Highway 25 Coalition Agenda Packet 06-24-2016Tentative Agenda
Highway 25 Coalition
June 24, 2016
7:30 AM
Monticello City Hall
1. Address organization/operation topics
• Chair
• Secretary
• Determine fiscal agent — one of the agencies will need to provide this service
• Liability Insurance
• Other
2. Initial discussion on work plan and budget for 2017/18 ( Work plan and budget needs to
be prepared by June meeting according to JPA)
• Following are some ideas for discussion
• Select a consulting traffic engineer
• Establishment of base line traffic data
• Preparation of traffic model utilizing base traffic data and land use
information
• Identification of trends and congestion projections
• Formulation of strategies and identification of improvements needed over
time as the area develops
When asked for a her thoughts on a budget estimate for completion of
work items in 2017, Claudia Dumont mentioned that the last two
traffic modeling contracts she administered came in at $82,000 and
$94,000. She went on to note "These contracts were for freeway traffic
modeling. Depending on how large a network gets modeled for TH 25 — I
would expect the cost to be higher, especially since there are a number of
local roads that would be key components of the model. I would budget
for $150,000 and hope the estimates come in for less."
• Identification of lobbying activities
• Other
3. Monticello/Wright County - Update on improvements to Highway 25 Intersections at
CSAH 75 and 7th Street.
4. Sherburne County Transportation topics of interest
5. I-94 Coalition information and update — other legislative updates
6. Discuss Traffic Engineer Selection process (see templates provided by Claudia Dumont
Highway 25 Coalition
Meeting Notes — Unofficial notes taken from gathering on May 27, 2016
Attendance: Mike Potter, Virgil Hawkins, Dan Webber, Steve Taylor, Raelynn Cook, Clay
Wilfahrt, Brian Stumpf, Jeff O'Neill, Ewald Petersen
Absent: Big Lake Township representation.
O'Neill reported that one more signature is needed for the group to be formally established.
Virgil Hawkins noted that the item will be placed on an upcoming Wright County Board
Agenda.
1. Discuss organization/operation topics
a. Chair
b. Secretary
c. Determine fiscal agent — one of the agencies will need to provide this service
d. Liability Insurance
e. Other
Items noted above to be discussed and addressed once the group is formally established.
2. Initial discussion on work plan and budget for 2017/18 ( Work plan and budget needs to
be prepared by June meeting according to JPA)
a. Following are some ideas discussed with direction provided by consensus.
i. Select a consulting traffic engineer. It was the consensus of the group to
ask Claudia Dumont for assistance in obtaining a request for proposal
template that could be utilized in selection of a consulting traffic engineer.
It is the goal of the group to have an engineer selected in 2016.
ii. For the items below, it was the consensus of the group to consult with
Claudia Dumont for an estimate of the cost to have a future appointed
consulting engineer conduct the following traffic research and planning in
2017.
1. Establishment of base line traffic data
2. Preparation of traffic model utilizing base traffic data and land use
information
3. Identification of trends and congestion projections
4. Formulation of strategies and identification of improvements
needed over time as the area develops
iii. Identification of lobbying activities. The group identified stakeholder
groups and lobbying activities that the group may wish to undertake as
part of its work plan for 2017. Following is a starter list of individuals as
well as governmental organizations and entities that were mentioned
would likely be interested in knowing about and participating in efforts
to maintain good traffic flow in the corridor;
1. MDNOT
2. Xcel Energy
3. BNSF
4. Greater MSP
5. DEED
6. Conexis
7. FAST
8. CEDS
9. National and State representatives
10. Governor Dayton
11. Lieutenant Governor Smith
12. Local School Districts
13. Centra Care
iv. Monticello/Wright County - update on improvements to Highway 25
Intersections at CSAH 75 and 7th Street. O'Neill reported
v. Sherburne County Transportation topics of interest. Clay Wilfahrt and
Steve Taylor provided an update on the status of development of a
potential rail based warehousing, business and industrial park.
Development of such a facility could result in significant economic
benefits to the local, statewide and the national economies. It was
recognized that development of the support required to build the necessary
bridge and interchange improvements in a timely fashion will require a
broad range of support. The group discussed conducting a summit
featuring participants that would have a high degree of interest in the
project to include and not limited to the parties identified as stakeholders
above.
• I94 Coalition information and update — other legislative updates — Mike Potter noted that
the I-94 lane construction between the Crow River and Albertville was not included in
the legislation approved in the 2016 session. However, there is some chance that the
segment could be added to transportation legislation as part of a special session if it
occurs.
• Discuss Traffic Engineer Selection process — See work plan noted above.
1.0 Preliminary Design
❑ 1.11 Environmental Documentation - Class I Actions
❑ 1.12 Environmental Documentation - Class II Actions
❑ 1.13 Environmental Documentation - Class III Actions
❑ 1.21 Geometric Layouts - Level 1
❑ 1.22 Geometric Layouts - Level 2
❑ 1.23 Geometric Layouts - Level 3
2.0 Highway Design
❑ 2.11 Highway Design -Level 1
❑ 2.12 Highway Design - Level 2
❑ 2.13 Highway Design - Level 3
3.0 Bridge Design
❑ 3.11 Bridge and Structure Design -Level 1
❑ 3.12 Bridge and Structure Design - Level 2
❑ 3.13 Bridge and Structure Design - Level 3
❑ 3.14 Bridge and Structure Design - Level 4
4.0 Bridge Inspection
❑ 4.1 Structural Metals Inspection
❑ 4.4 High Mast Light Tower Weld Inspection
5.0 Environmental Studies
❑ 5.2 Air Quality Analysis
❑ 5.3 Noise Analysis & Abatement Design
❑ 5.41 Contaminated Property Investigation - Level I
❑ 5.42 Contaminated Property Investigation - Level II
❑ 5.51 Wetland Services - Level 1
❑ 5.52 Wetland Services - Level 2
❑ 5.53 Wetland Services - Level 3
6.0 Materials Testing
❑ 6.1 Geotechnical Studies
❑ 6.2 Highway Materials Testing
❑ 6.3 Geotechnical Laboratory Testing - Level 1
❑ 6.3 Geotechnical Laboratory Testing - Level 2
❑ 6.4 Vibration Analysis & Monitoring
❑ 6.5 Pile Load Testing
❑ 6.6 Standard Penetration & Rock Coring
❑ 6.7 Cone Penetration Test
❑ 6.8 Solid Stem Auger Drilling
❑ 6.9 Soils Analysis & Recommendations
❑ 6.10 Ground Penetration Radar Survey
7.0 Transportation Planning
❑ 7.11 Planning -Class I
❑ 7.12 Planning - Class II
❑ 7.13 Planning - Class III
8.0 Right of Way Assistance
❑ 8.1 Direct Purchase
❑ 8.21 Relocation Assistance - Level 1
❑ 8.22 Relocation Assistance - Level 2
❑ 8.3 Field Title Investigation
❑ 8.4 Title Services
❑ 8.51 R/W Appraisals - Level 1
❑ 8.52 R/W Appraisals - Level 2
9.0 Land Surveys
❑ 9.11 Geodetic Control Surveying - Level 1
❑ 9.12 Geodetic Control Surveying - Level 2
❑ 9.13 Geodetic Control Surveying - Level 3
❑ 9.14 Geodetic Control Surveying - Level 4
❑ 9.2 Legal Description Preparation
❑ 9.3 Production of Right of Way Acquisition Plats
❑ 9.4 Design/Location Surveys
❑ 9.5 Right -of -Way Surveys
❑ 9.6 Land Surveys
(CSS/CM Last Updated 11/07/2014)
10.0 PhotoGrammetric Mapping and Aerial Imagery
❑ 10.1 Photogrammetric Mapping
❑ 10.21 Aerial Photography
❑ 10.22 IMU-GPS Aerial Photo
❑ 10.23 Digital Aerial Oblique
❑ 10.24 Digital Elevation Model
11.0 Construction Inspection/ Contract Administration
❑ 11.1 Construction Inspection Grading and Base, Bituminous and
Concrete
❑ 11.2 Construction Inspection Bridge Construction
❑ 11.3 Construction Surveying
❑ 11.4 Materials Sampling & Testing- Field Sampling and Testing
❑ 11.5 Materials Sampling & Testing- Plant Inspection/Bituminous
❑ 11.6 Materials Sampling and Testing- Plant Inspection/Concrete
❑ 11.7 Construction Contract Administration & Management
12.0 Cultural Resources
❑ 12.11 Archaeological Work
❑ 12.12 Historic Archaeological Work
❑ 12.3 Geomorphology Studies
❑ 12.4 Architectural/History Studies
❑ 12.5 Historic Architect Services
13.0 Hydraulic Structure Inspection, Location and Repair
❑ 13.1 Detailed Inspection and Location of Stormwater System Features
(Level 1)
❑ 13.2 Video Inspection of Stormwater System Features (Level 2)
❑ 13.3 Cleaning of Stormwater System Features (Level 3)
14.0 Traffic Engineering
❑ 14.1 Traffic Signal Design
❑ 14.2 Traffic Signal Operations
❑ 14.3 Roadway Lighting Design
❑ 14.4 Temporary Traffic Control Plan Design & Special Provisions
❑ 14.61 Signing Plan Design & Special Provisions - Level 1
❑ 14.62Signing Plan Design & Special Provisions - Level 2
❑ 14.63 Signing Plan Design & Special Provisions - Level 3
❑ 14.7 Traffic Engineering Special Studies
❑ 14.81 Freeway Modeling - Level 1
❑ 14.82 Freeway Modeling - Level 2
® 14.83 Freeway Modeling - Level 3
❑ 14.84 Freeway Modeling - Level 4
15.0Subsurface Utility Engineering
❑ 15.1 Subsurface Utility Engineering
16.0Value Engineering
❑ 16.1 Value Engineering Study/Workshop
17.011oundabouts
❑ 17.11 Low Demand/Volume (<1500) Roundabouts - Level 1
❑ 17.14 Low Demand/Volume (<1500) Roundabouts - Level 2
❑ 17.21 High Demand/Volume (>1500) Roundabouts - Level 1
❑ 17.22 High Demand/Volume (>1500) Roundabouts - Level 2
18.0 Transportation Landscape Architecture
❑ 18.1 Transportation Landscape Architecture
19.0 Asbestos and Regulated Waste
❑ 19.1 Asbestos & Reg Waste Material Assessment & Removal Oversight
❑ 19.2 Asbestos Abatement and Peeling Lead Paint Encapsulation
❑ 19.3 Regulated Waste Removal
❑ 19.4 Asbestos Containing Waste Material Management Oversight
❑ 19.5 Asbestos Containing Waste Material Abatement & Management
20.0 Project Management
❑ 20.11 Level 1 Preconstruction
❑ 20.12 Level 2 Construction
❑ 20.13 Level 3Contract Time Determination
-1-
PRE -QUALIFICATION ANNOUNCEMENT
Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT)
I-94 Corridors of Commerce II Traffic Modeling
This document is available in alternative formats for persons with disabilities by calling Claudia Dumont at (320) 223-6530 or
for persons who are hearing or speech impaired by calling the Minnesota Relay Service at 1-800-627-3529.
This request for letters of interest does not obligate MnDOT to award a contract or complete the project, and MnDOT reserves
the right to cancel the announcement if it is considered to be in its best interest.
PROJECT SPECIFIC INFORMATION
Project Overview
MnDOT requests responses for freeway traffic modeling on I-94 between Albertville and Maple Grove. Traffic modeling will
include travel demand modeling as well as freeway operation modeling.
Project Goal
The goal of this project is to assess the feasibility of operational improvements on the I-94 Corridor. The modeling
documentation needs to meet the requirements for an Interstate Access Request. See Attachment A for the project scope.
Responder Requirements
In order to submit a letter of interest, responders must be pre -qualified at the time this announcement is made available, in the
work type(s) identified above. This project has its own "Official Pre -Qualified Consultant List" that indicates the responders
that are eligible to submit for this specific project, which has been posted separately from this announcement. Note: If
responders are not pre -qualified for all work types needed for a project, they must make arrangements to subcontract with
firms that are pre -qualified for those work types. If applicable, the responder must identify, in the letter of interest, their
subcontractor and which work type the subcontractor will be completing.
If there are no firms listed on the "Official Pre -Qualified Consultant List" for an identified work type(s), the responder may
provide the work themselves or they may subcontract with any firm they choose.
OUESTIONS
Prospective, pre -qualified responders who have any questions regarding this request for letters of interest must submit
questions, by e-mail, to:
Claudia Dumont
Claudia. dumont@state.nm.us
All questions and answers will be posted, verbatim, on MnDOT's Consultant Services Web Page, at:
htto://www.dot.state.mn.us/consult/notices.html. Potential pre -qualified responders are responsible for checking the web page
for any addendums to this announcement and any questions that have been answered.
Questions regarding this announcement must be received, via e-mail, by the Contact Administrator identified above no later
than 2:OOPM Central Standard Time on January 21, 2015.
MnDOT anticipates posting answers to all questions by 4:00 PM Central Standard Time on January 28, 2015.
No other MnDOT personnel are allowed to discuss this announcement before the letter of interest submission deadline.
Contact regarding this announcement with any personnel not listed above could result in disqualification.
LETTER OF INTEREST CONTENT AND FORMAT
The letter of interest must not exceed 6 single -sided pages, with no smaller than 11 point font.
In addition, responders must submit a project specific Quality Management Plan (QMP), separate from the letter of interest.
The QMP must not exceed 2 single -sided pages, with no smaller than 11 point font.
-2-
(CSS/CM Last Updated 11/07/2014)
If a responder's letter of interest and/or QMP exceeds the page limits identified above, the excess pages will not be reviewed,
regardless of content. Note: required forms are NOT included as part of the page limit.
The letter of interest must adhere to the following format:
1. Contact Information:
The purpose of this section is for the responders to identify their contact information. Responder's must list the company's
full legal name, business address, contact person's name and title, telephone number, fax number and e-mail address (as
available).
2. Eligibility:
The purpose of this section is for responders to confirm that they, and (if applicable) their subcontractor(s) are pre-
qualified in the required work type(s).
3. Key Personnel:
The purpose of this section is for responders to list the key personnel that will be assigned to this project, and what roles
and responsibilities they will have in each task and/or the overall project.
Section 3. Key Personnel is amended to read:
3A. Qualifications and Experience of Company and Key Personnel: The purpose of this section is for responders to list the
company's and the key personnel's experience with similar work.
3B. Key Personnel: List the key personnel that will be assigned to this project, and what roles and responsibilities they will
have in each task and/or the overall project.
-3-
(CSS/CM Last Updated 11/07/2014)
4. Current Work:
The purpose of this section is for responders to list the current projects/workload for the proposed key personnel, and the
expected completion dates of those projects. For each key personnel, responders must indicate the percentage of their time
allocated to those current projects and the percentage of their time available to work on this project.
5. Project Understanding:
The purpose of this section is for the responders to demonstrate their understanding of the project. Responders must
clearly state their understanding of the project objectives, goals and tasks to show or demonstrate their view of the nature
of the project. Responders should demonstrate their understanding by using their own works rather than simply repeating
what is listed in the prequalification announcement.
6. Work Plan:
The purpose of this section is for responders to present their work plan. Responders must provide a detailed work plan,
which must identify the major tasks to be accomplished. Responders must be sure to not only describe what will be done,
but explain how each task will be accomplished. Responders must also utilize this section to affirm their ability to provide
the services within the identified time frame. The detailed work plan must present:
- The Overall Project Approach
- A Breakdown of the Project Tasks, detailing the tasks, and how they will be completed
- Deliverable Due Dates and an Overall Project Schedule
7. Quality Management Plan:
The purpose of this section is for responders to present their Quality Management Plan (QMP). Responders must provide
a project specific QMP that will be used on the project. The QMP must specify how responder will perform Quality
Assurance and Quality Control (QA/QC) activities throughout the duration of the project to ensure delivery of a quality
product in a timely manner that conforms to established contract requirements. Components of the QMP must include the
following project specific items (as outlined in MnDOT's current QMP Manual located at
httD://www.dot.state.nm.us/desi2n/cimD/index.html):
- A List of Requirements
- Intent of the QMP
- Philosophy of the QMP
- Technical Document Review Process
- Checking Procedures
- Quality Control Verification
- Definitions
QMP evaluation criteria will focus on the strength and clarity of QMP, what value is added and the project specific
scalable components of size, risk and complexity. Both the technical competencies of staff involved in this effort and the
components of the QMP will be evaluated. Components of the QMP must include the following project specific items: a
list of requirements, intent of the QMP, philosophy of the QMP, technical document review process, checking procedures,
quality control verification and definitions. Proposals should indicate specifically how the QMP will be applied to this
project.
8. Additional Information:
The purpose of this section is for responders to provide any additional information that would be relevant to this project
and assist MnDOT in making a selection.
9. Required Forms:
The purpose of this section is for responders to complete and submit ALL forms and documents required under any other
section of this RFP.
10. Certification Statement:
Responders must provide and agree to the following statement and signature:
I hereby certify that I am a duly authorized representative of the company and that the information contained within this
letter of interest is current, true and correct to the best of my knowledge. I hereby authorize and request any person,
agency or firm to furnish any pertinent information requested by MnDOT deemed necessary to verify the statements made
-4-
(CSS/CM Last Updated 11/07/2014)
in this application.
(Signature)
(Title)
(Date)
RESPONSE SUBMITTAL INSTRUCTIONS
Responders must submit 4 hard copies of the letter of interest, along with one copy of the entire response in electronic format
(CD-ROM or flash drive). Responses must be submitted in a sealed mailing envelope or package, clearly marked "Response"
on the outside. An authorized member of the firm must sign the response.
All letters of interest must be mailed (United States Postal Service), expressed (UPS, FedEx or other similar express carrier)
or dropped off to the attention of-
Claudia
£Claudia Dumont
Minnesota Department of Transportation
3725 12' Street North
St. Cloud, MN 56303
Responses must be received no later 2:OOPM Central Standard Time on February 4, 2015. Letters of interest are
accepted at the Information Desk only. The receptionist will time stamp the response.
RESPONSE EVALUATION
Representatives of MnDOT will evaluate all letters of interest received by the deadline. In some instances, an interview may
be part of the evaluation process. A 100 -point scale will be used to create the final evaluation recommendation. The factors
and weighting on which letters of interest will be judged are broken down in the following table:
Qualification and Experience of Key Personnel 30%
Qualifications and Experience of Company 30%
Expressed Understanding of the Project Objectives, Goals and Tasks 15%
Work Plan, Project Approach and Ability to Meet Schedule 15%
QMP 10%
MnDOT anticipates that the evaluation and selection will be completed by February 20, 2015.
GENERAL REOUIREMENTS
Responders must adhere to all terms of this announcement.
Late letters of interest will not be considered. Fax and e-mail responses will not be considered. All costs incurred in
responding to this announcement will be borne by the responder.
Affidavit of Noncollusion
Responders must complete the attached "Affidavit of Noncollusion" form and submit it as part of their response.
Conflicts of Interest
Responders must provide a list of all entities with which it has relationships that create, or appear to create, a conflict of
interest with the work that is contemplated in this announcement. This list should indicate the name of the entity, the
relationship and a discussion of the conflict. Responders must complete the attached "Disclosure of Potential Conflict of
Interest" form and submit it as part of their response.
Letter of Interest Certification
By submitting a letter of interest, responders warrant that the information provided is true, correct and reliable for purposes of
evaluation for potential contract award. The submission of inaccurate or misleading information may be grounds for
disqualification from contract award and may subject the responder to suspension or debarment proceedings, as well as other
remedies available to MnDOT, by law.
Disposition of Responses
All materials submitted in response to this announcement will become property of MnDOT and will become public record, in
-5-
(CSS/CM Last Updated 11/07/2014)
accordance with Minnesota Statutes § 13.591, after the evaluation process is completed. Pursuant to the Statute, completion of
the evaluation process occurs when MnDOT has completed negotiating the contract with the successful responder.
If a responder submits information in response to this Announcement that it believes to be trade secret materials, as defined by
the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes § 13.3 7, the responder must:
❑ Clearly mark all trade secret materials in its response at the time the letter of interest is submitted;
❑ Include a statement with its response justifying the trade secret designation for each item; and
❑ Defend any action seeking release of the materials it believes to be trade secret, and indemnify and hold harmless the
state, its agents and employees, from any judgments or damages awarded against the state in favor of the party requesting
the materials, and any and all costs connected with that defense. This indemnification survives MnDOT's award of a
contract. In submitting a letter of interest, the responder agrees that this indemnification survives as long as the trade
secret materials are in possession of MnDOT. MnDOT is required to keep all the basic documents related to its contracts,
including responses to announcements, for a minimum of seven years.
MnDOT will not consider the prices submitted by the responder to be proprietary or trade secret materials.
Contingency Fees Prohibited
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes § 1OA. 06, no person may act as or employ a lobbyist for compensation that is dependent upon
the result or outcome of any legislation or administrative action.
Sample Contract
Responders should be aware of MnDOT's standard contract terms and conditions when preparing their letter of interest.
Responders may view the current version of the Professional/Technical High Risk contract template on the Consultant
Services website, on the "P/T Contract Documents" page, at:
httn://dotann7.dot.state.mn.us/edms/edmsDocumentLinks.isn?folderld=525083. Much of the language reflected in the contract
template is required by statute. However; if a responder does take exception to any of the terms, conditions or language in the
contract template, they must indicate those exceptions in their letter of interest. Responders should note that certain exceptions
may result in your letter of interest being disqualified from further review and evaluation. Only those exceptions indicated in
the letter of interest will be available for discussion or negotiation.
Organizational Conflicts of Interest
The responder warrants that, to the best of its knowledge and belief, and except as otherwise disclosed, there are no relevant
facts or circumstances, which could give rise to organizational conflicts of interest. An organizational conflict of interest
exists when, because of existing or planned activities or because of relationships with other persons, a vendor is unable or
potentially unable to render impartial assistance or advice to MnDOT, or the vendor's objectivity in performing the contract
work is or might be otherwise impaired, or the vendor has an unfair competitive advantage. The responder agrees that, if after
award, an organizational conflict of interest is discovered, an immediate and full disclosure in writing must be made to the
Assistant Director of the Department of Administration's Materials Management Division which must include a description of
the action which the selected responder has taken or proposes to take to avoid or mitigate such conflicts. If an organization
conflict of interest is determined to exist, MnDOT may, at its discretion, cancel the contract. In the event the responder was
aware of an organizational conflict of interest prior to the award of the contract, and did not disclose the conflict to the
contracting officer, MnDOT may terminate the contract for default. The provisions of this clause must be included in all
subcontracts for work to be performed similar to the service provided by the prime contractor, and the terms "contract,"
"contractor," and "contracting officer" modified appropriately to preserve MnDOT's rights.
Targeted Group Business and Veteran -Owned Small Business Preference
In accordance with Minnesota Statutes § 16C.16 (subdivisions 6 and 6a), § 16C.19, and § 161.321 (subdivisions 2 and 2b), a
certified targeted group business (TGB) or certified veteran -owned small business (Veteran) will receive a 6% preference in
the evaluation of its letter of interest.
To be eligible for the TGB preference, a business must be certified by the Commissioner of Administration. To be eligible for
the Veteran preference, a business must have its principal place of business located in Minnesota AND must be certified by
the United States Department of Veterans Affairs as either a veteran -owned small business or a service -disabled veteran -
owned small business. (Visit www.vetbiz.2ov for more information about Veteran certification.) Furthermore, to claim the
TGB or Veteran preference, the responder must complete and submit the "Targeted Group and Veteran -owned Small
Businesses Preference Form" and submit it as part of their response, along with all documentation required by the form.
Finally, TGB and Veteran preferences are not cumulative, so a responder that is certified as both a TGB and a Veteran will
-6-
(CSS/CM Last Updated 11/07/2014)
receive only a 6% preference.
Human Rights Requirements
For all contracts estimated to be in excess of $100,000.00, responders must complete the attached "Affirmative Action
Data" form and submit it as part of their response. As required by Minnesota Rules part 500.3600, "It is hereby agreed
between the parties that Minnesota Statutes §363A.36 and Minnesota Rules Part 500.3400 — 5000.3600 are
incorporated into any contract between these parties based upon this specification or any modification of it. A copy of
Minnesota Statutes §363A.36 and Minnesota Rules Part 5000.3400 — 5000.3600 are available upon request from
MnDOT".
Insurance Requirements
A responder's response must clearly note any exceptions desired to insurance requirements, or the responder will be deemed
to have accepted such requirements and waived any request for exception.
1. The successful responder must not commence work under the resulting contract until they have obtained all the insurance
described below and the state of Minnesota has approved such insurance. The successful responder must maintain such
insurance in force and effect throughout the term of the contract.
2. The successful responder is required to maintain and furnish satisfactory evidence of the following insurance policies:
a. Workers' Compensation Insurance: Except as provided below, the successful responder must provide Workers'
Compensation insurance for all its employees and, in case any work is subcontracted, the successful responder will
require the subcontractor to provide Workers' Compensation insurance in accordance with the statutory requirements
of the State of Minnesota, including Coverage B, Employer's Liability. Insurance minimum limits are as follows:
- $100,000 — Bodily Injury by Disease per employee
$500,000 — Bodily Injury by Disease aggregate
- $100,000 — Bodily Injury by Accident
If Minnesota Statute 176.041 exempts the successful responder from Workers' Compensation insurance or if the
successful responder has no employees in the state of Minnesota, the successful responder must provide a written
statement, signed by an authorized representative, indicating the qualifying exemption that excludes the successful
responder from the Minnesota Workers' Compensation requirements.
If during the course of the contract the successful responder becomes eligible for Workers' Compensation, the
successful responder must comply with the Workers' Compensation Insurance requirements herein and provide the
State of Minnesota with a certificate of insurance.
b. Commercial General Liability Insurance: The successful responder is required to maintain insurance protecting it
from claims for damages for bodily injury, including sickness or disease, death, and for care and loss of services as
well as from claims for property damage, including loss of use which may arise from operations under the contract
whether the operations are by the successful responder or by a subcontractor or by anyone directly or indirectly
employed by the successful responder under the contract. Insurance minimum limits are as follows:
- $2,000,000 — per occurrence
- $2,000,000 — annual aggregate
- $2,000,000 — annual aggregate — Products/Completed Operations
The following coverages must be included:
- Premises and Operations Bodily Injury and Property Damage
- Personal and Advertising Injury
- Blanket Contractual Liability
- Products and Completed Operations Liability
- State of Minnesota named as an Additional Insured, to the extent permitted by law
Commercial Automobile Liability Insurance: The successful responder is required to maintain insurance protecting
it from claims for damages for bodily injury as well as from claims for property damage resulting from the ownership,
operation, maintenance or use of all owned, hired, and non -owned autos which may arise from operations under this
contract, and in case any work is subcontracted the contractor will require the subcontractor to maintain Commercial
Automobile Liability insurance. Insurance minimum limits are as follows:
- $2,000,000 — per occurrence Combined Single limit for Bodily Injury and Property Damage
-7-
(CSS/CM Last Updated 11/07/2014)
In addition, the following coverages must be included:
- Owned, Hired, and Non -owned Automobile
d. Professional/Technical, Errors and Omissions, and/or Miscellaneous Liability Insurance. This policy will
provide coverage for all claims the successful responder may become legally obligated to pay resulting from any
actual or alleged negligent act, error, or omission related to the successful responder's professional services required
under the contract. The successful responder is required to carry the following minimum limits:
- $2,000,000 — per claim or event
- $2,000,000 — annual aggregate
Any deductible will be the sole responsibility of the successful responder and may not exceed $50,000 without the
written approval of MnDOT. If the successful responder desires authority from MnDOT to have a deductible in a
higher amount, the successful responder will make such request in writing, specifying the amount of the desired
deductible and providing financial documentation by submitting the most current audited financial statements so that
MnDOT can ascertain the ability of the successful responder to cover the deductible from its own resources.
The retroactive or prior acts date of such coverage must not be after the effective date of the contract and the
successful responder must maintain such insurance for a period of at least three years, following completion of the
work. If such insurance is discontinued, extended reporting period coverage must be obtained by the successful
responder to fulfill this requirement.
3. Additional Insurance Conditions:
- The successful responder's policy(ies) must be primary insurance to any other valid and collectible insurance
available to the state of Minnesota with respect to any claim arising out of the successful responder's performance
under the contract;
- If the successful responder receives a cancellation notice from an insurance carrier affording coverage herein, the
successful responder agrees to notify the state of Minnesota within five business days with a copy of the cancellation
notice, unless the successful responder's policy(ies) contain a provision that coverage afforded under the policy(ies)
will not be cancelled without at least 30 days advance written notice to the state of Minnesota;
- The successful responder is responsible for payment of contract related insurance premiums and deductibles;
- If the successful responder is self-insured, a Certificate of Self -Insurance must be attached;
- The successful responder's policy(ies) will include legal defense fees in addition to its liability policy limits, with the
exception of B.4 above;
- The successful responder must obtain insurance policy(ies) from insurance company(ies) having an "AM BEST"
rating of A- (minus); Financial Size Category (FSC) VII or better, and authorized to do business in the state of
Minnesota; and
- An Umbrella or Excess Liability insurance policy may be used to supplement the the successful responder's policy
limits to satisfy the full policy limits required by the contract.
4. MnDOT reserves the right to immediately terminate the contract if the successful responder is not in compliance with the
insurance requirements and retains all rights to pursue any legal remedies against the successful responder. All insurance
policies must be open to inspection by MnDOT, and copies of policies must be submitted to MnDOT's Authorized
Representative upon written request.
5. The successful responder is required to submit Certificates of Insurance acceptable to the state of Minnesota as evidence
of insurance coverage requirements prior to commencing work under the contract.
E -Verify Certification (In accordance with Minnesota Statutes §16C.075)
By submission of a response for services in excess of $50,000, responders certify that as of the date of services performed on
behalf of MnDOT, they, and all of their proposed subcontractors, will have implemented, or be in the process of
implementing, the federal E -Verify program for all newly hired employees in the United States who will perform work on
behalf of MnDOT. In the event of contract award, the successful responder will be responsible for collecting all subcontractor
certifications and may do so utilizing the E -Verify Subcontractor Certification Form available at
httD://www.mmd.admin.state.nm.us/doc/EverifvSubCertForm.doc. All subcontractor certifications must be kept on file with
the successful responder and made available to MnDOT upon request.
Resident Vendor Form
If a responder wishes to claim resident vendor status, it must complete the "Resident Vendor" form and submit it as part of
-8-
(CSS/CM Last Updated 11/07/2014)
their response.
Accessibility Standards
Responder agrees to comply with the State of Minnesota's Accessibility Standard
(httD://mn.2ov/oet/ima2es/Stnd State Accessibilitv.ndf) for all deliverables under this Agreement. The State of Minnesota's
Accessibility Standards entail, in part, the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 (Level AA) and Section 508 of
the Rehabilitation Act, as amended. Responder's compliance with the State of Minnesota's Accessibility Standard includes,
but is not limited to, the specific requirements as follows:
• All videos must include closed captions, audio descriptions and a link to a complete transcript;
• All documents, presentations, spreadsheets and other material must be provided in an accessible format. In addition, the
Responder will provide native files in an editable format. Acceptable formats include InDesign, Word and Excel; and
• All materials intended for downloading and printing such as promotional brochures, must be labeled as such and the
content must additionally be provided in an accessible format.
THE BALANCE OF THIS PAGE HAS BEEN INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-9-
(CSS/CM Last Updated 11/07/2014)
CONFLICT OF INTEREST CHECKLIST AND DISCLOSURE FORM
Puruose of this Checklist: This checklist is provided to assist proposers in screening for potential organizational conflicts of
interest. The checklist is for the internal use of proposers and does not need to be submitted to MnDOT, however, the
"Disclosure of Potential Conflict of Interest" form must be submitted with your response.
Definition of "Proposer": As used herein, the word "proposer" includes both the prime contractor and all proposed
subcontractors.
Checklist is not Exclusive: Please note that this checklist serves as a guide only, and that there may be additional potential
conflict situations not covered by this checklist. If a proposer determines a potential conflict of interest exists that is not
covered by this checklist, that potential conflict must still be disclosed.
Use of the Disclosure Form: Proposers must complete the attached disclosure and submit it with their response (or
separately, as directed by MnDOT, for projects not awarded through a competitive solicitation). If the proposer determines a
potential conflict of interest exists, it must disclose the potential conflict to MnDOT; however, such a disclosure will not
necessarily disqualify a proposer from being awarded a contract. To avoid any unfair "taint" of the selection process, the
disclosure form should be provided separate from the bound response, and it will not be provided to selection committee
members. MnDOT's Contract Management personnel will review the disclosure and the appropriateness of the proposed
mitigation measures to determine if the proposer may be awarded the contract notwithstanding the potential conflict.
MnDOT's Contract Management personnel may consult with MnDOT's Project Manager and Department of Administration
personnel. By statute, resolution of conflict of interest issues is ultimately at the sole discretion of the Commissioner of
Administration.
Material Representation: Proposers are required to submit the attached disclosure form either declaring, to the best of its
knowledge and belief, that no potential conflict exists, or identifying potential conflicts and proposing remedial measures to
ameliorate such conflict. The proposer must also update conflict information if such information changes after the disclosure.
Information provided on the form will constitute a material representation as to the award of this contract. MnDOT reserves
the right to cancel or amend the resulting contract if the proposer failed to disclose a potential conflict, which it knew or
should have known about, or if the proposer provided information on the disclosure form that is materially false or
misleading.
Approach to Reviewing Potential Conflicts: MnDOT recognizes that proposer's must maintain business relations with other
public and private sector entities in order to continue as viable businesses. MnDOT will take this reality into account as it
evaluates the appropriateness of proposed measures to mitigate potential conflicts. It is not MnDOT's intent to disqualify
proposers based merely on the existence of a business relationship with another entity, but rather only when such relationship
causes a conflict that potentially impairs the proposer's ability to provide objective advice to MnDOT. MnDOT would seek to
disqualify proposers only in those cases where a potential conflict cannot be adequately mitigated. Nevertheless, MnDOT
must follow statutory guidance on organizational conflicts of interest.
Statutory Guidance: Minnesota Statutes § 16C.02, subdivision 10(a) places limits on state agencies ability to contract with
entities having an "organizational conflict of interest". For purposes of this checklist and disclosure requirement, the term
"vendor" includes "proposer" as defined above. Pursuant to such statute, "organizational conflict of interest" means that
because of existing or planned activities or because of relationships with other persons: (1) the vendor is unable or potentially
unable to render impartial assistance or advice to the state; (2) the vendor's objectivity in performing the contract work is or
might otherwise be impaired; or (3) the vendor has an unfair advantage.
Additional Guidance for Professionals Licensed by the Minnesota Board of Engineering: The Minnesota Board of
Engineering has established conflict of interest rules applicable to those professionals licensed by the Board (see Minnesota
Rules Part 1805.0300). Subpart 1 of the rule provides "A licensee shall avoid accepting a commission where duty to the client
or the public would conflict with the personal interest of the licensee or the interest of another client. Prior to accepting such
employment the licensee shall disclose to a prospective client such facts as may give rise to a conflict of interest".
-10-
(CSS/CM Last Updated 11/07/2014)
An organizational conflict of interest may exist in anv of the following cases:
❑ The proposer, or its principals, own real property in a location where there may be a positive or adverse impact on the
value of such property based on the recommendations, designs, appraisals, or other deliverables required by this contract.
❑ The proposer, or its principals, in previous work for the state has provided the final design or related services that are
directly related to performance of work required under this contract. Comment: this provision will, for example,
disqualify a proposer who performed final design for MnDOT and now seeks to provide construction administration
services for that same project. MnDOT believes this is necessary because the firm that prepared the plans may be unable
to objectively determine plan errors and omissions. This may cause a situation where: (1) the vendor is unable or
potentially unable to render impartial assistance or advice to the state; and (2) the vendor's objectivity in performing the
contract work is or might otherwise be impaired.
❑ The proposer is providing services to another governmental or private entity and the proposer knows or has reason to
believe, that entity's interests are, or may be, adverse to the state's interests with respect to the specific project covered by
this contract. Comment: the mere existence of a business relationship with another entity would not ordinarily need to be
disclosed. Rather, this focuses on the nature of services commissioned by the other entity. For example, it would not be
appropriate to propose on a MnDOT project if a local government has also retained the proposer for the purpose of
persuading MnDOT to stop or alter the project plans.
❑ This contract is for right-of-way acquisition services or related services (e.g. geotechnical exploration) and the proposer
has an existing business relationship with a governmental or private entity that owns property to be acquired pursuant to
this contract.
❑ The proposer is providing real estate or design services to a private entity, including but not limited to developers, whom
the proposer knows or has good reason to believe, own or are planning to purchase property affected by the project
covered by this contract, when the value or potential uses of such property may be affected by the proposer's performance
of work pursuant to this contract. "Property affected by the project" includes property that is in, adjacent to, or in
reasonable proximity to current or potential right-of-way for the project. The value or potential uses of the private entity's
property may be affected by the proposer's work pursuant to the contract when such work involves providing
recommendations for right-of-way acquisition, access control and the design or location of frontage roads and
interchanges. Comment: this provision does not presume proposers know nor have a duty to inquire as to all of the
business objectives of their clients. Rather, it seeks the disclosure of information regarding cases where the proposer has
reason to believe that its performance of work under this contract may materially affect the value or viability of a project it
is performing for the other entity.
❑ The proposer has a business arrangement with a current MnDOT employee or immediate family member of such
employee, including promised future employment of such person, or a subcontracting arrangement with such person,
when such arrangement is contingent on the proposer being awarded this contract. This item does not apply to pre-existing
employment of current or former MnDOT employees, or their immediate family members. Comment: this provision is
not intended to supersede any MnDOT policies applicable to its own employees accepting outside employment. This
provision is intended to focus on identifying situations where promises of employment have been made contingent on the
outcome of this particular procurement. It is intended to avoid a situation where a proposer may have unfair access to
"inside" information.
❑ The proposer has, in previous work for the state, been given access to "data" relevant to this procurement or this project
that is classified as "private" or "nonpublic" under the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, and such data
potentially provides the proposer with an unfair advantage in preparing a response for this project. Comment: this
provision will not, for example, necessarily disqualify a proposer who performed some preliminary work from obtaining a
final design contract, especially when the results of such previous work are public data available to all other proposers.
Rather, it attempts to avoid an "unfair advantage" when such information cannot be provided to other potential proposers.
Definitions of "government data", "public data", "non-public data" and "private data" can be found in Minnesota Statutes
Chapter 13.
❑ The proposer has, in previous work for the state, helped create the "ground rules" for this solicitation by performing work
such as: writing this solicitation, or preparing evaluation criteria or evaluation guides for this solicitation.
❑ The proposer, or any of its principals, because of any current or planned business arrangement, investment interest, or
ownership interest in any other business, may be unable to provide objective advice to the state.
-11-
(CSS/CM Last Updated 11/07/2014)
DISCLOSURE OF POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Having had the opportunity to review the Organizational Conflict of Interest Checklist, the proposer hereby indicates that it
has, to the best of its knowledge and belief:
❑ Determined that no potential organizational conflict of interest exists.
❑ Determined that a potential organizational conflict of interest exists, as follows:
Describe nature of potential conflict:
Describe measures proposed to mitigate the potential conflict:
Signature
Date
If a potential conflict has been identified, please provide name and phone number for a contact person authorized to discuss
this disclosure form with MnDOT contract personnel.
Name
-12-
(CSS/CM Last Updated 11/07/2014)
Phone
STATE OF MINNESOTA
AFFIDAVIT OF NONCOLLUSION
Instructions: Please return your completed form as part of your response.
I swear (or affirm) under the penalty of perjury:
1. That I am the responder (if the responder is an individual), a partner in the company (if the responder is a partnership), or
an officer or employee of the responding corporation having authority to sign on its behalf (if the responder is a
corporation);
2. That the attached response, submitted in response to the
announcement has been arrived at by the responder independently and has been submitted without collusion with and
without any agreement, understanding or planned common course of action with, any other responder of materials,
supplies, equipment or services described in the announcement, designed to limit fair and open competition;
3. That the contents of the response have not been communicated by the responder, or its employees or agents, to any person
not an employee or agent of the responder and will not be communicated to any such persons prior to the official opening
of the letters of interest; and
4. That I am fully informed regarding the accuracy of the statements made in this affidavit.
Authorized Signature:
Responders Firm Name:
Print Authorized Representative Name:
Authorized Signature:
Notary Public
Subscribed and sworn to before me this:
day of
Notary Public Signature
Commission Expires
-13-
(CSS/CM Last Updated 11/07/2014)
Title:
Date:
STATE OF MINNESOTA — AFFIRMATIVE ACTION CERTIFICATION
If your response to an announcement is or could be in excess of $100,000.00, complete the information requested below to
determine whether you are subject to the Minnesota Human Rights Act (Minnesota Statutes §363A.36) certification
requirement, and to provide documentation of compliance, if necessary. It is your sole responsibility to provide this
information and, if required, to apply for Human Rights certification prior to the due date and time of the response and to
obtain Human Rights certification prior to the execution of the contract. The state of Minnesota is under no obligation to delay
proceeding with a contract until a company receives Human Rights certification.
BOX A — For companies which have employed more than 40 full-time employees within Minnesota on any single
working day during the previous 12 months. All other companies proceed to BOX B.
Your response will be rejected unless your business:
Has a current Certification of Compliance issued by the Minnesota Department of Human Rights (MDHR)
-or-
Has submitted an affirmative action plan to the MDHR, which the Department received prior to the date and time the
responses are due.
Check one of the following statements if you have employed more than 40 full-time employees in Minnesota on any single
working day during the previous 12 months:
❑ We have a current Certificate of Compliance issued by the MDHR. Proceed to Box C. Include a copy of you
Certification with your response
❑ We do not have a current Certificate of Compliance; However, we submitted an Affirmative Action Plan to the MDHR
for approval, which the Department received on (date). Proceed to Box C.
❑ We do not have a Certification of Compliance, nor has the MDHR received an Affirmative Action Plan from our
company. We acknowledge that our response will be rejected. Proceed to Box C. Contact the MDHR for assistance. (See
below for contact information)
Please note: Certificates of Compliance must be issued by the MDHR. Affirmative Action Plans approved by the federal
government, a county, or a municipality must still be received, reviewed and approved by the MDHR before a certificate can
be issued.
BOX B — For those companies not described in BOX A
Check below
❑ We have not employed more than 40 full-time employees on any single working day in Minnesota within the previous 12
months. Proceed to BOX C.
BOX C — For ALL companies
By signing this statement, you certify that the information provided is accurate and that you are authorized to sign on behalf of
the responder. You also certify that you are in compliance with federal affirmative action requirements that may apply to your
company. (These requirements are generally triggered only by participating as a prime or subcontractor on federal projects or
Contracts. Contractors are alerted to these requirements by the federal government.)
Name of Company: Date
Authorized Signature: Telephone number:
Printed Name: Title:
For assistance with this form, contact:
Minnesota Department of Human Rights, Compliance & Community Relations
Mail: The Freeman Building, 625 Roberts Street North TC Metro: 651-296-5663 Toll Free: 800-657-3704
St. Paul, Minnesota 55155
Web: www.humanrichts.state.mn.us Fax: 651-296-9042 TTY: 651-296-1283
Email: comnliance.mdhr(astate.mn.us
-14-
(CSS/CM Last Updated 11/07/2014)
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESIDENT VENDOR FORM
In accordance with Laws of Minnesota 2013, Chapter 142, Article 3, Section 16, amending Minnesota Statutes § 16C.02,
subdivision 13, a "Resident Vendor" means a person, firm, or corporation that:
1. is authorized to conduct business in the state of Minnesota on the date a solicitation for a contract is first advertised or
announced. It includes a foreign corporation duly authorized to engage in business in Minnesota;
2. has paid unemployment taxes or income taxes in this state during the 12 calendar months immediately preceding
submission of the response for which any preference is sought;
3. has a business address in the state; and
4. has affirmatively claimed that status in the response submission.
To receive recognition as a Minnesota Resident Vendor ("Resident Vendor"), your company must meet each element of the
statutory definition above by the solicitation opening date and time. If you wish to affirmatively claim Resident Vendor status,
you should do so by submitting this form with your response.
Resident Vendor status may be considered for purposes of resolving tied low bids or the application of a reciprocal preference.
II:111711:3•(y1171Y1a,&I:/:VWY.1W 41130IZM1ldNK1Y117:311111111A
1. Is authorized to conduct business in the state of Minnesota on the date a solicitation for a contract is first advertised or
announced. (This includes a foreign corporation duly authorized to engage in business in Minnesota)
Yes No (must check yes or no)
2. Has paid unemployment taxes or income taxes in the state of Minnesota during the 12 calendar months immediately
preceding submission of the response for which any preference is sought.
Yes No (must check yes or no)
3. Has a business address in the state of Minnesota.
Yes No (must check yes or no)
4. Agrees to submit documentation, if requested, as part of the response process, to verify compliance with the above
statutory requirements.
Yes No (must check yes or no)
BY SIGNING BELOW, you are certifying your compliance with the requirements set forth herein and claiming Resident
Vendor status in your response submission.
Name of Company: Date:
Authorized Signature: Telephone:
Printed Name: Title:
IF YOU ARE CLAIMING RESIDENT VENDOR STATUS, SIGN AND RETURN THIS FORM WITH YOUR
PROPOSAL SUBMISSION.
-15-
(CSS/CM Last Updated 11/07/2014)
MnDOT Contract No. 07266
Exhibit A
Scope of Services
1-94 Corridors of Commerce Traffic Modeling 1-94
Albertville to St. Michael and Rogers to Maple Grove
1.0 Project Management/Meetings
Assumptions:
- Assumed project duration is four (4) months.
- Two project stakeholder meetings will occur.
- Four (4) SRF staff persons will attend the stakeholder meetings.
- Stakeholder meetings will be two (2) hours in duration.
- Stakeholder meetings will take place at SRF's Plymouth office.
- MnDOT will send out the stakeholder meeting invitations.
Client Deliverables:
- MnDOT will send out the stakeholder meeting invitations.
1.1 Provide day-to-day project management and administration, as well as project
coordination with MnDOT staff.
1.2 Conduct weekly conference call project updated meetings with MnDOT staff.
1.3 Prepare for and attend two (2) project coordination meetings with the project
Stakeholders. These two meetings will be used to present the results of the traffic forecasting
and operations analysis.
1.4 Administer SRF's project specific QMP.
SRF Deliverables:
- Project meeting agendas, presentation materials and meeting summaries.
- Monthly progress reports.
2.0 Data Collection
Assumptions:
- Current traffic volumes will be obtained for 1-94 and interchange ramps (where available) using
MnDOT detector data.
- MnDOT will provide a.m. and p.m. peak period turning movement counts at the 1-94/CSAH 37
and 1-94/CSAH 19 interchanges.
- Turning movement counts from Fall 2013 will be used for the 1-94/TH 241 ramp termini
intersections.
Client Deliverables:
- MnDOT will provide peak period turning movement counts at the 1-94/CSAH 37 and 1-94/CSAH
19 interchanges.
- MnDOT will provide traffic signal timing at signalized intersections.
- MnDOT will provide detector data for locations that are not accessible by SRF.
2.1 Conduct site visits to understand a.m. and p.m. peak period operations which will aid in the
calibration of the existing conditions operations model. The site visits will also be used to verify
speed limits and roadway geometrics.
2.2 Coordinate with MnDOT and other agencies to obtain all necessary traffic information, e.g,
turning movement counts and traffic signal timing.
2.3 Using MnDOT's traffic detectors pull current traffic volumes on 1-94 and interchange ramps
(where available). This data will be evaluated to ensure the traffic incidents, weather or the
MnDOT Contract No. 07266
Exhibit A
current construction project between TH 241 and TH 101 did not impact traffic for the selected
data. Vehicle classification data will also be obtained from MnDOT's database.
2.4 Conduct a.m. and p.m. peak period turning movement counts at up to four (4) intersections.
This task accounts for data that needs to be updated or for missing data.
2.5 Obtain and tabulate the most recent five-year crash data for the project area.
SRF Deliverables:
- Electronic files of all traffic volume counts and crash data
3.0 Travel Demand Forecasts
Assumptions:
- Travel demand forecasts will be developed following MnDOT guidelines; "Model and
Parameters for Adjustments to Model Inputs" and "Model Output Checks for Reasonableness
and Post Processing Adjustments".
- Travel demand forecasts will be developed for year 2040 and year 2017 (opening year)
conditions.
- Forecasts will be developed using the 2030 Collar County Model along with year 2040 land use
information for the communities within the project area. Forecast methodology will be
approved by MnDOT and Met Council before forecasts are developed.
- Forecasts will only be generated for general purpose lane alternatives. Forecasts for managed
lane alternatives are not included in this task.
- Forecasts will be developed on 1-94 from west of Albertville to the Fish Lake Road interchange
in Maple Grove.
- All forecasts will be reviewed and approved by MnDOT prior to use the benefit -cost analysis
and CORSIM analysis.
Client Deliverables:
- MnDOT will review results and documentation and will provide comments.
3.1 Work with MnDOT and Met Council to determine the appropriate methodology for
developing year 2040 forecasts. This includes roadway network assumptions and land use
assumptions.
3.2 Conduct validation run for existing (2010) base year; adjust model parameters (within
MnDOT's guidelines) as appropriate and revalidate based on adjustments. Discuss with MnDOT
to address any anomalies.
3.3 Review and update the model with land use information based on available 2040 data.
3.4 Prepare traffic forecasts for year 2017 and year 2040 no build conditions.
3.5 Prepare traffic forecasts for two (2) build alternatives under year 2040 conditions. These
alternatives include: 6 -lane section west of TH 241 that will tie in with the 6 -lane section that is
currently under construction and auxiliary lanes between the CSAH 37 east ramps and the TH
241 west ramps.
3.6 Prepare traffic forecasts for preferred alternative for year 2017 (year of opening)
conditions.
3.7 Perform travel time reliability analysis for the 1-94 Corridor between Albertville and
Maple Grove. This analysis will look at 365 day sample of data and will be used to develop
presentation materials to assist in stakeholder presentations.
3.8 Develop a Draft Travel Demand Forecasts Memorandum that documents assumptions,
methodologies and results for the scenarios listed above. The memorandum will be submitted
to MnDOT and Met Council for review and comment.
3.9 Prepare a final traffic forecast memorandum that incorporates received comments.
2
MnDOT Contract No. 07266
Exhibit A
3.10 Perform quality checks and documentation for task 3.0 per SRF's project specific Quality
Management Plan.
SRF Deliverables:
- Electronic copies of the draft and final traffic forecasts memorandum.
- Electronic copies of all relevant modeling files used in development of the traffic forecasts.
4.0 Traffic Operations Analysis
Assumptions:
- The CORSIM model used for the 1-94 Corridor of Commerce Phase I study will be utilized in
development of the base model. The model limits will be extended west of Albertville.
- Modeling will conform to the current "MnDOT Modeling Guidelines" and "CORSIM Calibration
Parameters" that can be found at internet web site,
"www.dot.state.mn.us/trafficeng/index.htmI". The modeling will conform to the modeling
process outlined in the current "Advanced CORSIM Training Manual".
- Model limits will include 1-94 from west of Albertville to the Fish Lake Road interchange in
Maple Grove.
- All models and supporting materials will be submitted to MnDOT for review and approval.
- Supporting materials include: link -node diagrams, lane schematics, 15 -minute volumes and
origin -destination pairs, TRF files, QAQC and MOE spreadsheets.
- Any intersection analysis, will be conducted using the Synchro/SimTraffic software.
Client Deliverables:
- MnDOT will review models, results and documentation and will provide comments.
4.1 Development of the existing year base CORSIM model. This includes the link -node
diagram, lane schematics, development of 15 -minute traffic data, origin -destination matrices,
a.m. and p.m. TRF files, QAQC spreadsheets, MOE spreadsheets.
4.2 The base model will be calibrated according to the current "CORSIM Calibration
Parameters". Submit models and supportive materials to MnDOT for review and approval.
4.3 Develop and analyze the year 2040 no build CORSIM model.
4.4 Develop and analyze the two (2) build alternatives under year 2040 conditions. These
alternatives include: 6 -lane section west of TH 241 that will tie in with the 6 -lane section that is
currently under construction and auxiliary lanes between the CSAH 37 east ramps and the TH
241 west ramps.
4.5 Conduct analysis to determine what mitigation, if any, is required based on the addition
of capacity on 1-94 between Albertville and St. Michael.
4.6 Conduct sensitivity analysis to determine when mitigation measures are needed.
Assumes three (3) runs will be conducted.
4.7 Analyze up to four (4) interchange modifications at various locations. This analysis
includes CORSIM to determine the impacts to the freeway and Synchro/SimTraffic to determine
the benefits to the intersections.
4.8 Conduct a safety analysis for the project area using the most recent 5 -year data.
4.9 Develop a Draft Traffic Operations Analysis Memorandum that documents assumptions,
methodologies and results for the analysis listed above. The memorandum will be submitted to
MnDOT for review and comment.
4.10 Prepare a final traffic forecast memorandum that incorporates received comments.
4.11 Perform quality checks and documentation for task 4.0 per SRF's project specific Quality
Management Plan.
SRF Deliverables:
3
MnDOT Contract No. 07266
Exhibit A
- Electronic copies of the draft and final traffic operations memorandum.
- Electronic copies of all relevant modeling files.
5.0 Benefit -Cost Analysis
Assumptions:
- Benefit -Cost Analysis will be conducted in conformance with State's Office of Capital Programs
benefit -cost guidelines.
- Assumes the analysis is only completed on the preferred alternative.
Client Deliverables:
- MnDOT will provide project costs for the preferred alternative
- MnDOT will review results and documentation and will provide comments.
5.1 Develop baseline assumptions and methodology for performing the analysis and send to
MnDOT for review and approval.
5.2 Develop vehicle miles traveled/vehicle hours traveled from the travel demand forecast
model. Calculate the shifts in travel patterns for use in the safety calculation.
5.3 Perform Benefit -Cost Analysis for the preferred alternative for eastbound and
westbound 1-94.
5.4 Prepare a draft benefit -cost analysis memorandum for MnDOT review.
5.5 Prepare a final benefit -cost analysis memorandum that incorporates comments
received from MnDOT.
5.6 Perform quality checks and documentation for task 5.0 per SRF's project specific Quality
Management Plan.
SRF Deliverables:
- Electronic copies of the draft and final benefit -cost analysis memorandum.
6.0 Interstate Access Modification Request
Assumptions:
- The Interstate Access Modification Request will be developed for the preferred alternative.
- The Interstate Access Modification Request will address FHWA's eight policy points.
Client Deliverables:
- MnDOT will review results and documentation and will provide comments.
6.1 Prepare a draft Interstate Access Modification Request that addresses the eight (8)
FHWA policy points. Submit to MnDOT and FHWA for review.
6.2 Prepare a final Interstate Access Modification Request that incorporates comments
received from MnDOT and FHWA.
6.3 Perform quality checks and documentation for task 6.0 per SRF's project specific Quality
Management Plan.
SRF Deliverables:
- Electronic and paper copies of the draft and final Interstate Access Modification Request.
7.0 Implementation Plan
Assumptions:
- None.
Client Deliverables:
- Review and comment on Draft implementation plan.
4
MnDOT Contract No. 07266
Exhibit A
7.1 Review state, county and local transportation improvement programs to identify
programmed improvements and discuss planned rehabilitation activities with MnDOT planners
to identify future scheduled improvements.
7.2 Review all elements of preferred alternative for the study area and develop logical
groups (e.g. geographic, bottleneck relief) of improvements that can be coordinated at isolated
projects.
7.3 Develop implementation plan that coordinates planned investments with elements of
the preferred alternative and required mitigation to leverage construction funds and phasing of
corridor improvements.
7.4 Prepare maps and graphics that demonstrate implementation plan to MnDOT and
Stakeholders and document results in a draft technical memorandum to MnDOT for review and
comment. Prepare a final memorandum that incorporate comments received.
7.5 Perform quality checks and documentation for task 7.0 per SRF's project specific Quality
Management Plan.
SRF Deliverables:
- Electronic copies of maps and graphics.
- Electronic and paper copies of the draft and final technical memorandum.
Tasks A, B and C may be required depending on the extent of mitigation needed for the addition of lanes
between Albertville and St. Michael.
The following tasks (A, B and C) will only be completed upon authorization by the MnDOT project
manager.
A. Additional Project Management and Meetings
Assumptions:
- Assumes two months will be added to the project schedule.
- One additional project stakeholder meeting is needed.
- Four (4) SRF staff persons will attend the stakeholder meeting.
- Stakeholder meeting will be two (2) hours in duration.
- Stakeholder meeting will take place at SRF's Plymouth office.
Client Deliverables:
- MnDOT will send out the stakeholder meeting invitations.
A.1 Provide day-to-day project management and administration, as well as project
coordination with MnDOT staff.
A.2 Conduct weekly conference call project updated meetings with MnDOT staff.
A.3 Prepare for and attend two (2) project coordination meetings with the project
Stakeholders. These two meetings will be used to present the results of the traffic forecasting
and operations analysis.
SRF Deliverables:
Project meeting agendas, presentation materials and meeting summaries.
Monthly progress reports.
Managed Lanes Travel Demand Forecasts
Assumptions:
- Travel demand forecasts will be developed following MnDOT guidelines; "Model and
Parameters for Adjustments to Model Inputs" and "Model Output Checks for Reasonableness
and Post Processing Adjustments".
5
MnDOT Contract No. 07266
Exhibit A
- Travel demand forecasts will be developed for year 2040 conditions only.
- Forecasts will be developed using the the 2030 Collar County Model along with year 2040 land
use information for the communities within the project area. Forecast methodology will be
approved by MnDOT and Met Council before forecasts are developed.
- Forecasting will be developed on 1-94 from west of Albertville to the Fish Lake Road
interchange in Maple Grove.
- All forecasts will be reviewed and approved by MnDOT prior to use the benefit -cost analysis
and CORSIM analysis.
Client Deliverables:
- MnDOT will review results and documentation and will provide comments.
B.1 Prepare traffic forecasts for two (2) managed lanes alternatives under year 2040
conditions. The extent of the lanes will be determined from the mitigation analysis completed
under task 4.0.
B.2 Add a section to the Draft Travel Demand Forecasts Memorandum that documents
assumptions, methodologies and results for the scenarios listed above in section B.1.
B.3 Perform quality checks and documentation for task B per SRF's project specific Quality
Management Plan.
SRF Deliverables:
- Electronic copies of all relevant modeling files.
C Managed Lanes Traffic Operations Analysis
Assumptions:
- Modeling will conform to the current "MnDOT Modeling Guidelines" and "CORSIM
Calibration Parameters" that can be found at internet web site,
"www.dot.state.mn.us/trafficeng/index.html". The modeling will conform to the modeling
process outlined in the current "Advanced CORSIM Training Manual".
- All models and supporting materials will be submitted to MnDOT for review and approval.
- Supporting materials include: link -node diagrams, lane schematics, 15 -minute volumes and
origin -destination pairs, TRF files, QAQC and MOE spreadsheets.
Client Deliverables:
- MnDOT will review models, results and documentation and will provide comments.
C.1 Develop and analyze the two (2) managed lane alternatives under year 2040 conditions.
C.2 Add a section to the Draft Traffic Operations Analysis Memorandum that documents
assumptions, methodologies and results for the managed lanes analysis listed in section C.1.
C.3 Perform quality checks and documentation for task C per SRF's project specific Quality
Management Plan.
SRF Deliverables:
- Electronic copies of all relevant modeling files.
0