to the City,
including Base Rent and
Participation Rent
10
10
Financial capability
10
10
Reasonableness of Revenue
Forecasts
5
5
All financial documents have been provided to support the REP requirements.
*if additional space is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
be added as needed.
Design & 0perational Plan
Improved efficiencies of
marina operation and site
utilization
10
10
Aesthetics & functionality of
proposed improvements
5
5
Effective use of site during
construction/redevelopment
5
5
Consistency with the
Virginia Key Master Plan
principles
5
5
• Proposal is consistent with the adopted VKMP.
Proposer has addressed the goal of sufficient public waterfront access through full
site integration as well as embraced by natural landscape elements.
• Proposed design is harmonious with environmental needs for Virginia Key.
• Design maximizes City's financial goals while enhancing public amenities for
Virginia Key.
• Landscape elements are appropriate for Virginia Key sensitive environment and
will aid in the longevity of the islands habitat.
• Architecture complements surrounding environment and does not compete with
Marine Stadium
• Proposed public support space and exhibition space is consistent with VKMP.
• Good use of elevated roof terraces to add additional public enjoyment of views.
' if additional space is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
be added as needed.
1
Resiliency & Environmental Considerations
Longterm resiliency of the
Project
5
4
Commitment to protection
of environmental assets and
history of environmental
stewardship
5
5
Incorporation of"green"
design and natural/native
elements
5
5
No specific details to sea level rise or resiliency of the site.
All landscape elements provide an enhancement to the natural Virginia Key
environment.
"If additional space is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
be added as needed.
Public Benefits and Local Participation
Benefits received by the
Public
5
5 7
Participation of firms and
contractors that maintain a
local office
5
• Additional public support -cc -ape and exhibition space will support future needs of
the community at large. :ir"`"``
• Natural enhancements will provide visual and environmental benefits to the
public.
. C ram. �l.�.
*If additional space is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
be added as needed.
TOTAL
100
* Please see the Scoring Guidelines below for detailed criteria and guidelines.
Instructions: 1) The Evaluation Criteria listed above is derived from the information provided in the RFP for this project 2) Each Reviewer must sign and date their Evaluation
form(s) in ink 3) Each Reviewer must base their evaluation on the same criteria so that value uniformity can be established. ONLY whole numbers should be used in scoring. 4)
Each Reviewer will evaluate and score all Proposals and provide the original completed score sheets. 5) Committee Chair will provide a written "Recommendation forFinai
Selection" memorandum addressed to the City Manager,
Proposers: 1, GCM Contracting Solutions in. ("GCM";1_
3. Virginia Key, LLC ("VKLLC")_
PLEASE NOTE THE FOLLOWING IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONS:
2. Biscayne Marine Partners. LLC ("BMP")
1. Proposers may be granted zero (0) points in any one category only if they failed to address the category entirely. During the administrative review,
proposals are reviewed to determine compliance with minimum requirements and would not likely reach the Selection Committee phase of the
Selection Process if they failed to address a category. Nevertheless, failure to address any portion of a Category may result in a score of less than 25%.
2. Any investment or revenue received from the proposed parking arrangement SHALL NOT be considered in the evaluation of the Proposals.
However, parking may be considered in the overall aesthetics and functionality of the design proposed.
3. The number of restaurants provided in the Proposal SHALL NOT be considered in the evaluation of the Proposals. However, configuration
and use of the site, including placement of restaurants, may be considered in the overall aesthetics and functionality of the design proposed.
4. Higher scoring may be justified, but is not necessary, upon consideration of any other requirements or specifications included in the RFP and consistent
with the categories specified above.
2 Evaluator initials V1-S
APPENDIX 11
Project Description: The City is inviting Proposers to bid oil Hi
Virginia Key for marinas/restaurant/shlp's store uses
Evaluator Name: _ David Snow
Evaluation Categories*
r Max
Value
5lgnatur
1
(GCM)
2 3
(SMP) , (VRLLC)
-17-011 for the (.ease and Development of City -owned property, located on
Date:
June 13.2.017
Comments
Overall Experience and Qualifications
Relevant business and
Project team experience in
similar projects
10
7
Operational history
reflective of capacity to meet
Project goals
10
8
Availability of
financial/business
references
5
4
• Not clear what automated dry dock storage facilities have been built and operated.
■ Proposer has provided 3 business references and 1 financial reference
*If additional space is required for notes. please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
be added as needed.
Financials & Proposed Revenues
Financial return to the City,
including Base Rent and
Participation Rent
10
10
Financial capability
10
10 ✓-
Reasonableness of Revenue
Forecasts
5
• All financial documents have been provided to support the RFP requirements.
• Provide clear plan of financial return to the City.
If additional space is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
be added as needed.
Design & Operational Plan
Improved efficiencies of
marina operation and site
utilization
10
9
Aesthetics & functionality of
proposed improvements
5
4
Effective use of site during
construction/redevelopment
5
5
Consistency with the
Virginia Key Master Plan
principles
5
5
• Proposal is consistent with the adopted VKMP.
• Proposer has addressed the goal of sufficient public waterfront access through full
site integration as well as embraced by natural landscape elements.
+ Proposed design is harmonious with environmental needs for Virginia Key.
• Design maximizes City's financial goals while enhancing public amenities for
Virginia Key.
• Landscape elements are appropriate for Virginia Key seusitive environment and
will aid in the longevity of the islands habitat,
• Proposed reversed gable style roof structure may compete with Iegacy Marine
Stadium Design.
• Green wall features are challenging to maintain and may create unintended design
issues.
'"lf additional space is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
be added as needed.
1
Resiliency & Environmental Considerations
Long term resiliency of the
Project
5
S
Commitment to protection
of environmental assets and
history of environmental
stewardship
5
5
Incorporation of "green"
design and natural/native
elements
5
ti---"`
5
Public Benefits and Local Participation
Benefits received by the
Public
5
5 •
Participation of firms and
contractors that maintain a
local office
5
• Proposer provides innovated solutions for sea level rise and water inundation
scenarios.
Native hardscape palette, storm water management plan and pollution control plan
provide new opportunities for reducing negative impact to sensitive environment
"If additional space is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
be added as needed.
5 "If additional space is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
be added as needed.
TOTAL
100
92
Please see the Scoring Guidelines below for detailed criteria and guidelines.
Instructions: 1) The Evaluation Criteria listed above is derived from the information provided in the RFP for this project 2) Each Reviewer must sign and date their Evaluation
form(s) in ink. 3) Each Reviewer must base their evaluation on the same criteria so that value uniformity can be established. ONLY whole numbers should be used in scoring. 4)
Each Reviewer will evaluate and score ail Proposals and provide the original completed score sheets. 5) Committee Chair will provide a written "Recommendation for Final
Selection" memorandum addressed to the City Manager.
Proposers: I. GCM Co,IIti sting Solutions -Inc. (" ]") 2. Biscayne Marne Partners. LLC (' BMP")
3. Virginia Key, LLC ("VKLLC")
PLEASE NOTE THE FOLLOWING IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONS
1. Proposers inay be granted zero (0) points in any one category only if they failed to address the category entirely. During the administrative review,
proposals are reviewed to determine compliance with minimum requirements and would not likely react the Selection Committee phase of the
Selection Process if they failed to address a category. Nevertheless, failure to address any portion of a Category may result in a score of less than 2 5%.
2. Any investment or revenue received from the proposed parking arrangement SHALL NOT be considered in the evaluation of the Proposals.
However, parking may be considered in the overall aesthetics and functionality of the design proposed.
3. The number of restaurants provided in the Proposal SHALL NOT be considered in the evaluation of the Proposals. However, configuration
and use of the site, including placement of restaurants, may be considered in the overall aesthetics and functionality of the design proposed.
4. Higher scoring may be justified, but is not necessary, upon consideration of any other requirements or specifications included in the RFP and consistent
with the categories specified above.
2
Evaluator Initials f7-
APPENDIX 11
# EVALUATION MATRIX
Virginia Key Marina RFP 16717-011
Project De criptian: The City is inviting Proposers to hid on Request fur Proposals
Virginia Key for marin restaurant/shi is store uses
Evaluator Name: .r .-'7 • , z* Z. signature:
(INP") No. 16-17-011 for the Lease and Development of City -owned property, lucatc_ d on
/
___ ..
�;�— - - pate: _-49/7
Evaluation Categories*
valueComments
GCM�
(BMP)KL
VLC
Overall Experience and Qualifica'fidns
If additional space is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
be added as needed.
Relevant business and
Project team experience in
similar projects
10
17
r
_q____i
___
Gj
Operational history
reflective of capacity to meet
Project goals
10
(
t9
Availability of
financial/business
references
5
/
'-J�T�'
I
Financials & Proposed Revers es
*If additional space is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
be added as needed.
Financial return to the City,
including Base Rent and
Participation Rent
20
7
cr
q
Financial capability
10
(
Reasonableness of Revenue
Forecasts
5
_.J
I
(
• Design & Operational Plant "mil
Improved efficiencies of
marina operation and site
utilization
10
7
c'T
Aesthetics & functionality of
' proposed improvements
5
Effective use of site during
' construction/redevelopment
5
3
q
Consistency with the
Virginia Key Master Plan
principles
5c
5----
5
*If additional space is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9.Additional pages may
be added as needed.
1
. Resiliency& Environmental Considerations
Long term resiliency of the
Project
Commitment to protection
of environmental assets and
history of environmental
stewardship
Incorporation of"green"
design and natural/native
elements
5
5
5
v
y
*If additional space is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
be added as needed.
Public Benefits and Local Participation -Mr
Benefits received by the
Public
Participation of firms and
contractors that maintain a
local office
5
5
3
5-
*If additional space is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
be added as needed.
TOTAL
100
(t
gel
Please see the Scoring Guidelines below for detailed criteria and guidelines.
lnetrutfinne• 1) The Evaluation Criteria listed above is derived from the information provided in the RFP for this project. 2) Each Reviewer must sign and date their Evaluation
form(s) in into 3) Each Reviewer must base their evaluation on the same criteria so that value uniformity can be established. ONLY whole numbers should be used in scoring. 4)
Each Reviewer will evaluate and score all Proposals and provide the original completed score sheets. 5) Committee Chair will provide a written "Recommendation for Final
Selection' memorandum addressed to the City Manager.
Proposers: 1. GCM Cnntr u ting Solutions lac. ("GCM") 2. Biscayne Marine Partners LLC: ("i3MY")
3. yirginiaJCe,v. T.I,f' ("VK1,T•C"1
PLEASE NOTE THE FOLLOWING IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONS:
1. Proposers may be granted zero (0) points in any one category only if they failed to address the category entirely. During the administrative review,
proposals are reviewed to determine compliance with minimum requirements and would not likely reach the Select on Committee phase of the Selection
Process i f they failed to address a category. Nevertheless, failure to address any portion of a Category may result in a score of less than 25%.
2. Any investment or revenue received from the proposed parking arrangement SHAkL..NQT be considered in the evaluation of the Proposals.
However, parking may be considered in the overall aesthetics and functionality of the design proposed.
3. The number of restaurants provided in the Proposal SHALL NOT be considered in the evaluation of the Proposals. However, configuration and
use of the site, including placement of restaurants, may be considered in the overall aesthetics and functionality of the design proposed.
4. Higher scoring may be justified, but is not necessary, upon consideration of any other requirements or specifications included in the RFP and consistent
with the categories specified above.
2 Evaluator Initials
APPENDIX 11
at.
EVALUATION MATRIX
Virginia Key Marina REP i-17-011
I Project Description: The City is inviting Proposers to hid on Request for Proposals ("RFP') Nu. 16-17-011 for the Lease and Development of City -owned property, located on
Virginia Key for marinas/restaurant/ship's store uses
/s
Evaluator Name, tufarl l ,O#.M iY Ciro- Signature:
Evaluation Categories* Max 1 2 3
Value (GCM) (l3MP) (VRLLC)
Overall Experience and Qualifications
Relevant business and
Project team experience in
similar projects
Operational history
reflective of capacity to meet
Project goals
10
10
ID
0
Availability of
financial/business
reference s
5
3
Comments
aka. att-Gir
*If additional space is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
be added as needed.
1
Financials & Proposed Revenues
Financial return to the City,
including Base Rent and
Participation Rent
10
Financial capability 10
Reasonableness of Revenue
Forecasts
5
1
3
ID
(0
3 u
*11 additional space is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
be added as needed.
Design & operational Plan
Improved efficiencies of
marina operation and site
utilization
10
Aesthetics & functionality of
proposed improvements
5
3
5
Effective use of site during
construction/redevelopment
5
Consistency with the
Virginia Key Master Plan
principles
5
3
ch,;_r_A-c-Otsp-eC
*If additional space is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
be added as needed.
1
Resiliency & Environmental Considerations
Long term resiliency of the
Project
s�
5
3
Commitment to protection
of environmental assets and
history of environmental
stewardship
5
y
Incorporation of "green"
design and natural/native
elements
2_
5
Public Benefits and Local Participation
Benefits received by the
Public
5
Participation of firms and
contractors that maintain a
local office
5
/k6-e-el
*1f additional space is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
be added as needed.
*If additional space is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
be added as needed.
TOTAL 100
* Please see the Scoring Guidelines below for detailed criteria and guidelines.
5
Instruction: 1) The Evaluation Criteria listed above is derived from the information provided in the RFP for this project. 2) Each Reviewer must sign and date their Evaluation
fornl(s) in ink. 3) Each Reviewer must base their evaluation on the same criteria so that value uniformity can be established. ONLY whole numbers should be used in scoring. 4)
Each Reviewer will evaluate and score all Proposals and provide the original completed score sheets. 5) Committee Chair will provide a written "Recommendation for Final
Selection" memorandum addressed to the City Manager.
Proposers: 1 GCM CnntractinE Solutions, Tnr. ("GCM) 2. Bisrayne_Marine Partners 1.1.0 ("BM,P")
3_ Virginia Key. LLC j"VKI.LC")
PLEASE NOTE THE FOLLOWING IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONS:
1. Proposers may be granted zero (0) points in any one category only if they failed to address the category entirely. Dining the administrative review.
proposals are reviewed to determine compliance with minimum requirements and would not likely reach the Selection Committee phase of the Selection
Process if they failed to address a category. Nevertheless, failure to address any portion of a Category may result in a score of less than 25%.
Z. Any investment or revenue received from the proposed parking arrangement, SHALL NOT be considered in the evaluation of the Proposals.
However, parking may be considered in the overall aesthetics and functionality of the design proposed.
3. The number of restaurants provided in the Proposal SHALL NOT be considered in the evaluation of the Proposals. However, configuration and
use of the site, including placementof restaurants, maybe considered in the overall aesthetics and functionality of the design proposed.
4. Higher scoring may be justified, but is not necessary, upon consideration of any other requirements or specifications included in the RFP and consistent
with the categories specified above.
CYjt`ka
2 Evaluator initials
APPENDIX 11
•
EVALUATION MATRIX
Virginia Key Marina RPP 16-17-011.
Project Description: The City is inviting Proposers to bid un Request for Proposals ["RR") Nn.16-17-011 for the Lease and flevelopment of City -owned property, located on
Virginia Key forrnariinas/re,staurantjr hip's store uses f• /'/74
/� y�
Evaluator Name: At— l' h t:� G'ti f 't 1v 5iguature . / 1 1
Evaluation Categories*
lMax 1
Value (GCM)
2 3
(BMP) a (VKLLC)
Overall Experience and Qualifications
Relevant business and
Project team experience in
similar projects
10
9
Operational history
reflective of capacity to meet
Project goals
Availability of
financial/business
references
10
5
9
‘,//z// / 7
Comments
"Ifadditional space is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
be added as needed.
Financials & Proposed Revenues
Financial return to the City,
including Base Rent and
Participation Rent
10
/o
Financial capability
1.0
/0
Reasonableness of Revenue
Forecasts
5
1/
*1f a itionall space is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
be added as needed.
Design & Operational Plan
Improved efficiencies of
marina operation and site
utilization
10
/0
Aesthetics & functionality of
proposed improvements 5
Effective use of site during
construction/redevelopment
5
3
Consistency with the
Virginia Key Master Plan
principles
5
3
tC (� ;r), f YY�r r{
y11�_"4�' ✓' 1��
*If additional space is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
be added as needed.
1
Resiliency & Environmental Considerations
Long term resiliency of the
Project
5
3
Commitment to protection
of environmental assets and
history of environmental
stewardship
Incorporation of "green"
design and natural/native
elements
S
5
i
174
c
*If a dditional space is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
be added as needed.
Public Benefits and Local Participation
Benefits received by the
Public
5
Participation of firms and
contractors that maintain a
local office
5
1
TOTAL, 100
'If additional space is required for notes, please use pages 7 through 9. Additional pages may
be added as needed.
* PIease see the Scoring Guidelines below for detailed criteria and guidelines.
Jn tructionc• 1) The Evaluation Criteria listed above is derived from the inforrnation provided in the RFP for this project 2] Each Reviewer must sign and date their Evaluation
form(s) in ink. 3) Each Reviewer must base their evaluation on the same criteria so that value uniformity can be established. ONLY whole numbers should be used in scoring. 4)
Each Reviewer will evaluate and score all Proposals and provide the original completed score sheets. 5) Committee Chair will provide a written "Recommendation for Final
Selection"' memorandum addressed to the City Manager.
Proposers: 1. GCM Contracting Solutions. Inc ("GCM") 2. Biscayne Marine Partners. LLC ("BMP")
3 Virginia Key l.l.0 ("VKi.LC")
PLEASE NOTE THE FOLLOWING IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONS:
1. Proposers may be granted zero (0) points in any one category only if they failed to address the category entirely. During the administrative review,
proposals are reviewed to determine compliance with minimum requirements and would not likely reach the Selection Committee phase of the Selection
Process if they failed to address a category. N evertheless, failure to address any portion of a Category may result in a score of less than ZS%.
2. Any investment or revenue received from the proposed parking arrangement SHALL NOT be considered in the evaluation of the Proposals.
However, parking may be considered in the overall aesthetics and functionality of the design proposed.
3. The number of restaurants provided in the Proposal SHALLNOT_ be considered in the evaluation oldie Proposals. However, configuration and
use of the site, including placement of restaurants, may be considered is the overall aesthetics and functionality of the design proposed.
4_ Higher scoring may be justified, hut is not necessary, upon consideration of any other requirements or specifications included in the RFP and consistent
with the categories specified above.
2
11V
Evaluator Initials)in