List of Possible Miami-Dade Civil Courthouse Builders Narrows to 3
Florida East Coast Industries's development team will remain as an alternate in case one of the three finalists opts out as planning proceeds.
December 19, 2018 at 02:53 PM
4 minute read
Miami-Dade County has eliminated the parent company of the Brightline passenger train and another development group from the competition to build a new civil courthouse and left three groups in the running for construction.
Five development teams started the process vying to build the courthouse, including an unsolicited joint proposal from Coral Gables-based Florida East Coast Industries LLC and El Paso, Texas-based Hunt Cos. Inc. FECI is the parent company of Brightline, which in November announced it's changing its name to Virgin Trains USA after Richard Branson's Virgin Group took a minority stake.
The first round looked at qualifications and although the FECI-Hunt team was eliminated, it will remain as an alternate in case one of the three finalists opts out in the second and final round.
The three companies still in the running are M-S-E Judicial Partners LLC, a partnership of the DLR Group and Suffolk Construction; Plenary Group USA Concessions Ltd., whose partners include design and architectural firm HOK and Los Angeles-based Tutor Perini Corp.; and Sacyr Infrastructure USA, a partnership of Sacyr SA, AECOM and Plaza Construction, according to a Dec. 11 county memo.
Next, they are being asked to submit project specifics, including cost and technical plans, according to the memo.
The other eliminated team was a partnership among Toronto-based investment firm Fengate Capital Management Ltd., Miami-based Arquitectonica, Colorado-based Hensel Phelps and others.
The county wants the new courthouse built under a public-private partnership with the private sector designing, building and maintaining the building while fronting the project cost. The county would repay the development team over time.
The courthouse is set to rise on a half-acre owned by the county. It's now is a park and parking lots on the northwest corner of Flagler Street and Northwest First Avenue just west of the existing 1928 courthouse at 73 W. Flagler St. Its problems include termites, mold, and water and plumbing leaks.
A selection committee reviewed the five applications and qualifications in the first round, heard oral presentations and scored the teams. The M-S-E Judicial Partners LLC team scored the highest, followed by Plenary Group and Sacyr in third place, according to a selection committee memo to the county Internal Services Department.
FECI-Hunt placed fourth, which allows it to stay as an alternate, and Fengate placed last.
The selection committee comprises five voting members, including county staff members from the Finance and Internal Services departments as well as a Florida International University representative and retired Miami-Dade Chief Circuit Judge Joseph Farina.
County administrators reviewed and upheld the selection committee's recommendation.
The county has been trying for years to build a new courthouse and find the financing. In 2014, voters struck down a $390 million bond measure to finance a new courthouse.
Now, the county has vowed it won't use property tax revenue to pay for the project. Revenue sources include the remainder of a $50 million voter-approved bond and proceeds from the future sale of county property, including the existing courthouse.
Miami-Dade Mayor Carlos Gimenez recommending a 1-acre, county-owned lot at the Children's Courthouse to the north. But many in the legal community pushed for the Flagler site.
In July, the County Commission voted 10-0 to select the Flagler site despite a warning from Gimenez of higher costs.
County administrators estimated in November that the first-year cost to the county would be 49 percent more than previously predicted in part because the Flagler site will require a rent payment.
The property was purchased with the help of a Federal Transit Administration grant requiring lease payments for nontransit uses.
The County Commission is scheduled to approve a development agreement in April 2020, and construction would start the following July.
Related stories:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllHow Much Coverage Do You Really Have? Valuation and Loss Settlement Provisions in Commercial Property Policies
10 minute readThe Importance of 'Speaking Up' Regarding Lease Renewal Deadlines for Commercial Tenants and Landlords
6 minute readMeet the Attorneys—and Little Known Law—Behind $20M Miami Dispute
Trending Stories
- 1Elon Musk Names Microsoft, Calif. AG to Amended OpenAI Suit
- 2Trump’s Plan to Purge Democracy
- 3Baltimore City Govt., After Winning Opioid Jury Trial, Preparing to Demand an Additional $11B for Abatement Costs
- 4X Joins Legal Attack on California's New Deepfakes Law
- 5Monsanto Wins Latest Philadelphia Roundup Trial
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250