Miami-Dade Legislative Item
File Number: 111305
Printable PDF Format Download Adobe Reader  Clerk's Official Copy   

File Number: 111305 File Type: Resolution Status: Adopted
Version: 0 Reference: R-504-11 Control: Board of County Commissioners
File Name: GROUTING OF SUBSURFACE LAYERS BELOW GOVERNMENT CUT CHANNEL Introduced: 6/13/2011
Requester: Department of Environmental Resources Management Cost: Final Action: 7/7/2011
Agenda Date: 7/7/2011 Agenda Item Number: 5C
Notes: ib 06.13.11 Title: RESOLUTION RELATING TO AN APPLICATION BY MAT CONCESSIONAIRE, LLC AND THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR A CLASS I PERMIT FOR THE GROUTING OF SUBSURFACE LAYERS BELOW GOVERNMENT CUT CHANNEL BETWEEN WATSON ISLAND AND DODGE ISLAND IN ASSOCIATION WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PORT OF MIAMI TUNNEL, MIAMI, MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA
Indexes: PORT OF MIAMI
Sponsors: NONE
Sunset Provision: No Effective Date: Expiration Date:
Registered Lobbyist: None Listed


Legislative History

Acting Body Date Agenda Item Action Sent To Due Date Returned Pass/Fail

Board of County Commissioners 7/7/2011 5C Adopted P
REPORT: First Assistant County Attorney Abigail Price-Williams read the foregoing proposed resolution into the record. Chairman Martinez opened the public hearing for persons wishing to speak in connection with this resolution. He closed the public hearing after no one appeared to be heard. It was moved by Commissioner Barreiro that the foregoing proposed resolution be approved. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Sosa, followed by a discussion. Chairman Martinez questioned why this resolution had no fiscal impact if work to grout the sub-surface rock layers below the channel was being added to the original scope of work. Mayor Gimenez noted approval of the permit had no fiscal impact, but the work certainly could. He said he was just briefed on this change order, and very upset about it. Mayor Gimenez noted he planned to meet with the contractors and the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) representatives to discuss it and hoped the FDOT would join him in challenging it. Chairman Martinez noted this project involved too many variables and fixed costs, which was why he did not support the Port Tunnel Project. Commissioner Sosa withdrew her second to the foregoing motion; however, Commissioner Heyman seconded the motion, for a discussion. In response to Commissioner Heyman’s inquiry of whether this permit was needed, or critical in any way to complete the Port Tunnel Project, Mayor Gimenez noted the County set aside a contingency fund of over $100 million to cover the costs of unanticipated geo-technical conditions. He said the County Commission was told that 1,000 core samples were taken and had tested fine, but now the company was requesting approval for a permit to grout below the channel to the bedrock. He said this was a very expensive proposition that could involve using the contingency funds and impact the State’s proposal to collect tolls in the tunnel. Mayor Gimenez noted he needed to speak with the contractors to clarify whether the additional work was necessary and if the job had been underbid. Commissioner Heyman asked if the County or the company was liable for any issue that might arise after the core samples were asserted, and whether such liability would be covered by the performance bond or the contingency fund. First Assistant County Attorney Price-Williams noted the County Attorney would definitely challenge the issue, but needed to review the underlying agreement to determine who was liable and if the liability was covered by the performance bond or the contingency fund. She noted the foregoing resolution, however, dealt specifically with the permit. She also noted the County usually sought compensation from the performance bond, and resorted to the contingency fund only when appropriate. Chairman Martinez asked that Ms. Price-Williams respond to Commissioners in private if their inquiries had any legal implications. In response to Commissioner Heyman’s question regarding whether a denial of this permit application today would impact the Port Tunnel Project, Ms. Price-Williams noted she could not say specifically how a denial today would impact that Project. Mr. Gus Pego, FDOT Secretary/Project Manager for the Port Tunnel Project, noted the contractor had envisioned this permit would be necessary in the worst case scenario, where geological changes had occurred in the subsurface areas. He also noted this permit would allow the contractor to make additional claims for reimbursement, pursuant to the contract. Mr. Pego noted that FDOT had not received an estimate for the cost of this work yet, but expected to receive it by July 15, 2011. He further noted that FDOT received six claim notices (relief events) from the contractor and only one had a fiscal impact. He said it was a modification to the tunnel boring machine that was denied by FDOT. Mr. Pego noted that claims submitted by the contractor must go through a process, be reviewed by technical experts, and if determined invalid, could end up being disputed before a resolution board or undergo litigation. Commissioner Heyman asked if it was possible to defer this application to the July 19th County Commission meeting for the Board to receive additional information on the cost estimates and the number of claims to be filed, without impacting the Project. Mr. Pego noted a deferral of this permit application to the next Commission meeting would not impact the project; however, the contractor planned to grout through the summer and needed the permit in place to complete this work, before beginning to bore the Tunnel. He noted that FDOT denied relief event No. 6 for a change in geological conditions, based on the technical analysis, and FDOT agreed that the contractor’s claim was invalid. Mr. Pego noted that FDOT wanted to ensure that taxpayer funds were spent wisely on this project. Commissioner Heyman expressed concern that the costs for this work might be taken from the contingency fund, and the County could be held liable for it. She said she could not support this application until she had more information. Commissioner Heyman withdrew her second to the motion. Commissioner Diaz seconded the motion, for more discussion. Clarifying the permit requirements for this work, Mr. Pego noted that DERM required a Class I Permit, based on the contractor’s estimated volume of work. Commissioner Barreiro noted that regardless of the outcome of the claims, the permit was needed to proceed with this work and should be supported. He noted approval of this permit today would not bind the Commission to approve the claims for reimbursement. Commissioner Diaz said he wanted to hear from FDOT regarding the measure issues referred to by the Mayor. He noted he was a strong proponent for the Port Tunnel Project, and did not want the issues to become political. He asked if any of the claims would be litigated. Mayor Gimenez noted the Administration’s position was to support approval of the permit for grouting and to challenge the work order. He noted the permit should be supported to avoid a delay of the project, but it seemed odd to him that a significant amount of money was needed for unanticipated consequences before the boring even started. He pointed out that it was the company’s burden to prove the work was necessary, based on unanticipated circumstances, and FDOT’s responsibility to validate or repudiate the claim of proof, through a mediation process. Mr. Pego concurred with the Mayor. He noted that FDOT had stood behind the County throughout this process and the development of the Project, and FDOT had conducted numerous tests of its own. He also noted that FDOT had determined the contractor needed to prove his claims before receiving any reimbursement. Mr. Pego pointed out that the County could incur additional costs if the Project was delayed. Commissioner Diaz noted he believed the County had capped its portion of funds for this project, and approval of the permit was necessary to begin this work; therefore, he supported it. He noted, however, he would not support any unnecessary change orders or delays of this project that could cost tax payers millions of dollars. Regarding the need for the permit, Commissioner Moss urged his colleagues to approve it today, with instruction to staff to bring back a report reflecting the estimated cost to grout the channel. He noted he was pleased with the Mayor’s position, and with the process in place for validating the claims. He said he wanted to be fair and ensure that projects moved forward and that taxpayer funds were handled appropriately. Responding to Chairman Martinez’ comment that this permit was not needed when the original Port Tunnel contract was approved, Mr. Pego noted that some grouting of the foundation had always been anticipated, and this permit would quantify the amount of work that needed to be done in the channel. Chairman Martinez noted the permit should have been approved with the original contract. He pointed out that the Baseball Stadium Project resulted in unintended consequences, and not every stakeholder was consulted on it. He also pointed out that the County had never stayed within its maximum cap for a capital project. Hearing no further comments, the Board, by roll call vote, adopted this resolution as presented. Commissioner Diaz asked the County Mayor to notify the County Commission immediately of any changes to this contract concerning FDOT’s proposal to implement tolls in the Port Tunnel. Mayor Gimenez advised that the Administration had no intentions of implementing tolls of any kind in the Port Tunnel or on the bridge, and would make every effort to prevent it. He noted the foregoing unanticipated expense had already put additional burden on the Port Tunnel Project. Chairman Martinez said he felt a time would come when tolls would be implemented in the Port Tunnel, which was why he did not support it.

County Manager 7/6/2011 Time Sensitive 7/7/2011
REPORT: The Contractor’s ‘means and methods’ are the grouting activities and any delay caused by the County in not passing the permit may result in claims to the County and FDOT for the delays. Both FDOT and MAT will be present tomorrow to respond to any questions on this permitting issue. It is important to pass the item. Please let me know if you need further detail.

County Attorney 6/15/2011 Assigned Abbie N. Schwaderer 6/16/2011

County Manager 6/13/2011 Assigned County Attorney 7/7/2011
REPORT: DERM; COMMITTEE REVIEW: NO; QUASI-JUDICIAL; PUBLIC HEARING REQUIRED; MUST PASS LIST:YES [TIME SENSITIVE, HIGH PRIORITY PROJECT]; COMMISSION SPONSORSHIP: NONE; ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY: ABBIE SCHWADERER-RAURELL

County Manager 6/13/2011 Assigned Sue Torriente 6/13/2011

Legislative Text


TITLE
RESOLUTION RELATING TO AN APPLICATION BY MAT CONCESSIONAIRE, LLC AND THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR A CLASS I PERMIT FOR THE GROUTING OF SUBSURFACE LAYERS BELOW GOVERNMENT CUT CHANNEL BETWEEN WATSON ISLAND AND DODGE ISLAND IN ASSOCIATION WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PORT OF MIAMI TUNNEL, MIAMI, MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA

BODY
WHEREAS, this Board desires to accomplish the purposes outlined in the accompanying memorandum, a copy of which is incorporated herein by reference,

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, that this Board having considered all the applicable factors contained within Section 24-48.3 of the Code of Miami-Dade County, hereby approves the application by MAT Concessionaire, LLC and the Florida Department of Transportation for a Class I permit for the grouting of subsurface layers below Government Cut Channel between Watson Island and Dodge Island in association with the construction of the Port of Miami Tunnel, Miami, Miami-Dade County, Florida, subject to the conditions set forth in the memorandum from the Miami-Dade County Department of Environmental Resources Management, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof. The issuance of this approval does not relieve the applicant from obtaining all applicable Federal, State, and local permits.

HEADER
Date:

To: Honorable Joe A. Martinez, Chairman
and Members, Board of County Commissioners

From: Alina T. Hudak
County Manager

Subject: Resolution Relating to an Application by MAT Concessionaire, LLC and the Florida Department of Transportation for a Class I Permit for the Grouting of Subsurface Layers below Government Cut Channel between Watson Island and Dodge Island in Association with the Construction of the Port of Miami Tunnel

Attached, please find for your consideration an application by MAT Concessionaire, LLC and the Florida Department of Transportation for a Class I permit. Also attached is the recommendation of the Department of Environmental Resources Management and a proposed resolution approving the issuance of the Class I permit.


_____________________
Assistant County Manager


Date: June 8, 2011

To: Alina T. Hudak
County Manager

From: Lee N. Hefty, Assistant Director
Department of Environmental Resources Management

Subject: Resolution Relating to an Application by MAT Concessionaire, LLC and the Florida Department of Transportation for a Class I Permit for the Grouting of Subsurface Layers Below Government Cut Channel between Watson Island and Dodge Island in Association with the Construction of the Port of Miami Tunnel


Recommendation
I have reviewed the Class I permit application submitted by MAT Concessionaire, LLC and the Florida Department of Transportation. Based upon the applicable evaluation factors set forth in Section 24-48.3 of the Code of Miami-Dade County (Code), Florida, I recommend that the Board of County Commissioners (Board) approve the issuance of a Class I permit for the reasons set forth below.

Scope
The project site is located between Watson Island and Dodge Island, within Government Cut in Biscayne Bay, in Commissioner Barreiro’s District 5.

Fiscal Impact/Funding Source
Not applicable.

Track Record/Monitor
Not applicable.

Background
The subject Class I permit application requests authorization for the work associated with the grouting of subsurface rock layers below Government Cut Channel between Watson Island and Dodge Island in association with the construction of the Port of Miami Tunnel in the City of Miami, Miami-Dade County. The proposed project is required to be reviewed and approved by the Board at a public hearing because the scope of work is not specifically referenced in Section 24-48.2 of the Code as work that can be processed administratively with a short form application. Therefore, a standard form application including a public hearing is required.

The Port of Miami Tunnel and Access Improvement Project includes the construction of twin tunnels beneath Government Cut Channel to provide a direct access link between the Port of Miami and MacArthur Causeway (I-395) on Watson Island. The tunnels will be excavated using a 40-foot diameter tunnel boring machine to cut through the earth along the path of the tunnel. During the pre-construction assessment phase, the applicants conducted geotechnical investigations of the conditions of the subsurface rock layers where the tunnels are proposed to be bored. The tests determined that subsurface formation grouting will be required in areas within the proposed tunnel route in order to provide the necessary stability for the tunnel construction.

The work will consist of drilling vertical holes between 40 and 80 feet below the bottom of Government Cut Channel and injecting them with grout. A total of 914 grouting holes will be bored, which will result in temporary impacts to 3,765 square feet of Government Cut Channel bottom. The drilling and grouting operations will use double cased drilling tubes, which will remove the drill cuttings from each drill hole and minimize the release of drilling fluids or grout to tidal waters. Once the drilling is complete, the drill holes will be backfilled with grout up to the original level of the channel bed, and any void at the top of each hole will be filled with clean limestone to restore the channel to its original elevation. The effectiveness of

the formation grouting operation will be verified through the drilling of control boreholes which will result in a total of 98 square feet of temporary impacts to the channel bottom. The same construction and channel bed restoration methodologies will be employed for the boreholes. The proposed work will occur on submerged lands owned by the City of Miami, which has authorized the proposed work by signing the Class 1 Permit Application ((Attachment A).

Pursuant to Section 24-48.4 of the Code, potential and cumulative adverse environmental impacts for a proposed project must be avoided and minimized. A thorough in-water bay bottom (benthic) survey revealed that there are no significant resources within the footprint of the proposed work. As stated above, the drilling and grouting will be conducted with double cased drilling tubes to minimize the potential for the release of drilling fluids or grout to tidal waters. Therefore, no mitigation is required for the minimal adverse environmental impacts expected under this project.

The proposed project is not located within an area identified by the Miami-Dade County Manatee Protection Plan (MDCMPP) as essential manatee habitat for the West Indian Manatee (Trichechus manatus). However, the Class I permit will require that all standard manatee conditions be followed during all construction operations.

The proposed project has been designed in accordance with all relevant Miami-Dade County coastal and wetland construction criteria and is consistent with all other Miami-Dade County coastal and wetland protection provisions. Please find attached a DERM Project Report which sets forth the reasons the proposed project is recommended for approval by DERM pursuant to the applicable evaluation factors set forth in Section 24-48.3 of the Code. The conditions, limitations, and restrictions set forth in the Project Report attached hereto are incorporated herein by references hereto.



Attachments
Attachment A:Class I Permit Application
Attachment B:Owner/Agent Letter, Engineer Certification Letter and Project Sketches
Attachment C:Zoning Memorandum
Attachment D:Names and Addresses of Owners of All Riparian Property within Three Hundred (300) Feet of the Proposed Work
Attachment E:DERM Project Report















Home  |   Agendas  |   Minutes  |   Legislative Search  |   Lobbyist Registration  |   Legislative Reports
2016 BCC Meeting Calendar  |   Miami-Dade County Code of Ordinances   |   ADA Notice  |  

Home  |  Using Our Site  |  About Phone Directory  |  Privacy  |  Disclaimer

E-mail your comments, questions and suggestions to Webmaster  

Web Site © 2016 Miami-Dade County.
All rights reserved.